What Is Climate Change?

[eyeball]

7 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Google.com says there is no such science 

Yes it does.

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

Yes it does.

Google.Com says you're wrong and notes that there isn't 98.7% chance you would lie about it  

[Deluge]

On 6/27/2026 at 9:08 AM, Barquentine said:

No it won't. But it will create some horrible outcomes.

Like what? 

[Nationalist]

Like nothing but a bunch o' whiney little toadies who actually hate their own nation. Its amazing. 

Libbies...really...are you all so terrified of boiling on Earth that you believe the clap-trap you've been sold? Come-on...some at you had to have read or heard predictions and dire reports that sounded over the top?

You've now been informed by your own little toadies...and the holy "science"...that we ain'-a goin' anywhere, any time soon.

You'll have to forgive my gruffness but...you slimeballs cost the world HUGELY right as The Rona was speading. Your Libbie policies choked off energy and increased its price across the board...and had the public pay for it. That is what it  sounds like...

Mean as Hell.

And stupid as Hell too. If you hate your lives so much that hurting the population gives you satisfaction...

You're actually psycho.

Edited 22 hours ago by Nationalist

[Deluge]

On 6/24/2026 at 10:27 AM, Deluge said:

Climate Change is a tool for elitist a$$holes to drive humanity into some dystopian corner where they can easily manipul -  

Oh, the d*ckheads are starting: 

Climate change refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns. Such shifts can be natural, due to changes in the sun’s activity or large volcanic eruptions. But since the 1800s, human activities have been the main driver of climate change, primarily due to the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas.

Burning fossil fuels generates greenhouse gas emissions that act like a blanket wrapped around the Earth, trapping the sun’s heat and raising temperatures.

The main greenhouse gases that are causing climate change include carbon dioxide and methane. These come from using gasoline for driving a car or coal for heating a building, for example. Clearing land and cutting down forests can also release carbon dioxide. Agriculture, oil and gas operations are major sources of methane emissions. Energy, industry, transport, buildings, agriculture and land use are among the main sectors causing greenhouse gases.

https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/what-is-climate-change

So the world has already spent trillions of dollars on climate change, yet it's still getting hotter outside. What's the point of spending all that money if you d*ckheads can't even keep the world from burning to a crisp? 

Edited 18 hours ago by Deluge

[Reg Volk]

Bwha haa haa Bernie is such a fool.  Where is the accountability? Why isn't this clown in jail for lying?

[Nationalist]

12 minutes ago, Reg Volk said:

Bwha haa haa Bernie is such a fool.  Where is the accountability? Why isn't this clown in jail for lying?

Plausible denyability.

Its where they hide. 

What a waste...

[Legato]

On 6/26/2026 at 10:57 PM, robosmith said:

No, it means that weather is weather until the trend is established by a 30+ years long accumulation of the predominate conditions. Only then is it climate.

Do you understand now?

So what is it called when there's a climactic weather event?

Whether the weather affected the wethers or the bellwethers? or a storm in the Darjeeling.

Then you may understand.

 

[eyeball]

16 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You were the one who tried to convince everyone that hundreds of millions of people would come screaming across our border and there'd be no possible way to stop them, but billions of people would die horribly and that essentially our civilization will come to an end.

Some estimates put the number at 1.5 billion around the world by 2050. There's already 24 million or so being displaced annually, most internally within their own countries - most of these are rural people who move to cities but that's not likely going to be sustainable for very long.

The way to stop them is to do something about climate change but...too late now I suppose. Apparently it's been cancelled to hear you people put it.

15 hours ago, CdnFox said:

But let's be honest, you think everything you read on google or websites you approve of is science

My approval has nothing to do with anything.

[Deluge]

40 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The way to stop them is to do something about climate change but...

No, the way to stop them is to keep voting for Republicans. 

[Nationalist]

"AHHH! WE ALL GONNA DIIIEEE!"

[CdnFox]

58 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Some estimates put the number at 1.5 billion around the world by 2050.

No estimates anywhere suggest anything of the kind and every time you're asked to provide some sort of evidence you can't

Google.com says there's zero, nada, none, no chance 1.5 billion people will be coming to canada by 2050 or even by 2250. 

This is just the Doomsday alarmism you sell it has no truth and it's not based in science and only appeals to people who are slightly dumber than the folks who thought the war of the world's radio broadcast was actually happening.

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

My approval has nothing to do with anything.

Nothing you say has anything to do with anything other than your own imagination. So you're approval basically is what drives your entire argument. Never falsehoods you've made up and decided to promote is true or what you put forward. That's why you can never come up with a single ounce of proof or any science to support your position

[Michael Hardner]

On 6/26/2026 at 7:44 PM, eyeball said:

That depends on what you mean by crushing regulations.

1 to 2% of GDP?

Proposing 5%, but half would be private investment 

[Reg Volk]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Some estimates put the number at 1.5 billion around the world by 2050. 

