« First « Previous Comments 6342 - 6381 of 6,381 Last »
You have completely shifted your argument to "there is no climate change" to "there is climate change but who cares because hot is better than cold."
1. The side putting forward the theory has to defend it from skepticism. That is how science works. It is not a popularity contest.
2. Some of us are old enough to have heard this stuff every decade since our childhood. It didn't come true.
in no way did the alarmist models come true
If you use a model to make a prediction and it falls flat on its face, it is not illogical to be skeptical of the model
It will be a dead horse soon. Enough people are speaking up.
How many freight ships transit the arctic?
The whole premise of this is to allow anyone to provide me visual proof at any resolution that sea level has risen.
3 I can assure you that I am not confused.
theory is the way to prove science, this predictive theory has failed, therefore I reject your future predictions.
Well, I'll start caring about sea level rise when you can.
2 degrees and a foot are NOT catastrophic and alarmist models do NOT predict the future.
Michael Mann s hockey stick.
You do know that chaotic systems like weather are almost impossible to model ?Don't you?
If the temperature continues to decline will you revisit your ideology or just continue to make excuses?
What do you think the ideal temp for human habitation on earth is?
Um nobody is debating whether certain gases help prevent Infrared radiation from the earth traveling to space and thus cooling the planet. Of the gases, water vapor is much MUCH better at providing this affect than CO2. A cloudy winters day is always warmer than a clear winters day, even though the CO2 concentrations are the same on both days.
I'm curious why I should watch a near 1 hour video of a person who is not a scientist in the field, has no published work on it, and is presumably a self-appointed hobbiest "expert," ..... and from that, you believe I will somehow get all the answers I need. Seriously? What about all the actual scientists working in the field? I can't get the answers from them? They wouldn't be a better source? Yes or no?
Shit, even the title sounds religious, like a Chick Tract.
Not even sure why he is even talking about housing in the first place
My favorite kind of liability is the one that pays a monthly dividend so large that it covers the rent
Hmm, I’m no meteorologist, but I’m pretty sure that things like:1)rain2)snow3)evaporation4)sublimationAll change the atmospheric water concentration.
Can you explain the mechanism by which CO2 (alone) changes the water vapor in our air?
Again, soap and water are the greatest drugs ever conceived.
If you really believe humans are going to devastate the planet with CO2, best get to fucking work on cold fusion or some other source of limitless energy because people are not going to stop making fires. They’re just not.
Harsh Ice Ages AND Ice-Free Poles for millions of years, long before humans but well after advanced life.
once homo sapiens (not Lucy from 4 mya) walked across the North Sea and/or Channel without getting their feet wet
The climate changes that ruined societies generally happened when they were at their maximum population load relative to their pre-science production
Even an 8C change in global temperatures isn't going to destroy human civilization at this point.
People got matches and want to stay warm.
Cancel the Alarm, nothing to see here.
Time may not change the minds of the holdouts, but time has and will continue to refute their apocalyptic predictions of exponential temperature and sea rise.
What I'm saying is, the path to getting off fossil fuels is Nuclear power.
" However, many other chemicals are produced when wood is burnt, including one of the most potent greenhouse gases, nitrogen dioxide; although the amounts may be small (200 g of CO2 equivalent per kg of wood burnt), the gas is 300 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide and lasts 120 years in the atmosphere."https://www.transitionculture.org/2008/05/19/is-burning-wood-really-a-long-term-energy-descent-strategy/
Does the process of manufacturing them give off pollution and greenhouse gases?