What Is Climate Change?

[Reg Volk]

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I can answer that. As the concentration ofcarbon increases in the atmosphere, less energy is re-rediated and the planet warms up. What is difference about this warming is it is happening much faster that previous events. It will become a self-generating process that we will be unable to stop. 

The remedy is to transition to nuclear power, and preserve our petroleum and coal resourses for future generations. Nuclear power, both unraium and thorium fuelled reactors, are a licence to print money in western Canada.

 

 

But why would anyone do that?  You aren't answering the basic question.  How much "bad weather" is saved by taking these actions?  How much bad weather per dollar are we saving by "transitioning"?  No climate kook I know can answer this, and you are just once again proving my point.

[Deluge]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well, it does though. 🤔

Science feeds the public sphere with information that needs discussion.  

You've confused science with activism, Mike. You've been shoving activism into the public sphere which is why you've been getting pushback. 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I can answer that. As the concentration ofcarbon increases in the atmosphere, less energy is re-rediated and the planet warms up.

So?

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

What is difference about this warming is it is happening much faster that previous events.

So?

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

 

It will become a self-generating process that we will be unable to stop. 

That at least is definitely untrue. There's a maximum amount of heat that any Carbon level can hold in with regards to the atmosphere. It will not grow infinitely uncontrollably. That science is solid. So the question becomes how bad does this get and I have yet to see a single scientific document that addresses that despite having asked an infinite number of times on this forum and other places

I'll ask you the same thing. Can you produce actual scientific documents that explain exactly how bad it will get, what the impact will be and why we should consider it to be a crisis? Bonus points if you can also point to anything that says anything we can do will actually have a measurable significant result

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

 

The remedy is to transition to nuclear power, and preserve our petroleum and coal resourses for future

Not according to the environmentalists, they hate nuclear power

And I'm going to guess ahead of time that you don't have any actual science to back up the claim that if we moved our entire grid to nuclear power instead of the current power generation models that it would make a significant difference or what exactly would not happen that would have happened otherwise

Here's the problem. While I'm sure your intentions are good and I'm sure your beliefs are real what we see is people like yourself making these strong statements as if they're back without any ability to back it up with real science. Usually what they will do is point to a website that has no science in it but suggests that somewhere out there in the universe there is science to support whatever claims they're making

And now people have totally lost faith in the government with regards to climate change or that it's a crisis. And well they should, every scrap of evidence when looking at government actions points to the idea that they don't think it's serious or a threat. They see it as a money pit

 

[Reg Volk]

1 hour ago, User said:

All you need to know, to know what BS the climate change alarmism is from folks on the left here is to watch them cheer on China for their clean energy while ignoring their continued coal plant building and use of coal… cheer on choking their own countries with regulations and restrictions and ignore that they are just shipping the coal and industry to China instead.

 

Apparently “global” warming isn’t really global, if you ship all the emissions to China everything is magically better. 

Same goes for those that tell me that they "care about the environment" because they drive two EV's and have solar panels on their houses.  Then I show them that they have to drive their Teslas for 8 years just to catch up to my gas-powered car because of all the emissions that it took just to make their cars, let alone mine all the materials needed, and they get all upset.  Then I show them that those solar panels are never going to produce enough power to replace the energy required just to build them, and their footprint is so big they will never in their lifetime reduce the CO2 outputs that was required to build them, and they just run away.  They don't want to hear the truth.

If it's all "made in China" then the emissions don't exist.  Right?

The few that manage to make it past the truth telling on their stupid EV's, I haul out Billy Bob on Youtube and they just about short-circuit and stroke out:

"Green Energy" is a joke, and a massive lie.

Edited yesterday at 02:34 AM by Reg Volk

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well, it does though. 🤔

Science feeds the public sphere with information that needs discussion.  

It doesn't. For example I've asked you dozens of times to provide the science that I mentioned above and you never have been able to.

So what happens is actually that politicians and other groups with interests make statements claiming that they are speaking for the science. But very commonly if not almost universally the science actually says something different than what they're claiming.  But they use the 'claim' of science, and the public never sees the original science.  So it does NOT wind up informing the public, it participates in the misinformation of the public.

[robosmith]

3 hours ago, Goddess said:

We'll adapt.  Like we always do.

Your weather reports do NOT represent CLIMATE. Duh

[CdnFox]

27 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Your weather reports do NOT represent CLIMATE. Duh

Sure it does. Prove otherwise

[Nationalist]

12 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I can answer that. As the concentration ofcarbon increases in the atmosphere, less energy is re-rediated and the planet warms up. What is difference about this warming is it is happening much faster that previous events. It will become a self-generating process that we will be unable to stop. 

The remedy is to transition to nuclear power, and preserve our petroleum and coal resourses for future generations. Nuclear power, both unraium and thorium fuelled reactors, are a licence to print money in western Canada.

 

 

Nuclear power is a good alternative. But the world still bases its energy production on fossil fuels. 

It has now been admitted that the great climate scare is not worthy of the drastic and costly measures taken. All they did was drive inflation and cause suffering. 

At some point the greenie freaks will have to admit they were wrong. Completely wrong. And to make sure they at least stop this insanity, we who always suspected the whole panic was based on outright lies, are gonna ridicule the greenies relentlessly. 

