| There are 32 comments on this blog. This blog is locked and no further comments are permitted. |
|
|
Fake climate change part 3
|
|
|
Bet the climate will change when the Con gets run out of town.
|
|
|
Walter, do you read what you link? Somebody wants to have a page titled "global warming" on Wikipedia and so he found some old paper. The other contributors immediately put him down. If you cannot read, the two charts show it all. Many decades ago, someone saw a trend of cooling and worried. After decades more data, that trend is a local peak, the long term trend is obviously warming.
|
|
|
^page titled "global cooling"
|
|
|
They are called weather cycles. It's amazing, this has been happening for millions of years..
Fuckin Caveman ruined it for everyone with that 1st fire.... LOL
|
|
|
Am I trying to convince you? Not really, too tough, like 1/4 Americans are the centre of the universe with the sun going around them.
Am I trying to convert you?
I'm sure climate change is way down the priority for many people. But why I get all these reactions here? Why you even want to shout it down, fake fake fake, just like our asshole president? Why you even read the blog?
If you are not in oil and gas, why? It's not that they shrink the oil and gas and coal and hence the economy. The money goes to other energies. Actually, it's more money around when you have a leading industry. God knows how many iPhones the Chinese bought and how much more they will.
|
|
|
No apple products ever bought by me.
I like to laugh at the Libs and the Left about climate change. One of your leaders AL Gore, you know the guy who invented the internet, buys a huge mansion (which he owns a few because of all of the cash me made because of fake climate change) on the beach and preaches about the sea levels rising.. LOL .
You just can't make this shit up! LOL
|
|
|
It's hopeless to discuss with you. What I hope to gain is figuring out something somebody.
Care to disclose your source? If you say something original I can figure out more.
|
|
|
Being on a board that is intended to meet Women and have fun, and you want to debate Fake Climate Change...
I'll just leave that right there.. LOL
|
|
|
Precisely what you said. Why do you care about climate change?
I'm here precisely because people like you care and I wonder why?
I'm doing research.
|
|
|
You seem to be starting the threads Abe..
Please continue your valuable research.
Sleep well.
|
|
|
If I don't start the topic how can I research?
If all my subjects go to sleep I have no research.
If nobody comes here I will leave too.
|
|
|
Read a fake climate change book?
Call AL Gore?
Talk with the sheep on the Left?
|
|
|
Carbon dioxide is as essential for life on this planet as water. The historian Turner explored the relationship between famine and population. This is the real problem. The sea level has been rising ever since the end of the last ice age. Sacramento is enjoying huge contributions to the State Treasury as a result of AB32, and recently passed two laws to keep the money flowing. This is a significant contribution to the price of fuel at the pump. Combined taxes on a gallon of gasoline in California are on the order of $ 0.80 per gallon.
When the life cycle cost of "green energy" is evaluated, the costs of alternative energy are still higher than fossil fuel derived energy. Exxon-Mobil and others have researched deriving diesel range hydrocarbons from algae that has been grown with captured CO2 emissions. During the Carter administration, it was predicted that petroleum reserves would be depleted by 2025, but improved extraction methods such as fracking have extended the availability of crude oil.
The "tipping point" and catastrophic climate change predictions have not materialized, because the effects of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) are small compared to natural climate drivers such as solar activity.
Governments and government-funded research are supporting carbon taxes, an inherent conflict of interest. The fact that climate changes over time is obvious from the geological record.
|
|
|
We can either die off from famine, war or FUBAR's solution or get Africa and Asia to control (reverse) the increase in population. In most of Europe and the Americas, population is actually declining. If the billion dollars Obama gave away after the Paris Agreement had been to sterilize third world couples after their first child instead of enriching corrupt dictators, I would have been in favor of it.
|
|
|
Angler, I do understanding something about you. You are not willing to go into details. At least you understand that it's impossible to hide who you are not, even behind the screen down under your mother's basement. The attack on Al Goal is a slip. You deniers are watching the same propaganda. That is a classic personal attack. It also doesn't matter since he is not a scientist. He is just the messenger and if he is shot no body cares except for his funding.
