Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Why is good weather not blamed on Global Warming?

It has been Beautiful in the desert southwest lately.

It seems that only bad weather events are blamed on global warming. But what about good weather?

How can GW only be responsible for the weather that we don't like?
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Theyitis · 36-40, M
Man-made climate change is responsible for mellowing of some harsh climates such as in the Sahara Desert. You don’t hear about that as much (especially if Faux News is your primary source) for the obvious reason that that’s not a problem. Climate change is causing weather that is bad for humans in many more places throughout the world, and that is a very significant problem for humanity.

However, the climate of the Sahara is not getting better quickly enough to be hospitable to human life anytime soon.
DogMan · 61-69, M
@Theyitis How do you know that this is not a natural occurrence? Why is it always MAN MADE? Everything that is
happening, has happened before. Before the industrial age, it was a natural occurrence. Why is it all Man Made now?
Theyitis · 36-40, M
@DogMan Because that’s the consensus among all the experts that study climate science, and I trust them. I don’t have time to be an expert on everything myself, so when the people that get paid to be experts on a subject all agree on something I typically believe it.
DogMan · 61-69, M
@Theyitis Thats not true, ALL the experts are not saying that. Only the ones that receive millions in study grants are.

Anyone that doesn't agree with them is excoriated and deemed nuts and kooks, which they are not.

Climate hysteria is big business.
22Michelle · 70-79, T
@DogMan Okay, so lets modify the comment to " all the credible experts".
Theyitis · 36-40, M
@DogMan The few that don’t agree lack the credentials that the ones that do agree all have, and their “research” has all been funded by the fossil fuels industry.

That brings up another point. You guys always dismiss green energy as a moneymaking scheme. Well you don’t think a few people are getting really rich by selling fossil fuels? So what’s the difference? I’ll tell you what the difference is, the green energy folks are getting rich by selling renewable resources that make our environment cleaner, whereas the fossil fuel folks get rich by polluting it.
DogMan · 61-69, M
@Theyitis Sure Oil companies make money, and we get low cost energy. Once energy costs come down,
prices on everything will come down.
22Michelle · 70-79, T
@DogMan Oil price us around $63 a barrel. How much lower do you expect it to go?
DogMan · 61-69, M
@22Michelle It can go lower than $63 per barrel. The problem is, the blue states are adding more fees and taxes
as the price goes down, so many of us will not see the drop. California recently added another .45 tax to a gallon.

Who does that hurt most? Not the rich.
22Michelle · 70-79, T
@DogMan If the price goes lower oil companies cut back on exploration and production to try and keep prices profitable. And prices are set internationally. Oil companies are more price takers than makers.
DogMan · 61-69, M
@22Michelle I would say that the government is the real takers. They make far more per gallon than the oil companies.

The oil company makes pennies on a gallon; the state and feds make about 2 dollars for every gallon sold.
22Michelle · 70-79, T
@DogMan You misunderstand the term. It refers to the fact that oil companies have to take the price offered. They don't set a selling price based on their costs etc. As for the US Government that's up to what they want to prioritise. As an example, if you wanted to encourage exploration you would cut the tax take. That would be far more effective than changing the name of a body of water.
trollslayer · 46-50, M
@DogMan oil companies pay far, far more than climate research grants. I work in that industry - i have seen it first hand many, many times.
gol979 · 41-45, M
@Theyitis Maurice Strong and Beyond Petroleum dont agree with your view. The anthropological climate change/carbon narrative is a tool of control imo
22Michelle · 70-79, T
@trollslayer And such research by Exxon, back in the 1950's, predicted Climate Change due to fossil fuel usage, but Exxon suppressed the data as it was bad for business.