Jump to content

The man-made climate change is a fraud.


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

You can recreate the greenhouse effect in a lab.  That, with the amount of CO2 we're creating is evidence enough.

We don't have a second Earth that we can experiment on.

 

That sounds insane for one simple reason.   It is impossible to duplicate the earth's atmosphere to create global warming in a lab.  The heating of the earth's atmosphere is extremely complex system with the various gases plus water vapour and some or all gases constantly recycling with the ocean, with forests, plant life, etc.  Plus you have the sun's radiation heating the atmosphere and the radiation varies constantly depending on sun spots, radiation from space, heat emissions from volcanoes and from the centre of the earth.  Any scientist who knows anything about it would tell you the same thing, that is impossible to prove the exact causes of global warming.  Such an experiment would be built on assumptions, which are unknown and impossible to replicate in a lab.   A lab can never be the same as the earth's atmosphere.  Conclusion:  Nobody can make the claim man is causing global warming.  It is pure speculation. End of story.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

1. That sounds insane for one simple reason.   It is impossible to duplicate the earth's atmosphere to create global warming in a lab. 

2. The heating of the earth's atmosphere is extremely complex system with the various gases plus water vapour and some or all gases constantly recycling with the ocean, with forests, plant life, etc.  Plus you have the sun's radiation heating the atmosphere and the radiation varies constantly depending on sun spots, radiation from space, heat emissions from volcanoes and from the centre of the earth.

3. Any scientist who knows anything about it would tell you the same thing, that is impossible to prove the exact causes of global warming.   

4. ... pure speculation...

1. That's why I said we don't have a second Earth to experiment with. If you want proof on that level, it would basically be impossible. So you would never be able to prove any threat to our atmosphere.

Does that seem like a pragmatic way to assess environmental threats? To basically say we will never do anything about them because we can't prove it with an identical lab situation?

That said, everything about the greenhouse effect checks out with the lab recreation. And there are no alternate theories

2. Of course it's complex, but that doesn't mean we should start looking for phantom causes. When we know the relationship between greenhouse gases, radiation, and temperature to a large degree. It would be like saying gravity is complex, you can't calculate the actual effect, and then saying that the cause of an apple falling might be something else.

3. I myself will tell you that it can't be proven.

4. Pure speculation? That's a ridiculous assertion. When it comes to assessing risks and threats, you eliminate the ones that are highly unlikely and focus on the ones that are likely. Greenhouse gases are the culprit here.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, blackbird said:

It's you climate alarmists that are putting taxes on us, putting heavy-handed regulations on industry and planning to eliminate fossil fuels.  Don't you think the onus is on those who are doing these things to the people to prove what they are doing is legitimate?  Prove man is causing climate change.

Prove man isn’t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/19/2024 at 10:51 AM, Nationalist said:

Really? Hey what's the temperature around Europe and North America these days?

Western Canada had one week of below normal temperatures, the rest of the winter has been abnormally warm with next to no snowfall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. That's why I said we don't have a second Earth to experiment with. If you want proof on that level, it would basically be impossible. So you would never be able to prove any threat to our atmosphere.

Does that seem like a pragmatic way to assess environmental threats? To basically say we will never do anything about them because we can't prove it with an identical lab situation?

That said, everything about the greenhouse effect checks out with the lab recreation. And there are no alternate theories

2. Of course it's complex, but that doesn't mean we should start looking for phantom causes. When we know the relationship between greenhouse gases, radiation, and temperature to a large degree. It would be like saying gravity is complex, you can't calculate the actual effect, and then saying that the cause of an apple falling might be something else.

3. I myself will tell you that it can't be proven.

4. Pure speculation? That's a ridiculous assertion. When it comes to assessing risks and threats, you eliminate the ones that are highly unlikely and focus on the ones that are likely. Greenhouse gases are the culprit here.

 

You admit it is impossible to prove.  Yet, you are ok with governments and media making the unproven claim that man is causing global warming and climate change and resulting in heavy taxation of millions of people, harming our energy industry, shutting down fossil fuel use which is a vital, essential resource for man to live on earth.  You are ok with heavy regulations put on industries,  tens of billions of dollars of taxpayer money spent by government to fight this unproven man-made climate change.   You are talking about people in authority who claim the unproven is true and therefore they are playing God.  They do not know a thing about it and nobody can claim it is true.  Therefore they are completely out of line and doing great harm to mankind all based on an unproven claim.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not a scientist but I do not believe at all that man-made climate change has been proven. It is impossible to duplicate the earth's atmosphere to create global warming in a lab. The heating of the earth's atmosphere is extremely complex system with the various gases plus water vapour and some gases constantly recycling with the ocean, with forests, plant life, animals, etc. Plus you have the sun's radiation heating the atmosphere and the radiation varies constantly depending on sun spots, radiation from space, heat emissions, gases released from volcanoes and heat released from the centre of the earth. I am sure any scientist who is being honest and knows anything about it would tell you the same thing, that it is impossible to prove man is the cause of climate change. Such an experiment would be built on assumptions, which are impossible to replicate in a lab. A lab can never be the same as the earth's atmosphere. I believe it is beyond man's capabilities to prove. Conclusion: Nobody can make the claim man is causing abnormal global warming or any measurable global warming. It is pure speculation. End of story.

10 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Prove man isn’t.

