« First « Previous Comments 43 - 82 of 240 Next » Last » Search these comments
Also, science is self correcting, in the sense one can give counter claims and correct the hypothesis. So far , all I have heard is excuses from the right wing.
water, oxygen but if their levels changed suddenly you have flood and fire.
So what is the current hypothesis of the alarmists? Will the world end in 10 years if we don't stop all co2 production?
I'm not holding my breath for an answer.
it agrees that it does not have explanation for everything
At this point the majority (97%) of the experts agree that the climate change is happening due to human activity. That pretty much puts it as a fact
If the current pace of the buildup of these gases continues, the effect is likely to be a warming of 3 to 9 degrees Fahrenheit from the year 2025 to 2050, according to these projections. This rise in temperature is not expected to be uniform around the globe but to be greater in the higher latitudes, reaching as much as 20 degrees, and lower at the Equator.
That pretty much puts it as a fact.
Tim Aurora saysSo far , all I have heard is excuses from the right wing.
I think that there are perhaps 100 or 200 people on Earth who can understand arguments for/against global warming competently. I am not one of them, and neither are any other Patnetters from what I can see.
One of the greatest disproofs of a theory is when predictions are far, far off from reality down the road.
- "it happened before":
NAH.... MUST BE A WORLDWIDE CONSPIRACY OF LEFTISTS TO PREVENT ME FROM DRIVING MY F SUV.
IT'S THE ONLY POSSIBILITY.
there is warming but it's the volcanoes": yeah well... we know how much C we burn, and we know how much its presence in the atmosphere is increasing. It doesn't take much to out 2 and 2 together.
The fact that you want to preach to us that we don’t understand climate when you don’t even understand one of the basic drivers of immediate climate change is revealing.
"it's the sun": well of course we measure the sun and the didn't change
"there is no warming": well melting ice world wide, temp measurements, etc... begs to differ
"it happened before": well ok, that's fucking meaningless
the models suck and can't predict anything": Ok... so what about what we observe and measure right now?
In one post you accuse of the 97% Scientific community being lax and questioning their past credibility record and on another you accuse them of being a religion
Yes, if anyone says there is no current warming, that person is biased as we do have warming trend currently
The temp peaked in 2016 which was warmer than 2015 by .04 degrees. 2017 and 2018 were colder than 2016 and 2019 looks to be colder still. If there is a trend it is stable or cooling.
But the alarmists predicted multiple degrees hotter by now
Onvacation, I am not sure what are you arguing
. In one post you accuse of the 97% Scientific community being lax and questioning their past credibility record and on another you accuse them of being a religion
But it is not just you but the entire deniers who are just throwing arguments and looking for something to stick.
Heraclitusstudent saysthere is warming but it's the volcanoes": yeah well... we know how much C we burn, and we know how much its presence in the atmosphere is increasing. It doesn't take much to out 2 and 2 together.
This one statement reveals a PROFOUND lack of understanding of climate and weather. Volcanoes cool the earth down, usually a hemisphere at a time due to prevailing winds, and a large volcanic eruption can cause a significant short term effect of a degree or more in average change.
Heraclitusstudent saysNAH.... MUST BE A WORLDWIDE CONSPIRACY OF LEFTISTS TO PREVENT ME FROM DRIVING MY F SUV.
IT'S THE ONLY POSSIBILITY.
Who said that?
Is it not obvious that I am arguing that global warming is a scam?
Crop yields continue to increase globally, surpassing what is needed to feed the world. Agricultural technology matters more than climate.
theoakman saysCrop yields continue to increase globally, surpassing what is needed to feed the world. Agricultural technology matters more than climate.
Let's say we continue to burn C without paying attention to climate change. The temp goes up +2.. +3... +5.... +10 Celcius. Let's continue to +15?
At what point does the "it's good for us" or "it doesn't matter" become utter obvious BS?
Heraclitusstudent says"it's the sun": well of course we measure the sun and the didn't change
it does change
Heraclitusstudent saysthe models suck and can't predict anything": Ok... so what about what we observe and measure right now?
here I vehemently disagree - correlation is not causation, and models DO suck
Heraclitusstudent says"it's the sun": well of course we measure the sun and the didn't change
it does change
We know for an absolute fact that whatever tiny variations in sun intensity we observe cannot explain the warning observed.
- can we agree humans emit CO2?
- can we agree there is more CO2 now in the atmosphere than 50 yrs ago? - observed
- can we agree that CO2 is a greenhouse gas? - observed in laboratories
- can we agree that we see more reflected heat from the atmosphere in the frequency where we expect this due to CO2? - observed
- can we calculate the extra heat that will not radiate in space at the scale of earth? - calculated
- can we observe extra heat in fact being present? - observed
When you know the exact mechanism, and you observe EVERY STEP of the mechanism in fact happening, doesn't claiming "correlation is not causation" become UTTER BS?
That's not true. As long as the variations are small then yes, there must be another source for significant changes. But if we approach any local minimum or even maunder minimum, the warming we have seen is meaningless, a blip on the radar and no match for the upcoming ice age.
1. Please explain if more CO2 in atmosphere causes positive or negative warming feedback loops. I can't answer that personally.
mell saysThat's not true. As long as the variations are small then yes, there must be another source for significant changes. But if we approach any local minimum or even maunder minimum, the warming we have seen is meaningless, a blip on the radar and no match for the upcoming ice age.
There is no maunder minimum, or larger variations happening now.
We also know for a fact for example that polar regions that DO NOT SEE THE SUN FOR 6 MONTHS A YEAR are the places that see the most warming. This is totally consistent with greenhouse effect and totally INCONSISTENT with a variation in sun intensity.
So I'll repeat again:
We know for an absolute fact that whatever tiny variations in sun intensity we observe cannot explain the warning observed NOW.
« First « Previous Comments 43 - 82 of 240 Next » Last » Search these comments
The extreme alarmism of climate change lunatics — best personified by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’ insistence that humanity will be destroyed in 12 years if we don’t stop burning fossil fuels — is all based on nothing but fearmongering media propaganda and faked science. (The IPCC and NOAA both routinely fudge temperature data to try to create a warming “trend” where none exists.)
It’s all a massive, coordinated fraud, and the mainstream media deliberately lies to the public about climate change to push anti-free market schemes that would destroy the U.S. economy while transferring literally trillions of dollars into the pockets of wealthy globalists as part of a “carbon tax” scheme.
Yet carbon isn’t the problem at all. And the “war on carbon” is a stupid, senseless policy created by idiots, given that humans are carbon-based lifeforms, meaning that any “war on carbon” is a war on humanity.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-07-12-climate-change-hoax-collapses-new-science-cloud-cover.html?fbclid=IwAR1YBhLRbjz72RoT9foEI4nkXq9XsDhe0dQAtuJrm2UJkPOxuCxFlKd9h1w