|
|
|
If you have to subtract out the influence of the solar cycles, adjust temperatures for heat islands, etc. just to get your models to work (show what you want them to show), that sounds more like data manipulation than science. Climate itself is a human construct to simplify and generalize observations of weather patterns. Who is to say that having polar ice caps is the ideal climate for this planet. In the geologic history of the planet, the human era is a tiny fraction of the earth's history. The palm tree fossils in Antarctica suggest that climate has been changing long before there was a concept of climate.
|
|
|
There are many more serious things that can cause global warming. However, we are the stewards of the planet and we should try to be more conservative.
|
|
|
I agree with Hime about conserving resources and FUBAR about reducing our individual "footprints." My objection is the notion of a Carbon tax, and taking money from our treasury (or borrowing from China) to transfer it to third world dictators. Afterall, Hime can remember when there were palm trees in Antarctica.
|
|
|
Walter, you want to hide who you are. You can't, even if you spend 6 hours to filter you throw outs. You know, I know. You seem to mind what the others think of you. I don't. You are just an idiot trying not to sound like one. That's impossible even if you hire an editor.
|
|
|
Yeah but you still have skid marks
|
|
|
hey abra, you're complaining that it's so hard to 'convince' us that climate change isn't a thing. everyone's against you.... well, here's a thought: if everyone else is telling you that you're wrong, maybe you're wrong.
climate change is real. the climate is changing. some 'experts' are saying it's warmer today than it has been. others are saying that it's cooler. co2 levels are changing. we can see by examining ice cores that the levels have been changing, going up and down for a long time.
the problem i have with the 'global warming' crowd is that they conclude that this change is the result of humans. were humans to blame for warmer temperatures in the past? or just in the last ~150 years and the industrial revolution?
i don't know the answer. and when i hear 'experts' claiming that they do - that they understand all of the variables involved in climate change i have to laugh. we can't even get accurate weather predictions five days in the future. the number of inputs into the model are extensive and i think it's arrogant of anyone to claim that they've solved the problem and they know the answer.
this doesn't mean we shouldn't reduce pollution - of co2 or other substances. we should. but to claim that one this is 'it' and then criticize others because we don't believe you? you're not going to convince people with that tactic. so right or wrong, ease up a bit. you'll convince more people with educated debating than you will with criticism and name calling. just a thought.
|
|
|
Pooch, it's the anti same sex marriage people whose head exploded when it became legal. You are here and cares about who else fucked who else, who else marries who else? Mind your own sex.
It doesn't bother me if the supreme court reverted same sex marriage or abortion. I just pity those hurt by it. These things just don't affect any other people, like prostitution and weed. Can everybody mind their own business?
The problem is the b-book. Still, many people believe that all it said was right. It was supposed to say that homo is evil. So believers act against it, so their world will not be destroyed by the almighty's anger, and he who fight evil will go to heaven.
Assume that there are still so much good in the world that the almighty aren't anger enough to destroy us, and that there are so many other evils to fight, I just don't see why so many voted Tramp because of the Supreme Court. Is it worth it? Asshole in the WH?
And the damage is already done. The corporations are protected the same way as an individual giving them a lot of power to corrupt politics. The swamp is already a fortified moat with a castle in the middle, before you even thought of to drain it.
|
|
|
iRent and others, now I think some deniers are different. They believe that the climate is changing. There's no way to due with it. And that it will cost so much of your enjoyment that's it's not worth it. And since it's not going to affect us, it's more convenient to deny it.
Why you bother to block others attempt to do something?
Even in some other religions with heaven like places, saying that you are impotent is one of the biggest insults because your DNA will be erased forever instead of living forever. I really don't see why one heaven cult is different from another. Walter, do you? Imagine your kids or grand kids have to play in your house they inherited, and there is no grass because of permanent water restrictions like the past drought. It's just not good, isn't it?