A man is innocent until proven guilty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

When it comes to assessing risks and threats, you eliminate the ones that are highly unlikely and focus on the ones that are likely. Greenhouse gases are the culprit here.

 

We are talking about something that is beyond man's capability to know or prove.  The issue is as simple as that.  Anybody who thinks they can speculate and make a claim that man is the cause is going far beyond reason or logic.  It is completely out of the realm of human ability.  Men are often full of pride and think they have the ability and knowledge which they simply don't have.  That is the problem here.  People simply do not know what they are talking about.  People often use fancy words, technical, or science jargon to give the impression they know what they are talking about.  But if you dissect it and strip it down, you will find they have nothing to offer.  Politicians are often the same.  They are professionals at deception and obfuscation.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I am not a scientist but I do not believe at all that man-made climate change has been proven. It is impossible to duplicate the earth's atmosphere to create global warming in a lab. The heating of the earth's atmosphere is extremely complex system with the various gases plus water vapour and some gases constantly recycling with the ocean, with forests, plant life, animals, etc. Plus you have the sun's radiation heating the atmosphere and the radiation varies constantly depending on sun spots, radiation from space, heat emissions, gases released from volcanoes and heat released from the centre of the earth. I am sure any scientist who is being honest and knows anything about it would tell you the same thing, that it is impossible to prove man is the cause of climate change. Such an experiment would be built on assumptions, which are impossible to replicate in a lab. A lab can never be the same as the earth's atmosphere. I believe it is beyond man's capabilities to prove. Conclusion: Nobody can make the claim man is causing abnormal global warming or any measurable global warming. It is pure speculation. End of story.

A man is innocent until proven guilty.

In the court of what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Aristides said:

In the court of what?

It's not court. It's risk assessment.

You can actually arrest a person based on reasonable grounds, there are lots of other examples where you don't need ironclad proof to take action. 

Edited by Michael Hardner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, blackbird said:

In the court of reason, logic, human rights, and humanity.

To assume man is guilty without proof is a gross violation of basic human rights.  It is dictatorial and totalitarianism.

Do you actually believe nature gives a shit about any of those human inventions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's not court. It's risk assessment.

You can actually arrest a person based on reasonable grounds, there are lots of other examples where you don't need ironclad proof to take action. 

There is no evidence or proof at all that man is the cause of global warming.  You cannot arrest someone simply based on a hunch without any evidence.

Also, arresting someone is not comparable to the global warming issue at all.

You are grasping for straws.

Nobody can be convicted or found guilty without reasonable proof or evidence.  

The defence will say there is no proof and no reasonable evidence; therefore he is not guilty.  A jury must have reasonable evidence.

To even lay charges, there has to be reasonable grounds that the person may be found guilty.  There is none in the climate change scam.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Western Canada had one week of below normal temperatures, the rest of the winter has been abnormally warm with next to no snowfall.

You can try to sell your alarmist crap but, people know it's bullshit now.

My parents in Southern Alberta told me it's been -40 to -50 at night.

Brrrr...global warming. 

What a bunch of crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

You can try to sell your alarmist crap but, people know it's bullshit now.

My parents in Southern Alberta told me it's been -40 to -50 at night.

Brrrr...global warming. 

What a bunch of crap.

For one week in a whole winter that has had record high temperatures and almost no snow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Aristides said:

For one week in a whole winter that has had record high temperatures and almost no snow. 

Dude...your climate bullshit is over. You can argue till you're blue in the face but, the population sees it for what it is now.

A money and control mechanism.!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Dude...your climate bullshit is over. You can argue till you're blue in the face but, the population sees it for what it is now.

A money and control mechanism.!

And when it is cold and does snow a lot, these people start screaming that it's "climate change causing extreme weather!!!"   <insert chicken-little icon>

Meanwhile we haven't really gone up much in global temperature yet. Although the average is rising, and things are changing (glacial melting has increased) we haven't reached the so-called "tipping point" where effects become impactful, which is still projected to be years away.

So why are they screaming like it's already here, now?  The projections for climate change are on the order of decades to centuries. Relax everybody.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

And when it is cold and does snow a lot, these people start screaming that it's "climate change causing extreme weather!!!"   

The answer is simple... Don't listen to people who are screaming unless there's an immediate threat in your eyeline.

We're here to talk about issues in a way that's a little more elevated than that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

The answer is simple... Don't listen to people who are screaming unless there's an immediate threat in your eyeline.

We're here to talk about issues in a way that's a little more elevated than that.

Yes, I agree, we need to maintain a calm, civil and intellectual dialogue. Keep perspective on the scale of things. I find climate alarmism detrimental to the discussion, just as climate change denial can be.

But in the end, real substantive change must come from political leaders and industry. And so far we have seen about 30 years of empty promises, failed commitments and foot-dragging. Perhaps these are the people who don't really believe in climate change.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Perhaps these are the people who don't really believe in climate change.

Are you referring to climate change by nature because I think most people would agree with natural climate change?  I don't believe in man-made climate change.  The climate change alarmists are claiming man is the cause of climate change.  I don't believe that because it is unproven.

The debate should really be around man-made climate change which is a fraud.  That is why they are imposing carbon taxes and trying to kill the fossil fuel industry and all the other measures including pouring billions of dollars of taxpayer money into subsidizing EV battery plants and billions into transitioning to so-called green energy which has not proven to be reliable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,750
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Betsy Smith
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...