Deniers and Bill Nye-rs. I'll take the data please.pic.twitter.com/lWl3u2tNHt
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Deniers and Bill Nye-rs. I'll take the data please.pic.twitter.com/lWl3u2tNHt
I would go with the 97% of scientists who agree with @SenSanders lots of data out there for all to see :)
Check that number again. 97% agree the climate is changing. A far lesser percentage believe the impact is primarily caused by Man. Research!
Research shows that Exxon knew about global warming back in the 80s, but chose to suppress their research and promote propaganda instead.
You've been at this thread for 4 hours & haven't produced a thing besides screen grabs. All you've proven is that there isn't a lot of data.
You've been at it longer than I. And you've done nothing but post debunked nonsense with no links at all. Do you get paid for this?
I've been gone for two houts and came back to you arguing with five other people about some Exxon report. Your delusional. And blocked.
The report that says Exxon knew that increasing carbon levels would raise the temperature decades ago? I can see why that burns your behind.
It isn't but that is not the point. The world has carbon emissions from other sources than humans and the earth would heat up anyway.
Even if it were, why is not transitioning to sustainable energy not the correct move in this case? Gas gotta run out someday.
Of course it's important to move towards renewable energy but AS OF NOW we need to fuel our cars and keep our electricity. We aren't ready.
Again, in that case, why aren't we becoming ready? It is a sector that creates jobs and will reduce in cost as it becomes more common.
Dismantling the EPA has nothing to do with that plan.
There's no point in cracking down on fossil fuels when we have no alternative.
Nuclear, hydroelectric, geothermal, wind and solar power are five alternatives i can name off the top of my head. (1/2)
If so environmental... Why do they have more energy to create government programs than to support current working programs?pic.twitter.com/pADmazpwkf
Pretty sure the liberals aren't dismantling the regulations / EPA so their business friends can dump their toxic garbage anywhere they want.
Pretty sure conservatives aren't trying to pollute the atmosphere when they roll back regs. They are the ones with the cleaner atmospherespic.twitter.com/X1EbJRgGWr
Nothing to do with the fact the countryside doesn't emit many pollutants.
So conservatives are so against the environment and yet maintain rural areas as rural instead of creating big polluting cities.
Conservatives conserve the environment.
So far they're not doing so well.
How so? The majority of pollution occurs in liberal strongholds while conservatives conserve their rural environment where they live&work.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.