Global Warming: Man-Made or Natural?

[LinkSoul60]

3 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Fossil fuels will serve just fine.

Until you moonbats find a cheaper and more efficient way to keep America moving at high speeds, you'll just have to sit on your stupid activism until the next democrat slithers into the WH. 

I'm guessing that you have no children or grandchildren that will be around long after you're gone.

[robosmith]

7 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

I'm guessing that you have no children or grandchildren that will be around long after you're gone.

DELUGINAL BAGHDAD BOB never thinks about anything but his next BULLSHIT come back. And he doesn't think about that very much.

[paxamericana]

12 minutes ago, robosmith said:

There is a lot of research on CO2 capture, so if they find a way to make money with that, it could be much sooner.

Like maybe building materials (cement/bricks, etc)

Co2 like global warming is a good thing, makes the planet greener. Plants grow better in greenhouses.

Edited August 12, 2025 by paxamericana

[Nationalist]

39 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well he died 5 years ago. He did have a point, however he also used to say the temperature wasn't increasing. That point was proven, false, and probably the CO2 1 point will be also. 

Even if his claim that we shouldn't associate greenhouse effects with atmospheric warming are correct... I mean at some point you do have to do something.

Is the general climate on Earth warming? Evidently.

Has man's industrialization caused this? Perhaps to some unknown degree.

Is this a crisis? No.

Should we act on the info anyway? Sure. How?

By doing everything possible to force the cost of energy to rise abruptly? No...that sounds excessive since we can't even agree on the severity or the cause.

Is there something less painful that can be done? Yes. Glad you asked. Finance research to find reliable and reasonable alternatives...invest in nuclear plants...continue to refine fossil fuel burning...which we've already done to a major degree. So we know that's very possible. 

Thank you Dumb-Dumbs.

Have a nice day.

[Deluge]

25 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. You really need to be specific in your language.

2. Yes, it does have to do with human causation. No, it does not have anything to do with the Earth being destroyed. 

3. It is for conversational reasons, but it's an important conversation after all.

1. So do you. 

2. Then I'm still not interested. I'll trust my source instead. 

3. It's left-wing propaganda and that's pretty much it. 

 

[herbie]

When you're standing on the beach and see that tsunami coming, don't run for high ground. Just stand there drooling and tell yourself it's "natural".

[Michael Hardner]

24 minutes ago, Deluge said:

 I'll trust my source instead. 

My sources are Stanford university and NOAA, for the record.

[Deluge]

14 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

My sources are Stanford university and NOAA, for the record.

Mike, it's been nothing but crying and left-wing hysteria. I need something more than Stanford, NOAA and moonbat tears. Surely after 100+ years of weeping for the environment there would be some kind of global catastrophe - I mean something where large parts of continents have gone under water in the last 100 years. 

I want a timeline. How much time does humanity have before everyone's floating in the sea? 

[Michael Hardner]

7 minutes ago, Deluge said:

1. I need something more than Stanford, NOAA and moonbat tears. 3.

2. Surelyly after 100+ years of weeping for the environment there would be some kind of global catastrophe - I mean something where large parts of continents have gone under water in the last 100 years. 

3. I want a timeline. How much time does humanity have before everyone's floating in the sea? 

1. What do you expect?

2. You're going to wait until there are giant catastrophes? Okay. 

3. We don't have that. But it's not reasonable to expect like something at that level of detail.  I mean people already decry the doom and gloom predictions. And they also reject any tie-in between current events and climate.

[SpankyMcFarland]

The underlying rate of warming in this current interglacial period has been about 1C per 1000 years or 0.01C per decade. Over the last forty years it has been more like 0.2C per decade, twenty times as much. That difference needs to be explained by those who dispute AGW. 

[LinkSoul60]

No dispute from me.  It's fact.  

The real concerning part is that globally, the 10 warmest years on record have all been in the last decade...2015 through to 2024.  

https://earth.org/2024-hottest-year-on-record-marks-decade-of-deadly-heat/

 

 

 

[Moonlight Graham]

The vast majority of climate-related scientists disagree with Fred Singer.   Link in OP from 2007?  LOL.

