Grok's paper on why global climate change is likely natural

[CdnFox]

Just now, eyeball said:

Except AGW does exist.

Sigh. 

Ok so show us the science and lets take a look at whether it's a crisis or anything to worry about at all. 

Lots of things exist, including your derranged paranoia. But that doesn't mean they're worth time worrying about. So.. lets see the science. 

No? No? Anyone? Buller?

ANyway it can't exist, i paid my carbon tax for years so it's gone now right? Otherwise why would the liberals kill the tax. 

[eyeball]

6 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

ANyway it can't exist, i paid my carbon tax for years so it's gone now right? Otherwise why would the liberals kill the tax

To kill the Conservatives. If nothing else stands out as a crisis to you that might do it eh?

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

To kill the Conservatives. If nothing else stands out as a crisis to you that might do it eh?

It's no surprise that the left would be lead by their hatred and bigotry as you admit. 

But that would not be a crisis, we would simply reset and rebuild and eventually we'd win

And we'd save up our anger and retribution for that  

[Nationalist]

11 hours ago, eyeball said:

The quandary is a fabrication. The definition of crisis is dependent on the context it's being used, health crisis, financial crisis, personal crisis, environmental crisis and on and on it goes. It's simply a qualifier that follows instead of preceding the thing in...crisis. As such a good stand alone definition might be,

A crisis is any event or period that will lead to an unstable and dangerous situation affecting an individual, group, or all of society. Crises are negative changes especially when they occur abruptly, with little or no warning.

You can't pin down what specific event or moment in time a crisis occurs but you'll very likely recognize one when it does. Unless you're determined to deny it but then that could be the crisis so...

To coin a phrase...sure kid.

Nice try anyway.

[Michael Hardner]

14 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Then produce real proof that "the sky is falling". Real proof. Not "could be"..."appears to". And of course...you can't...because they don't know conclusively. 

Bullsh1t.

Why do I have to produce proof for a claim I did not make?

[Nationalist]

35 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Why do I have to produce proof for a claim I did not make?

https://michaelhardner.blogspot.com/2019/12/human-caused-climate-change-hardners.html?m=1

Didn't make huh?

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, Nationalist said:

https://michaelhardner.blogspot.com/2019/12/human-caused-climate-change-hardners.html?m=1

Didn't make huh?

Did I say that the sky is falling?  Did I take a position on a detailed response?

 

You keep coming at me from these angles, I think because you want to make an argument where we don't have one.

 

Sometimes there's nothing to say.

[CdnFox]

9 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Did I say that the sky is falling?  Did I take a position on a detailed response?

You do all the time Mike.  You dance around it because you never ever like to actually say anything you can't claim was a misunderstanding later when you're called on it but you absolutely have supported the idea that climate change is a crisis and imminent threat.

But you can't support it. You've got zero science. 

[Nationalist]

23 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Did I say that the sky is falling?  Did I take a position on a detailed response?

 

You keep coming at me from these angles, I think because you want to make an argument where we don't have one.

 

Sometimes there's nothing to say.

Good. Then since you agree...you won't complain when all this war on fossil fuels is taken down.

[CdnFox]

Just now, Nationalist said:

Good. Then since you agree...you won't complain when all this war on fossil fuels is taken down.

 

That might not not be not untrue maybe 

-Typical Mike answer. 

[eyeball]

5 hours ago, Nationalist said:

To coin a phrase...sure kid.

Nice try anyway.

What definition of crisis do you subscribe to? What features would it have that make the term identifiable and in a way that everyone would know it no matter what the context?

[Nationalist]

59 minutes ago, eyeball said:

What definition of crisis do you subscribe to? What features would it have that make the term identifiable and in a way that everyone would know it no matter what the context?

More than a definite maybe would be good for a start.

[eyeball]

22 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

More than a definite maybe would be good for a start.

It's not a matter of if but when. That's the starting point. The science is abundantly clear.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Good. Then since you agree...you won't complain when all this war on fossil fuels is taken down.

I doubt that I will "complain" (your word).

[Nationalist]

15 minutes ago, eyeball said:

It's not a matter of if but when. That's the starting point. The science is abundantly clear.

Oh?

Ok let's see your conclusive statements from scientists.

15 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I doubt that I will "complain" (your word).

Good.

[eyeball]

21 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Ok let's see your conclusive statements from scientists.

You know perfectly well where to look yourself. But you do need to be realistic in your expectations. Typing 100% consensus into a search engine for example would be a stupid place to start.

[Nationalist]

29 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You know perfectly well where to look yourself. But you do need to be realistic in your expectations. Typing 100% consensus into a search engine for example would be a stupid place to start.

So none...ok.

[eyeball]

4 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

So none...ok.

No it's around 95 -97%. Where it's been for years.

[Nationalist]

43 minutes ago, eyeball said:

No it's around 95 -97%. Where it's been for years.

So you're saying 95 to 97 percent of climatologists agree that the current changes are soley due to man's presence and that we have a crisis?

Show me.

[eyeball]

52 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

So you're saying 95 to 97 percent of climatologists agree that the current changes are soley due to man's presence and that we have a crisis?

Sorta. Your wording reflects your obvious intent to be disingenuous about it - kicking and screaming every inch of the way IOW.

That's why I ask you people if it wouldn't be lot be easier to simply say you just don't give a flying fùck. Except you have to support politicians who keep pretending it matters so your kind of stuck in a limbo between a silly and a stupid place.

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Show me.

Show you what? You don't even know what you want.

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Sorta. Your wording reflects your obvious intent to be disingenuous about it - kicking and screaming every inch of the way IOW.

That's why I ask you people if it wouldn't be lot be easier to simply say you just don't give a flying fùck. Except you have to support politicians who keep pretending it matters so your kind of stuck in a limbo between a silly and a stupid place.

Show you what? You don't even know what you want.

Lol...what a denile.

You support an imposition on the entire population...based on fear. Nothing more.

Disgusting. 

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

It's not a matter of if but when. That's the starting point. The science is abundantly clear.

Post some of it. 

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

You know perfectly well where to look yourself. 

So you don't have any

[Nationalist]

16 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Post some of it. 

So you don't have any

It's like debating with kids.

"AHHH...WE ALL GONNA DIIIEEE!!!"

In the end...it's all hype.

[eyeball]

49 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Lol...what a denile.

Of what?

52 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

You support an imposition on the entire population...based on fear. Nothing more.

Fear of what, that "AHHH...WE ALL GONNA DIIIEEE!!!" There isn't a single scientist anywhere who's said that. Seriously, go find me a paper, study, conclusion anything that says or concludes "AHHH...WE ALL GONNA DIIIEEE!!!"

Whatever you've got is based on...laughing gas for all anyone can tell.

[CdnFox]

10 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Of what?

Fear of what, that "AHHH...WE ALL GONNA DIIIEEE!!!" There isn't a single scientist anywhere who's said that. Seriously, go find me a paper, study, conclusion anything that says or concludes "AHHH...WE ALL GONNA DIIIEEE!!!"

Whatever you've got is based on...laughing gas for all anyone can tell.

We can't find any papers anywhere that even say we're in trouble.  Or that the problem is terribly serious.  nether can you.  But thanks for finally admitting there is no science that says this is any kind of crisis. It's not.