For example, while agricultural jobs that grow corn for ethanol are accorded green credit, shouldn’t workers who drive tractors that consume petroleum and produce emissions to plant, fertilize and harvest it be deducted from the overall count? And what about those who produce the polluting fertilizers and pesticides, consume huge amounts of water to process that alcohol and drive the trucks to transport it since it can’t be distributed in pipelines? Then, since ethanol isn’t profitable without subsidies, produces as much CO2 as petroleum, and provides little or no net energy benefit, does it really qualify as sustainable, environmentally-friendly or resource-efficient? Shouldn’t we maybe erase those green job plaudits altogether?
Well let’s have a quick peek at Dessler’s surface data, which tells us that the greatest warming has been in the Arctic.
Note: Gray areas signify missing data.
(Missing data – like the Arctic) ROFLMAO
Atmospheric phenomena are complicated so people's opinions about what matters in the climate inevitably reflect this complexity. If, in some subcommunity, it doesn't, it shows that this subcommunity isn't really scientific: it's a group of fascist *beep* *beep* LFCSes struggling to *beep* *beep* and *beep* *beep* and we should better *beep* *beep* to *beep* *beep* to protect the elementary values of science and the modern civilization in general.