Killing a lot of people and poor people is a solution and that it's sad because it's impossible?
That's facist, and they are clever than that. Divide across the racial line is easier across the poverty line. That's history.
Now about election time, there was the talk about hating rich people. I don't hate rich people; I just like to tax them more above my tax bracket. And when Banon proposed it nobody seems to care.
|
|
|
The most hilarious AGW argument is the "97% of climate scientists..." Scientific method is not based on consensus or democracy. You don't have to go back to the days of Keppler, Copernicus and Galileo for an example of the accepted doctrine being proven false.
Until the discovery of helicobacter pylori by Marshall and Warren in 1982, the conventional wisdom was that stomach ulcers couldn't possibly be caused by bacteria, because they couldn't survive the stomach acidity.
Scientific "breakthroughs" occur when the conventional wisdom is wrong. I think most people agree that there is an effect from CO2 emissions. The disagreement is over the magnitude and consequences of the effect. The alarmists think we should assume the worst and take action immediately. Due to the adverse economic impacts, the geological record and the fact that a single major volcanic eruption would have far worse consequences the wiser course is to continue reducing emissions as the United States already is. Treating CO2 as a pollutant is almost as absurd as regulating water vapor.
Planting trees, preventing deforestation and wild fires, and reducing energy usage to reasonable levels are steps in the right direction, but the lack of control of world human population growth is the most important problem.
|
|
|
Some late comers may have missed the point. Some mentally challenged people can never get it no matter how many times I say. Am I here to research climate change? Don't be silly. With you? LOL. I want to figure out what some of you thinks and why.
So if you have some brilliant materials, link it. If you have great opinions, give me your real name and where you work. I might look at that.
I'm also not trying to convert you. There's nothing you can do if the guy only considers his own feelings. And don't talk reasons. Not nothing but hard, like you have to rocket a flat earther into space and watch the earth from above. If you convince you to take the rocket with you in the first place.
|
|
|
Happy Earth Day to you all!
|
|
|
Dude, I'm not here to debate climate change itself but I can comment on your comments. You are basically using the same playbook as the Princeton Denier.
Your comment on science is a little right. But Keppler, Copernicus and Galileo presented sound scientific theory that was rejected by the church. Supportive scientist won't say a word.
Science is always waiting for the one guy to over turn everything in the field. The Princeton guy never published anything sensible.
"Treating CO2 as a pollutant is almost as absurd as regulating water vapor. "
This is straight from the Princeton guy's playbook? right?
If you agree that it should be reduced, reduce, measure and compare. If you don't have enough water, restrict the sprinklers. We did.
|
|
|
Abe I'm with you. U guys get so worked up when u hear about climate change, or global warming. Chill it's just a discussion . Who is to say any of u r correct
|
|
|
What most people fail to realize is what catastrophically bad agreements both the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement were for the United States. The transfer of funds from the developed countries like the United States to third world dictators provides no benefit to the American taxpayer. At least Clinton treated the Kyoto Protocol as a treaty so the Senate could protect us by killing it. Obama just gave away a billion dollars without any Congressional authorization after the so called Paris Agreement.
I'd say giving away a billion dollars without Congressional authorization would be a high crime, but no one said anything about impeaching Obama.
If anyone has any explanation of what benefit was derived from giving away a billion dollars of our money, I'd love to hear it.
|
|
|
Walter, I'm not done with you while the other blog is blocked.
Have you actually read the article you actually linked?
The charts' captions all say the source is via CNN.
And if you do a search like you ask the 1st article is CNN.
The article you linked is almost a copy of the CNN one, that I have read and quoted.
The difference is that the site you linked sell stock/finance service at the end or actually embedded in the article.
Your links fail in so many ways, who, what, where.
And you are disputing the info you gave me.
It's just almost impossible to hide who you are not (an idiot). I'm done with you but if you want me to figure out you some more, go ahead and give me something interesting or some surprise.
|
|
|
want to continue?
|
| There are 32 comments on this blog. This blog is locked and no further comments are permitted. |