[Michael Hardner]

12 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

The vast majority of climate-related scientists disagree with Fred Singer.   Link in OP from 2007?  LOL.

It is a shame... We didn't do enough to educate people.... 😔 

[robosmith]

8 hours ago, paxamericana said:

Co2 like global warming is a good thing, makes the planet greener. Plants grow better in greenhouses.

No, it's NOT a good thing. It is melting the glaciers and if not mitigated will FLOOD MAJOR COASTAL CITIES. Duh

[robosmith]

8 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Is the general climate on Earth warming? Evidently.

Has man's industrialization caused this? Perhaps to some unknown degree.

Is this a crisis? No.

Should we act on the info anyway? Sure. How?

By doing everything possible to force the cost of energy to rise abruptly? No...that sounds excessive since we can't even agree on the severity or the cause.

Is there something less painful that can be done? Yes. Glad you asked. Finance research to find reliable and reasonable alternatives...invest in nuclear plants...continue to refine fossil fuel burning...which we've already done to a major degree. So we know that's very possible. 

Thank you Dumb-Dumbs.

Have a nice day.

Your AMATEUR OPINION on this subject MEANS NOTHING because you have NO EXPERTISE. The FACT is  YOU DON'T KNOW whether it's NOT A CRISIS.

You haven't even cracked ONE CLIMATE SCIENCE JOURNAL, NOR KNOW WHERE TO FIND ONE.

Quote

Yes, climate change is widely considered a crisis due to its far-reaching and severe impacts on the planet and human societies. It's not just an environmental issue; it's a multifaceted crisis affecting public health, food security, and human security. The scientific consensus is clear: human activities are the primary driver of climate change, and the consequences are already being felt globally. 

 

Here's why it's considered a crisis:

• Scientific Consensus:

  There's overwhelming agreement among scientists that climate change is happening and is primarily caused by human activities. 

   
• Irreversible Impacts:

  Some changes, like the melting of glaciers and ice sheets, are already irreversible and will have long-lasting consequences. 

   
• Extreme Weather Events:

  Climate change is increasing the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events like heat waves, droughts, floods, and storms, causing widespread damage and loss of life. 

   
• Health Impacts:

  Climate change is a health crisis, exacerbating respiratory illnesses, spreading infectious diseases, and contributing to food and water insecurity. 

   
• Social and Economic Impacts:

  Climate change is disrupting food production, displacing populations, and exacerbating existing inequalities, leading to increased social and economic instability. 

   
• Threat to Biodiversity:

  Many plant and animal species are at risk of extinction due to climate change, threatening ecosystems and biodiversity. 

   
• Human Security:

  Climate change is increasingly impacting human security by intensifying resource scarcity, leading to conflicts and displacement. 

   

 

•  
•  

   

  

   

   

  
   
•  

   

  

   

   
   
•  

 

 

•  
   

 

Edited August 13, 2025 by robosmith

[Nationalist]

7 hours ago, robosmith said:

Your AMATEUR OPINION on this subject MEANS NOTHING because you have NO EXPERTISE. The FACT is  YOU DON'T KNOW whether it's NOT A CRISIS.

You haven't even cracked ONE CLIMATE SCIENCE JOURNAL, NOR KNOW WHERE TO FIND ONE.

 

Apparently neither have your government agencies...who are funded by tax payer money and thus rely on keeping the population scared enough to keep funding them.

Nice try Hypocrite.

[Deluge]

15 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. What do you expect?

2. You're going to wait until there are giant catastrophes? Okay. 

3. We don't have that. But it's not reasonable to expect like something at that level of detail.  I mean people already decry the doom and gloom predictions. And they also reject any tie-in between current events and climate.

1. I expect catastrophe at a massive scale - we're still waiting for it. 

2. No, I'm going to continue with my life because I know man-made climate change is a bullshit notion. 

3. EVERYTHING affects the climate in moonbat world. I'm sorry, MIke, but there is no forseeable end to humanity. We'll keep going just like we always have. 

Edited August 13, 2025 by Deluge

[Nationalist]

14 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

The underlying rate of warming in this current interglacial period has been about 1C per 1000 years or 0.01C per decade. Over the last forty years it has been more like 0.2C per decade, twenty times as much. That difference needs to be explained by those who dispute AGW. 

