Do You Believe in Man-Made Climate Change?

[blackbird]

"Climate preacher/scientist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez predicted recently that “We’re like… the world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change.” You can add that to the spectacularly wrong predictions made this year around the time of Earth Day 2019.

Finally, think about this question, posed by Ronald Bailey in 2000: What will Earth look like when Earth Day 60 rolls around in 2030? Bailey predicts a much cleaner, and much richer future world, with less hunger and malnutrition, less poverty, and longer life expectancy, and with lower mineral and metal prices. But he makes one final prediction about Earth Day 2030: “There will be a disproportionately influential group of doomsters predicting that the future–and the present–never looked so bleak.” In other words, the hype, hysteria and spectacularly wrong apocalyptic predictions will continue, promoted by the virtue signalling “environmental grievance hustlers” like AOC."  aei.org

[Infidel Dog]

10 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Wait - didn't somebody show up on Tucker Carlson to say Texas' whacky green energy policies were at the root of things ?  That's the first story in this cycle I can remember.

Did he? Whoever that genius was,  turned out he was correct.

Didn't click the link, did ya?

 

[Right To Left]

22 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Only one of the two nuclear generators was down, and it was only for two days.

I didn't find much interest in examining if there was any danger to the public from these emergency shutdowns. What if a reactor's cooling system failed during such a shutdown!

[OftenWrong]

2 minutes ago, Right To Left said:

I didn't find much interest in examining if there was any danger to the public from these emergency shutdowns. What if a reactor's cooling system failed during such a shutdown!

These are not RBMK's. They have safety interlocks up the yin-yang, and enough reserve capacity to wind themselves down. Good science and engineering.

[Right To Left]

21 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well that's good to hear.... because the right-wing is being silenced don't you know... 

There is something very strange going on down there now! It's almost like the US is turning into a one party state, with a small compliant conservative party allowed to present the image of an opposition. 

I sure as hell would never support Republicans, let alone Trump. But an online oligarch yankiing Trump's Twitter account is just more evidence of who has power and who doesn't in America today. 

[Right To Left]

1 minute ago, OftenWrong said:

These are not RBMK's. They have safety interlocks up the yin-yang, and enough reserve capacity to wind themselves down. Good science and engineering.

Didn't they say something similar about the GE reactors at Fukushima a few  years back? Now, those melting reactor cores are burning their way through the earth, with the recent earthquake there causing more radiation to leak into the atmosphere.

[OftenWrong]

Just now, Right To Left said:

Didn't they say something similar about the GE reactors at Fukushima a few  years back? Now, those melting reactor cores are burning their way through the earth, with the recent earthquake there causing more radiation to leak into the atmosphere.

Now you went from snows storms to cooling systems to earthquakes. Move the goal posts much?

I am not in a position to assess the geographic stability of fault lines in that region.

[DogOnPorch]

2 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Now you went from snows storms to cooling systems to earthquakes. Move the goal posts much?

I am not in a position to assess the geographic stability of fault lines in that region.

 

Not a damn thing the dinosaurs did stopped CO2 levels from rising...and that wasn't what killed 'em.

[DogOnPorch]

[OftenWrong]

2 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

Not a damn thing the dinosaurs did stopped CO2 levels from rising...and that wasn't what killed 'em.

Everything has a price. Windmills and solar panels are unreliable and they have their own harms.

What matters in the here and now is energy security, and these tinker-toys are not going to cut it. While we play with them our enemies are building reactors one-two-three.

[DogOnPorch]

3 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Everything has a price. Windmills and solar panels are unreliable and they have their own harms.

What matters in the here and now is energy security, and these tinker-toys are not going to cut it. While we play with them our enemies are building reactors one-two-three.

 

If the US Navy can build a reactor that accounts for atomic depth charges going-off in the region, perhaps that's the design we should be using for civilian reactors. But damn...three layers of expensive shielding? Do they want to protect the crew or something???

Clearly no understanding of profit...

[blackbird]

While the west is squandering it's resources and wealth on fighting the hoax of man-made climate change, Russia and China are building military power which will rival or push them ahead of America and west.  Get the book Alliance of Evil.  Let's not forget it was the U.N. which is largely controlled by Communist countries which forced this global warming agenda on the west. 

Edited March 1, 2021 by blackbird

[Michael Hardner]

China is also building Green Technology but ok...

[Right To Left]

23 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Now you went from snows storms to cooling systems to earthquakes. Move the goal posts much?

I am not in a position to assess the geographic stability of fault lines in that region.

If you're happy with a nuclear sword of Damocles hanging over your head, GREAT!  But if most people were informed of the risks and longterm costs and all of the costs that private contractors - GE and Westinghouse skip out on, support for nuclear would have never increased over the past 30 years.

The public is less informed about nuclear than during the 70's or 80's after Chernobyl, and has been brainwashed with false information that nuclear has no carbon footprint...even though the tons of concrete that have to be produced and poured to make the necessary safety containment walls sure does produce alot of carbon that goes up in the air.