That was supposed to happen by 2010 originally.  These shysters just keep moving the goalposts, and the stupid sheep just keep lapping up the lies.

[LinkSoul60]

2 hours ago, Reg Volk said:

Bwha haa haa Bernie is such a fool.  Where is the accountability? Why isn't this clown in jail for lying?

Your ability to understand what someone actually said is as spot on as the fool who decided that Sanders said 'we had 6 years left before climate catastrophe wiped us out'.   Try to listen to and understand his words... they matter.

Bwha haa haa Fool...

 

 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Google.com says there's zero, nada, none, no chance 1.5 billion people will be coming to canada by 2050 or even by 2250. 

That's right.

[LinkSoul60]

6 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Like nothing but a bunch o' whiney little toadies who actually hate their own nation. Its amazing. 

Libbies...really...are you all so terrified of boiling on Earth that you believe the clap-trap you've been sold? Come-on...some at you had to have read or heard predictions and dire reports that sounded over the top?

You've now been informed by your own little toadies...and the holy "science"...that we ain'-a goin' anywhere, any time soon.

You'll have to forgive my gruffness but...you slimeballs cost the world HUGELY right as The Rona was speading. Your Libbie policies choked off energy and increased its price across the board...and had the public pay for it. That is what it  sounds like...

Mean as Hell.

And stupid as Hell too. If you hate your lives so much that hurting the population gives you satisfaction...

You're actually psycho.

Feel better?

Wtf...  

[Nationalist]

10 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

Feel better?

Wtf...  

Better? No. I'll feel better when Canastan decides to be a real country for Canadians. Use the gifts of this country and stop trying to impress European leaders who are on the outs themselves. 

I think I'd like to see our immigration officials start deporting all the illegals.

But the Liberal vote in this country is determined to tax the citizens to death. Make it impossible to make a profit from our massive natural resources. 

Stupido.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1 to 2% of GDP?

 

At a time when gdp growth is 1.5 percent?  And you wonder how we fell into recession. 

2 percent of gdp is an ENORMOUS burden

[Barquentine]

17 hours ago, Deluge said:

Like what?

What, you can't read? Can't even look around?

1000 dead in France from yet more record heat, more severe droughts, more floods, fish species moving or disappearing, rising oceans swallowing small island countries, insurance companies not selling policies to affected areas, food insecurity, species dying off, more wildfires, tropical disease moving northward, etc...

[Deluge]

2 hours ago, Barquentine said:

What, you can't read? Can't even look around? 1000 dead in France from yet more record heat, more severe droughts,more floods, fish species moving or disappearing, rising oceans swallowing small island countries, insurance companies not selling policies to affected areas, food insecurity, species dying off, more wildfires, tropical disease moving northward, etc...

Sounds like the Earth just doing its thing. 

All that shit you're talking about has happened before - it's just the way the Earth rolls, and there is nothing we can do about it. 

California's been in a drought for years - it's even had some nasty fires - so why in the f*ck aren't your fellow zombies scrambling like rats to get out of there? I'll tell you why, it's because they know your climate change is bullshit, but it's proven effective in scaring others into submission. Political wins come from "man-made climate change". Those perverts are staying put. 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by Deluge

[Goddess]

1 hour ago, Deluge said:

All that shit you're talking about has happened before - it's just the way the Earth rolls, and there is nothing we can do about it. 

This is where they lose me, too.

CO2 is a tiny trace element and it's NOT a pollutant.  CO2 levels are the lowest they've ever been on earth before, we are actually in a CO2 famine.

Yet they want you to believe that this tiny trace element is causing mass destruction all over the earth.

They want you to believe that CO2 levels don't fluctuate naturally on their own - it's man who is 100% in control of it.

They want you to believe that cloud coverage, solar activity, volcanic activity, including underwater volcanic activity and the natural ebb & flow of earth cycles - NONE of that has anything to do with the climate on earth.  It's all because of man.

There's a reason why they had to get rid of "global cooling" and replace it with "global warming' and then replace that with the generic "climate change."

"Climate change" covers everything.

Too much snow?  Climate change! And it's YOUR fault for warming your car up when it's 40 below.  Bad humans!

Not enough snow?  Climate change!  And it's YOUR fault for using AC in the summer.  Bad humans!

Too much rain?  Climate change!  And it's YOUR fault for eating beef.  Bad humans!

Not enough rain?  Climate change!  And it's YOUR fault for not driving an electric car.  Bad humans!

Heatwave in France?  No, you bad humans cannot use AC - let the old people die.

The climate alarmist foot soldiers, they hate humans.  Humans are a parasite to them.  Humanity needs to die off to save the planet.

It's a sick & twisted death cult.

[Deluge]

14 minutes ago, Goddess said:

This is where they lose me, too.

CO2 is a tiny trace element and it's NOT a pollutant.  CO2 levels are the lowest they've ever been on earth before, we are actually in a CO2 famine.