The cost of this debauchery has been and still is monumental. Those who perpetuated the lies "should" be jailed. Like that fat Al Gore who knew he was selling blatant fear-porn and did so for no other reason than profit.

[Nationalist]

9 hours ago, robosmith said:

Your weather reports do NOT represent CLIMATE. Duh

Lol...and we start Thursday with more asinine comments from the ANTIFA dweeb.

[Barquentine]

19 hours ago, Deluge said:

around the time Emma Lazarus started stamping her feet for foreigners to come in and leech off the country. They do the same thing with immigration - illegal immigration is just immigration - it's ALL immigration.

WTF do you think made America so powerful? America was built into the giant it is by immigrants.

Edited 19 hours ago by Barquentine
spelling

[Nationalist]

5 minutes ago, Barquentine said:

WTF do you think made America so powerful? America was built into the giant is by immigrants.

Indeed.

And when immigration became an issue, the US government implemented immigration laws. Laws which you silly fops like to pretend don't exist.

Fly straight or be labeled a lyin' goof.

[Barquentine]

12 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Now, never mind that deserts used to be jungles and plains used to be oceans or glaciers were retreating before man ever walked the earth.

And how long did those changes take? 10s or 100s of thousands of years. How long since the industrial revolution became a factor in the changes we see now? 200 years or so.

 

It may look like an ocean liner foundering at sea, but these are factory chimneys poking through the smog in the East End in 1952

Edited 19 hours ago by Barquentine
adding text

[Deluge]

5 minutes ago, Barquentine said:

WTF do you think made America so powerful? America was built into the giant is by immigrants.

Oh, you mean those titans of industry from Somalia and Mexico. 

Who were they again? 

[Deluge]

Climate Change is whatever we need it to be. 

-- The Left

[Nationalist]

1 minute ago, Deluge said:

Oh, you mean those titans of industry from Somalia and Mexico. 

Who were they again? 

A great point.

Imagine if you will...

A very successful nation, colonized by northern European people, has a border in which south of that border are a multitude of nations colonized and setup by the Spanish and the Portuguese...for the most part.

These South American countries created.. mud. Poor societies. Excessive crime.

Now...would it be "wise" of that successfull country to let millions of people from these failed states, flood the country and bring such mentality to the successful state?

[Deluge]

1 minute ago, Nationalist said:

A great point.

Imagine if you will...

A very successful nation, colonized by northern European people, has a border in which south of that border are a multitude of nations colonized and setup by the Spanish and the Portuguese...for the most part.

These South American countries created.. mud. Poor societies. Excessive crime.

Now...would it be "wise" of that successfull country to let millions of people from these failed states, flood the country and bring such mentality to the successful state?

Nope, it would never be wise. That's a culture that has already proven to have ZERO interest in assimilating here. In fact most times they try to do the opposite. 

[Barquentine]

12 hours ago, Reg Volk said:

No climate kook I know can answer this, and you are just once again proving my point.

No, that's the old familiar fallacy: I say I don't have an answer, you say you do, therefore you must be right. WRONG!!!

[Barquentine]

7 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

These South American countries created.. mud.

Wrong about the mud part. And the US just happens to be in the right climate zones to be the one of, if not the largest most fertile land masses in the world.

[Nationalist]

3 minutes ago, Barquentine said:

No, that's the old familiar fallacy: I say I don't have an answer, you say you do, therefore you must be right. WRONG!!!

If you dont have an answer, stand aside and let those who do...get things straightened out.

[Barquentine]

11 hours ago, CdnFox said:

But very commonly if not almost universally the science actually says something different than what they're claiming.

Prove that.

[Nationalist]

1 minute ago, Barquentine said:

Wrong about the mud part. And the US just happens to be in the right climate zones to be the one of, if not the largest most fertile land masses in the world.

Yup.

Success takes a number of ingredients. Hard work...diligence...intellect...

And in most cases...a bit of luck.

So why should a successful state allow the influence of those who have already failed?

[Barquentine]

3 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

If you dont have an answer, stand aside and let those who do...get things straightened out.

Not surprised you didn't understand the fallacy.

[Barquentine]

27 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Oh, you mean those titans of industry from Somalia and Mexico. 

Who were they again? 

Why do you insist on changing the subject from climate change to modern immigration? As if they're related.

[Nationalist]

Just now, Barquentine said:

Not surprised you didn't understand the fallacy.

Not surprised you insist on lying.

Does it not bother you that there is literally no evidence that humanity is in danger of extinction from the climate? Or that this greenie fear-porn has cost humanity unnecessary hardship?

I guess you can be labeled a lyin' fool.

Enjoy that.

[Deluge]

17 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Why don't you test it for your self? You can model it using equipment found in any undergraduate physics lab. The results are predictable, measurable and repeatable. Physics doesn't care about politics. 

You clearly have grounds to pursue litigation against your physics prof because if he led you to believe the greenhouse effect is unproven, he lied to you and took your money under false pretences.

How do we know the equipment is legit? We don't even know how to use the equipment. All we've had for the past 100+ years is a bunch of hysterics in lab coats telling us that we're killing the planet. The planet isn't dead, in fact we've actually cleaned up parts of it - there was a time where LA smog had everyone gagging but now that's pretty much gone. 

Your message is old and tired and authentic people don't give a shit.