[Right To Left]

23 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

If the US Navy can build a reactor that accounts for atomic depth charges going-off in the region, perhaps that's the design we should be using for civilian reactors. But damn...three layers of expensive shielding? Do they want to protect the crew or something???

Clearly no understanding of profit...

Mini-reactors are apparently safer and easier to manage than the big ones needed to boil enough water to power the turbines that provide electricity to major cities. And nuclear power is perfectly safe.....until something goes wrong at one of them, anywhere, and then all bets are off. And that's why they require government underwriting! No private-for profit insurance companies will take the risk that could completely bankrupt them! That's what governments are for.

[blackbird]

10 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

China is also building Green Technology but ok...

  China is building hundreds of coal-fired electricity-generating stations both in China and abroad.

"Yet China's overseas ventures include hundreds of electric power plants that burn coal, which is a significant emitter of the carbon scientifically linked to climate change. Edward Cunningham, a specialist on China and its energy markets at Harvard University, tells NPR that China is building or planning more than 300 coal plants in places as widely spread as Turkey, Vietnam, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Egypt and the Philippines."  -npr.org

China's CCP is not dumb like half of the population in the west who are asleep on what is really happening in the world.  The CCP are doing things to increase their economic and military strength in the world.  If they were really serious about cutting CO2, they would be changing what they do.  Instead they emit more CO2 than any other country in the world. 

 

[OftenWrong]

9 hours ago, Right To Left said:

If you're happy with a nuclear sword of Damocles hanging over your head, GREAT!  But if most people were informed of the risks and longterm costs and all of the costs that private contractors - GE and Westinghouse skip out on, support for nuclear would have never increased over the past 30 years.

The public is less informed about nuclear than during the 70's or 80's after Chernobyl, and has been brainwashed with false information that nuclear has no carbon footprint...even though the tons of concrete that have to be produced and poured to make the necessary safety containment walls sure does produce alot of carbon that goes up in the air.

Its not about what Im happy with. There is more at stake here than the environment. Its a matter of national security now more than ever.

Safety be damned.

[Right To Left]

On 3/2/2021 at 1:50 AM, OftenWrong said:

Its not about what Im happy with. There is more at stake here than the environment. Its a matter of national security now more than ever.

Safety be damned.

"Safety be damned!!!"  Exactly what criteria do you rightwingers and Neolibs use to define "national security?"

[Hannah]

I personally do not believe in man made climate change. I do not think that some person can go out there and change the climate. The earth itself changes and has been hanging for years. 

[Michael Hardner]

5 hours ago, Hannah said:

I personally do not believe in man made climate change. I do not think that some person can go out there and change the climate. The earth itself changes and has been hanging for years. 

Well, you are wrong and didn't do good research.

[Infidel Dog]

You might want to take your own advice and do some research. 

At least he's thinking about it. Not just following along with a narrative.

There is good reason to suspect man has some effect on climate. There's the Urban Heat Island Effect, for example. One can check that out by driving around a city with a thermometer. There's a high school laboratory experiment one can do that shows in a black-body environment you can raise temperature 1 degree per doubling of CO2. 

What you don't seem to know or care about though is none of that shows any evidence of creating the kind of catastrophes global warmers rely on to pass on political power in fear of it.

There is no current pattern of dangerous weather or its effects we haven't seen before. The rise in longer range temperatures and sea levels do not necessitate the kinds of changes in policy political resetters would like to inflict on the global populace.

If you'd done your research, you'd know that, Mike.

Edited December 12, 2021 by Infidel Dog

[Michael Hardner]

It's not a narrative, it's a body of research.

 

Yeah, I am up on it.  Definitely can discuss in greater detail than the guy who says 'The earth itself changes and has been hanging for years. '

[ironstone]

I've touted this website on here before and I'll do it again.

Climate Discussion Nexus

Lot's of articles and short videos about  climate change  alarmism. Yes there is a large body of data but it get's more actual scrutiny here. You may be surprised.

Yes the climate is changing , just like it always has.

[Michael Hardner]

10 hours ago, ironstone said:

1. Lot's of articles and short videos about  climate change  alarmism. Yes there is a large body of data but it get's more actual scrutiny here. You may be surprised.

2. Yes the climate is changing , just like it always has.

1. Videos eh ?  In other words, let's replace the peer review system with crackpot theories directed to an unknowing public.

2. That statement is a red flag telling us that you have no idea.

[ironstone]

So you're saying you don't believe the science?

 

The “science" makes a lot of different claims based on a lot of different lines of evidence. You can't "believe" all of it because it's full of inconsistencies. Do you believe the scientific data that shows less warming than predicted by climate models? Or the science that shows hurricanes aren't more frequent or more severe? I certainly don't believe alarmist interpretations of the science that cherry-pick computer simulations and try to frighten us with implausible worst-case scenarios. A better question is whether you mainly believe the models or the data, because in a lot of key areas they disagree with each other.