Climate Change

[Rebound]

40 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Dude, it's no secret that you wokies are keen on science. The problem is that you're keen on skewing science. It's only obvious that NASA and the entire science community has been overrun by activists. 

No, the thing about science is that it's been corrupted by woke activists. One has to look pretty hard to find something that hasn't been tainted by you wackjobs. 

Why is it obvious? Because you don’t like the results? 

[Michael Hardner]

44 minutes ago, Deluge said:

 It's only obvious that NASA and the entire science community has been overrun by activists. 

 

@Rebound you have now arrived at your destination. This person has asserted that NASA is corrupt, therefore no public institution can be used as a source of information.  There is a conspiracy to change all information from such places, you see?

So everyone just has to get information from their political partisans and objective information is not available.

This means that separate political groups now must necessarily start building their own institutions with their own sources of information.

Under this landscape, there can be no unity between the political groups and politics is therefore itself dead.

Edited July 6, 2023 by Michael Hardner

[Deluge]

26 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

@Rebound you have now arrived at your destination. This person has asserted that NASA is corrupt, therefore no public institution can be used as a source of information.  There is a conspiracy to change all information from such places, you see?

So everyone just has to get information from their political partisans and objective information is not available.

This means that separate political groups now must necessarily start building their own institutions with their own sources of information.

Under this landscape, there can be no unity between the political groups and politics is therefore itself dead.

Thank you, Michael, I knew you'd come around. 

The takeaway here is that everything is fine, and climate activists need to keep their opinions to themselves. 

[reason10]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

According to many decades of continual satellite monitoring, the arctic ice is definitely melting long term.  It’s fact.  I already linked to the data. 
 

Activists don’t own their own satellites. Facts are facts. 
 

Here, try teaching yourself something.  This is really interesting stuff:

https://nsidc.org/learn/parts-cryosphere/sea-ice/quick-facts-about-sea-ice

Unfortunately, 2023 is the worst on record, by far.  It’s a serious problem   

https://earth.gsfc.nasa.gov/cryo/data/current-state-sea-ice-cover

Left wing POLITICAL sites? And you whine like a bee itch when i cite Investors Business Daily.

[Deluge]

57 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Why is it obvious? Because you don’t like the results? 

No, it's obvious because nothing's happening. 

But like I said before, the moment the sun punches a hole through the ozone and fries Beijing to a crisp, I'll be right there with you moonbats, in the forests, weeping for the trees.

Hell, I'll even get onboard when NYC is permanently up to its knees in sea water.

Edited July 6, 2023 by Deluge

[Nationalist]

You silly twits and your climate change emergency. You cheer on governments who cave to your whining...and in the process you inflict suffering on the entire world.

I don't know for sure if the climate is changing unnaturally. I do know the reaction to this panic is having an adverse effect on everyone. So...if you twits are all freaked out about carbon...on a carbon based planet...find a way to actually generate the power necessary to drive the world's energy needs and quit playing with your dumb-ass windmills and mirrors. None of them are reliable and its FOSSIL FUELS that power your PCs and cells...from which you choose to trash the production of said power.

Gee...that makes you all...panic driven, destructive and extremely hypocritical.

Edited July 6, 2023 by Nationalist

[Michael Hardner]

14 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

 

I don't know for sure if the climate is changing unnaturally.  

No of course not, why would you ever have a thought that breaks from populist orthodoxy?

 

[Nationalist]

9 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

No of course not, why would you ever have a thought that breaks from populist orthodoxy?

 

Possibly because none of it has been proven without reasonable dispute as yet?

Tell me...what's the blatantly obvious results of all this anti-fossil fuels charade?

Edited July 6, 2023 by Nationalist

[Deluge]

4 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

No of course not, why would you ever have a thought that breaks from populist orthodoxy?

I have the same thoughts about democrats. It wasn't too long ago that dems/libs were the ones trying to tell everyone to free their minds - now they shit their pants if you don't say and do exactly what they want. lol

[Michael Hardner]

10 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Possibly because none of it has been proven without reasonable dispute as yet?

Tell me...what's the blatantly obvious results of all this anti-fossil fuels charade?

See the discussion points I put in my signature below.  Given that laboratory level causative proof would be impossible, I think we are way beyond the threshold of reasonable.

For your benefit I'll just restate it top level... The greenhouse effect is real, CO2 is a greenhouse gas, humans have been pumping CO2 into the atmosphere at great levels, CO2 increase correlates to the temperature increase, there's no other cause that can be shown for the temperature increase.

None of this reflects anything like a proof, such as exists in mathematics, but it's beyond reasonable.

[Rebound]

35 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

You silly twits and your climate change emergency. You cheer on governments who cave to your whining...and in the process you inflict suffering on the entire world.

I don't know for sure if the climate is changing unnaturally. I do know the reaction to this panic is having an adverse effect on everyone. So...if you twits are all freaked out about carbon...on a carbon based planet...find a way to actually generate the power necessary to drive the world's energy needs and quit playing with your dumb-ass windmills and mirrors. None of them are reliable and its FOSSIL FUELS that power your PCs and cells...from which you choose to trash the production of said power.