Nobody disputes that. It's your reaction that's disputed.

Trashing our current source of energy and driving the cost of everything up as a result, is the act of an authoritarian twit.

[Deluge]

18 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

I'm guessing that you have no children or grandchildren that will be around long after you're gone.

So what's your timeline, professor? When do we all get washed away in sea water? 

18 hours ago, robosmith said:

DELUGINAL BAGHDAD BOB never thinks about anything but his next BULLSHIT come back. And he doesn't think about that very much.

Tree worship is robomarx's favorite.

 

[Nationalist]

5 minutes ago, Deluge said:

 

Lol...such id1ots.

[Deluge]

19 hours ago, robosmith said:

DELUGINAL BAGHDAD BOB never thinks about anything but his next BULLSHIT come back. And he doesn't think about that very much.

Baghdad is 95% Muslim. As an America hating sociopath, robomarx LOVES Islam.

The problem is that robomarx is also a pronoun slut so he/him/it isn't sure whether it's BaghDAD or BaghMOM. 

[LinkSoul60]

14 minutes ago, Deluge said:

So what's your timeline, professor? When do we all get washed away in sea water? 

Obviously there is not a definitive timeline.  It's also obvious to the vast majority of scientists that climate change is real and is a continued threat.

Guess I was right in assuming you had no children or grandchildren.  That's probably a good thing for the kid and society in general, but let's assume you did and let's assume your political bias around climate change is incorrect and in fact it's a crisis....   Would you care about the world you leave behind to your children and grandchildren, or would you not?  

The science is unequivocal....   Not only in this thread, but you keep reminding me of what Neil DeGrasse Tyson had said;

How sad it must be- believing that scientists, scholars, historians, economists, and journalists have devoted their entire lives to deceiving you, while a reality TV star with decades of fraud and exhaustively documented lying is your only beacon of truth and honesty.

 

He is so spot on....

 

 

[Deluge]

6 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

1. Obviously there is not a definitive timeline.  

2. It's also obvious to the vast majority of scientists that climate change is real and is a continued threat.

3. Guess I was right in assuming you had no children or grandchildren.  

4. That's probably a good thing for the kid and society in general, but let's assume you did and let's assume your political bias around climate change is incorrect and in fact it's a crisis....   Would you care about the world you leave behind to your children and grandchildren, or would you not?  

5. The science is unequivocal....   Not only in this thread, but you keep reminding me of what Neil DeGrasse Tyson had said;

6. How sad it must be- believing that scientists, scholars, historians, economists, and journalists have devoted their entire lives to deceiving you, while a reality TV star with decades of fraud and exhaustively documented lying is your only beacon of truth and honesty.

 

He is so spot on....

1. Obviously not. 

2. Too bad they don't have definitive proof because much of the planet is laughing in their faces. We know the Obama's are laughing, as their home is right on the f*cking coast. lol

3. Of course I do, but the last thing they have to worry about is man-made climate change - in fact they don't have to worry about it at all beause it doesn't exist. 

4. I have no political bias. I'm just waiting for the catastrophes. You clowns have had over a 100 years and still nothing. 

5. It's unequivocal, but there's no timeline. That's convenient. lol

6. I don't need Trump to tell me that you climate activists are purely political and full of shit. lol

[LinkSoul60]

4 minutes ago, Deluge said:

1. Obviously not. 

2. Too bad they don't have definitive proof because much of the planet is laughing in their faces. We know the Obama's are laughing, as their home is right on the f*cking coast. lol

3. Of course I do, but the last thing they have to worry about is man-made climate change - in fact they don't have to worry about it at all beause it doesn't exist. 

4. I have no political bias. I'm just waiting for the catastrophes. You clowns have had over a 100 years and still nothing. 

5. It's unequivocal, but there's no timeline. That's convenient. lol

6. I don't need Trump to tell me that you climate activists are purely political and full of shit. lol

If you go outside today, be sure that your helmet is on properly.  

[Deluge]

21 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

If you go outside today, be sure that your helmet is on properly.  

It's a beautiful day! Not a sign of man-made climate change in sight!