Yet they want you to believe that this tiny trace element is causing mass destruction all over the earth.

They want you to believe that CO2 levels don't fluctuate naturally on their own - it's man who is 100% in control of it.

They want you to believe that cloud coverage, solar activity, volcanic activity, including underwater volcanic activity and the natural ebb & flow of earth cycles - NONE of that has anything to do with the climate on earth.  It's all because of man.

There's a reason why they had to get rid of "global cooling" and replace it with "global warming' and then replace that with the generic "climate change."

"Climate change" covers everything.

Too much snow?  Climate change! And it's YOUR fault for warming your car up when it's 40 below.  Bad humans!

Not enough snow?  Climate change!  And it's YOUR fault for using AC in the summer.  Bad humans!

Too much rain?  Climate change!  And it's YOUR fault for eating beef.  Bad humans!

Not enough rain?  Climate change!  And it's YOUR fault for not driving an electric car.  Bad humans!

Heatwave in France?  No, you bad humans cannot use AC - let the old people die.

The climate alarmist foot soldiers, they hate humans.  Humans are a parasite to them.  Humanity needs to die off to save the planet.

It's a sick & twisted death cult.

Don't forget toxic masculinity - it's also a culprit. 

From AI:

Toxic masculinity contributes to climate change through deeply ingrained social norms that link consumption and environmental dominance to manhood. These cultural scripts fuel higher carbon footprints and climate denial, hindering the collective shift toward sustainability. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]

The connection between masculine identity and environmental damage manifests in several specific ways:

• The "Green-Feminine" Stereotype: Research shows that average consumers often subconsciously view eco-friendly behaviors as "feminine." Because of this, men are more likely to avoid sustainable products and habits for fear of appearing less masculine. [1, 2, 3]
• "Petro-Masculinity": Coined by political scientist Cara Daggett, this concept describes a toxic fusion between fossil fuel consumption, climate change denial, and the defense of patriarchal dominance. Driving large, inefficient vehicles and defending extraction-based industries are often culturally upheld as powerful assertions of traditional manhood. [1, 2, 3]
• Disproportionate Consumption: Studies demonstrate that men's spending habits result in higher greenhouse gas emissions than women's. This is largely driven by historically higher consumption of carbon-intensive goods, such as meat, fossil fuels for driving, and air travel. [1, 2]
• Climate Change Denial: Psychological studies, such as research conducted on adult populations in Sweden, indicate that men who feel their traditional masculinity is under threat are significantly more likely to reject climate science and resist environmental policies. [1, 2]

Addressing these norms by promoting "ecological masculinities"—identities rooted in ecological stewardship, community, and care rather than dominance—is a major focus

1 minute ago, Deluge said:

Don't forget toxic masculinity - it's also a culprit. 

From AI:

Toxic masculinity contributes to climate change through deeply ingrained social norms that link consumption and environmental dominance to manhood. These cultural scripts fuel higher carbon footprints and climate denial, hindering the collective shift toward sustainability. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]

The connection between masculine identity and environmental damage manifests in several specific ways:

• The "Green-Feminine" Stereotype: Research shows that average consumers often subconsciously view eco-friendly behaviors as "feminine." Because of this, men are more likely to avoid sustainable products and habits for fear of appearing less masculine. [1, 2, 3]
• "Petro-Masculinity": Coined by political scientist Cara Daggett, this concept describes a toxic fusion between fossil fuel consumption, climate change denial, and the defense of patriarchal dominance. Driving large, inefficient vehicles and defending extraction-based industries are often culturally upheld as powerful assertions of traditional manhood. [1, 2, 3]
• Disproportionate Consumption: Studies demonstrate that men's spending habits result in higher greenhouse gas emissions than women's. This is largely driven by historically higher consumption of carbon-intensive goods, such as meat, fossil fuels for driving, and air travel. [1, 2]
• Climate Change Denial: Psychological studies, such as research conducted on adult populations in Sweden, indicate that men who feel their traditional masculinity is under threat are significantly more likely to reject climate science and resist environmental policies. [1, 2]

Addressing these norms by promoting "ecological masculinities"—identities rooted in ecological stewardship, community, and care rather than dominance—is a major focus

L-OH-L!!!

[CdnFox]

5 hours ago, Barquentine said:

What, you can't read? Can't even look around?

1000 dead in France from yet more record heat, 

It's too bad for them that people like you insisted we focus on pretending we could change climate change rather than focusing on adapting.  If we had ignored you people and taken steps to make sure people were safe instead they'd be alive today.  The climate crisis hoax kills people. 

Ash to the rest crap is going to change. Which hasn't it always will. But you haven't presented any evidence as to why it's a crisis

[Goddess]

Here's one of Michael Crichton's very finest quotes, especially applicable to climate "science":

"I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science.

I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled.

Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.

Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right ... In science, consensus is irrelevant."