Gee...that makes you all...panic driven, destructive and extremely hypocritical.

Thirty Percent of ALL electricity generated in Texas is from windmills.

Fifty Percent of ALL electricity generated in Iowa is from windmills. 

[Michael Hardner]

9 minutes ago, Deluge said:

I have the same thoughts about democrats. It wasn't too long ago that dems/libs were the ones trying to tell everyone to free their minds - now they shit their pants if you don't say and do exactly what they want. lol

This is exactly why you can't be a party partisan and claim to be an independent thinker.

[Nationalist]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

See the discussion points I put in my signature below.  Given that laboratory level causative proof would be impossible, I think we are way beyond the threshold of reasonable.

For your benefit I'll just restate it top level... The greenhouse effect is real, CO2 is a greenhouse gas, humans have been pumping CO2 into the atmosphere at great levels, CO2 increase correlates to the temperature increase, there's no other cause that can be shown for the temperature increase.

None of this reflects anything like a proof, such as exists in mathematics, but it's beyond reasonable.

Yet in the absence of irrefutable evidence...you find it justified to impose suffering on the entire human population? Gee...that's swell...

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, Nationalist said:

Yet in the absence of irrefutable evidence...you find it justified to impose suffering on the entire human population? Gee...that's swell...

Nothing is irrefutable in science, everything is open for debate.

You're asking about trading off suffering now versus later, that's all.  We don't need proof of causality, we need low levels of reasonable doubt and we are definitely there.

If somebody had an alternate theory for the temperature increase, we might have something to talk about however the alternate explanations died out in the literature decades ago.

[Rebound]

3 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Yet in the absence of irrefutable evidence...you find it justified to impose suffering on the entire human population? Gee...that's swell...

The suffering is being caused by the petroleum industry which lobbies extensively to prevent faster implementation of renewable energy sources which will make energy far more plentiful and cheaper. After all, wind and the sun are 100% free. These technologies are mature and they work. Whether the oil and coal companies like it or not, wind and sun will take over in the long run, because they are cheaper, non-polluting, and they don't hold a nation hostage to the whims of a handful of Arab sheiks.

[Deluge]

12 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

This is exactly why you can't be a party partisan and claim to be an independent thinker.

"Independent thinking" on your part, landed you in the same camp as the Left. You're into climate activism, and I'm betting you believe that parents need to defer to educators. 

True independent thinkers take the information given and square it with their own understanding. 

[Nationalist]

14 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Nothing is irrefutable in science, everything is open for debate.

You're asking about trading off suffering now versus later, that's all.  We don't need proof of causality, we need low levels of reasonable doubt and we are definitely there.

If somebody had an alternate theory for the temperature increase, we might have something to talk about however the alternate explanations died out in the literature decades ago.

IMO...part of the doubt stems from the past history of climate activists. We've been told, over and over..."AHHH...WE ALL GONNA DIIIEEE!!!" yet...we're all still here. Panic and silly predictions do not form a solid basis for belief. It breeds distrust.

The reasonable reaction to the belief that man is warming the climate with carbon, is to find a reliable alternative to burning carbon to drive generators. THEN slowing replacing the carbon burning units with the reliable alternative. That way...you feel good that we've done something about it...and doubters like me feel good because what we did was reasonable and most of all RESPONSIBLE.

What this panicked reaction has produced is frankly...silly as hell. Mirrors and windmills? Really? Build and bring online a number of nuclear plants, THEN phase out fossil fuels. That way...everyone has power and nobody has to suffer this insanity.

Edited July 6, 2023 by Nationalist

[Michael Hardner]

13 minutes ago, Deluge said:

"Independent thinking" on your part, landed you in the same camp as the Left. You're into climate activism, and I'm betting you believe that parents need to defer to educators. 

True independent thinkers take the information given and square it with their own understanding. 

This can be I'm only on the left if you believe in camps. 

There is a very long list of conservative leaders who believe in the environment and have rallied to join the effort to address climate change.

Squaring things means changing your mind sometimes. When's the last time you did that?

 

[Nationalist]

14 minutes ago, Rebound said:

The suffering is being caused by the petroleum industry which lobbies extensively to prevent faster implementation of renewable energy sources which will make energy far more plentiful and cheaper. After all, wind and the sun are 100% free. These technologies are mature and they work. Whether the oil and coal companies like it or not, wind and sun will take over in the long run, because they are cheaper, non-polluting, and they don't hold a nation hostage to the whims of a handful of Arab sheiks.

Yes well...that's horseshit.

In order to power just the USA, wind and solar farms would take up the land space of over 5 South Dakotas. Even then it would not be reliable at all times. It would require supplemental generation of some sort. The building of this silly dream would cost the USA a massive chunk of farm land. So while the power may be there...80% to 85% of the time...the USA would be at the mercy of nations who have something we like to call...food. REAL food. Not lab-grown crap and certainly not bugs.

The USA had energy independence...then Biden happened...

[Queenmandy85]

55 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Yes well...that's horseshit.

In order to power just the USA, wind and solar farms would take up the land space of over 5 South Dakotas. Even then it would not be reliable at all times. It would require supplemental generation of some sort. The building of this silly dream would cost the USA a massive chunk of farm land. So while the power may be there...80% to 85% of the time...the USA would be at the mercy of nations who have something we like to call...food. REAL food. Not lab-grown crap and certainly not bugs.

The USA had energy independence...then Biden happened...

You've never heard of nuclear power?  MY BAD. APOLOGIES TO NATIONALIST.

You claim the greenhouse effect hasn't been proven. You can prove it in any undergraduate physics lab. If you lower the proportion of a greenhouse gas in the atmosphere such as carbon dioxide or methane, and apply radiant energy, the re-radiation of energy increases, causing the atmosphere to cool. If you increase the proportion of CO2 or methane, the re-radiation of energy is reduced, causing the atmosphere to warm. The results are measureable and predictable. That is the definition of proof. Physics, math, and chemistry have nothing to do with politics. 

You should consult your lawyer because you likely have a case against your physics prof. for negligence.

A degree in the hard sciences should be a prerequisite for holding public office.

 

Edited July 6, 2023 by Queenmandy85

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, reason10 said:

And there is ZERO EVIDENCE that human activity on FOURTEEN FCKING PERCENT OF THE EARTH'S SURFACE IS THE REASON FOR THE PLANET HEATING UP, WHEN THE PLANET HAS HEATED AND COOLED LONG BEFORE HUMANS EVER GOT HERE.

You are DANGEROUSLY stupid.

You being IGNORANT of the plethora of EVIDENCE and engaging in LOGICAL FALLACIES, does not make the evidence disappear.

What's dangerously stupid is you believing an IGNORANT FOOL like yourself knows the issues better than actual EXPERTS.

PREVIOUS heating and cooling is irrelevant to the PHYSICS of man burning GHG CURRENTLY warming the planet. Duh.

Do you even know that massive coal fires IN THE GROUND caused warming in the ancient PAST?

Dunning-Kruger in ACTION. ?

[Deluge]

11 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

This can be I'm only on the left if you believe in camps. 

There is a very long list of conservative leaders who believe in the environment and have rallied to join the effort to address climate change.

Squaring things means changing your mind sometimes. When's the last time you did that?

 

You're more in line with the Left than you are the Right. 

Oh, I don't believe in waste, and I'm certainly supportive of improving air quality. It wasn't super long ago that it hurt to breathe in LA; now it's much better. 

I change my mind quite often. The problem with Climate Change is that your claims don't jibe with what's actually happening. I read the other day about how back in 2019, the UN thought we only had 11 years to go before "catastrophe" struck. We're four years into this prophecy and I haven't seen even the slightest change since 2019. 

Like I said before, I'll change my mind when Beijing is on fire or NYC is up to its knees in sea water. 

[Michael Hardner]

36 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

1. IMO...part of the doubt stems from the past history of climate activists. We've been told, over and over..."AHHH...WE ALL GONNA DIIIEEE!!!" yet...we're all still here. Panic and silly predictions do not form a solid basis for belief. It breeds distrust.

2. The reasonable reaction to the belief that man is warming the climate with carbon, is to find a reliable alternative to burning carbon to drive generators. THEN slowing replacing the carbon burning units with the reliable alternative. That way...you feel good that we've done something about it...and doubters like me feel good because what we did was reasonable and most of all RESPONSIBLE.

 

1. Okay but doubting the activists and pundits is different than doubting the actual science.

2. Sounds like you're talking about mitigation activities. Okay.

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Yes there is. Tonnes of it.

So POST IT HERE. Duh

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Which is EXACTLY the same as you. So he's every bit as much of an expert as you are.

I posted EXPERT evidence. Deluginal HAS cited NO EVIDENCE. 

 

 

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, Deluge said:

 1. The problem with Climate Change is that your claims don't jibe with what's actually happening.

2. I read the other day about how back in 2019, the UN thought we only had 11 years to go before "catastrophe" struck. We're four years into this prophecy and I haven't seen even the slightest change since 2019. 

3. Like I said before, I'll change my mind when Beijing is on fire or NYC is up to its knees in sea water. 

1. I haven't made any claims on my own for sure. I do site with the experts say, including temperature predictions.

2. It doesn't sound like there's any science in that claim, so I'm not going to address it. If you had a cite though that would help.

3. That is the case, then well that's too late. It's like saying I'm going to put my seat belt on when I see an accident about to happen.

4 hours ago, reason10 said:

And there is ZERO EVIDENCE that human activity on FOURTEEN FCKING PERCENT OF THE EARTH'S SURFACE IS THE REASON FOR THE PLANET HEATING UP, WHEN THE PLANET HAS HEATED AND COOLED LONG BEFORE HUMANS EVER GOT HERE.

You are DANGEROUSLY stupid.

CO2 was the cause in the past also..