Climate Change

[Rodcx500z]

By the time they really find the cause of this so called temp variation stuff, we will all be long gone and, they will be stood there wide eyed saying yep it was mother nature after all, never stops amazing me why folk argue about s--t they have no control over i mean people are still having debates about if Mr Armstrong really did step on the moon in 1969, i think it's best to just enjoy your little moment on the big ball we live on and remember nothing lasts forever

 

[Bernie]

What are facts and is "fact checking" really objective?

 

[Stan's Brew]

By the time they really find the cause of this so called temp variation stuff, we will all be long gone and, they will be stood there wide eyed saying yep it was mother nature after all, never stops amazing me why folk argue about s--t they have no control over i mean people are still having debates about if Mr Armstrong really did step on the moon in 1969, i think it's best to just enjoy your little moment on the big ball we live on and and that remember nothing lasts forever

>>remember nothing lasts forever

And that includes your income that they want to take more and more of in the name of climate change!

No-one needs to be worried about the climate, it will look after itself (man's vain attempts to control the climate are futile), it's the money that governments and billionaires want to take from us to pay for their pet schemes that is worriesome plus the level of totalitarian control they are already imposing on us and are aiming to increase.

 

[Bernie]

By the time they really find the cause of this so called temp variation stuff, we will all be long gone and, they will be stood there wide eyed saying yep it was mother nature after all, never stops amazing me why folk argue about s--t they have no control over i mean people are still having debates about if Mr Armstrong really did step on the moon in 1969, i think it's best to just enjoy your little moment on the big ball we live on and remember nothing lasts forever

That is your opinion. Others have children grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
Much of the science of climate change is about dealing with the consequences. What are our descendants to think of Rodcx500z if we haven't adapted our livelihoods, habits and environment to suit the changed climate? After all "we will all be long gone" and "it was best to just enjoy our little moment on the big ball we lived on and remember nothing lasts forever"?

 

[Stu's Brews]

I didn't ask you to watch it on a Sunday morning in the first place!

If you'd care to look at my original post #93 that I originally referred you to, you will clearly see that I spelled out the reasons why Lindzen has a different view on global warming, that goes quite a way to answering your question:

"He has contributed to the development of theories for the Hadley Circulation, hydrodynamic instability theory, internal gravity waves, atmospheric tides, and the quasi-biennial oscillation of the stratosphere. His current research is focused on climate sensitivity, the role of cirrus clouds in climate, and the determination of the tropics-to-pole temperature difference."

You can lead a horse to water ...

Is the reason that people who believe in government and media sponsored narratives will not look at alternative views because the so-called fact-checking websites have done their research for them? It really is lazy research if this is the case and it appears to be so.

More slander. Just because I don't have time to watch a two hour video it does not mean I have not researched the subject.

I've done my level best to be polite in this debate but you've now turned it nasty by throwing out baseless accusations.

You said you don't believe climate change is caused by CO2 so I asked you to provide an scientifically proven alternative. You've pointed me to Dr. Lindzen, who in his own work agrees that CO2 causes global warming. What he disagrees with is the future forecast for climate change and it's associated impact.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/a-disse...d-climate-scientists-take-on-richard-lindzen/
The critique starts with the key points on which Lindzen and the UK experts agree. They welcome Lindzen’s acceptance of some well established ‘knowns’ of climate science, including:

“There has been a large increase of atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases due to emissions resulting from human activity over the past 150 years […] Global average surface temperature has very probably warmed by about 0.7°C in the same period […] Increasing carbon dioxide alone, and in the absence of climate feedbacks, should cause about 1°C warming for each doubling.”

 

[chthon]

That is your opinion. Others have children grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
Much of the science of climate change is about dealing with the consequences. What are our descendants to think of Rodcx500z if we haven't adapted our livelihoods, habits and environment to suit the changed climate? After all "we will all be long gone" and "it was best to just enjoy our little moment on the big ball we lived on and remember nothing lasts forever"?

Yeah, "après nous, le déluge"...

 

[Rodcx500z]

That is your opinion. Others have children grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
Much of the science of climate change is about dealing with the consequences. What are our descendants to think of Rodcx500z if we haven't adapted our livelihoods, habits and environment to suit the changed climate? After all "we will all be long gone" and "it was best to just enjoy our little moment on the big ball we lived on and remember nothing lasts forever"?

Well i wouldn't be knowing what they think i will be a pile of dust

 

[Bosch]

Whatever Greta is, she is not good at answering unscripted pointy questions:

What an unpleasant pair of cretins.

Absolutely nonsensical questions.

She did the right thing, not answering them.

 

[Rodcx500z]

Yeah, "après nous, le déluge"...

Yes , selfish disregard, more like being led down the garden path while our leaders and the elite line their pockets while they laugh at us , have us plebs learned nothing over the centurie's seems not

 

[Rodcx500z]

What an unpleasant pair of cretins.

Absolutely nonsensical questions.

She did the right thing, not answering them.

This is a good watch Greta on La Vagabond sailing to Spain

 

[Stan's Brew]

More slander. Just because I don't have time to watch a two hour video it does not mean I have not researched the subject.

I've done my level best to be polite in this debate but you've now turned it nasty by throwing out baseless accusations.

You said you don't believe climate change is caused by CO2 so I asked you to provide an scientifically proven alternative. You've pointed me to Dr. Lindzen, who in his own work agrees that CO2 causes global warming. What he disagrees with is the future forecast for climate change and it's associated impact.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/a-disse...d-climate-scientists-take-on-richard-lindzen/
The critique starts with the key points on which Lindzen and the UK experts agree. They welcome Lindzen’s acceptance of some well established ‘knowns’ of climate science, including:

“There has been a large increase of atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases due to emissions resulting from human activity over the past 150 years […] Global average surface temperature has very probably warmed by about 0.7°C in the same period […] Increasing carbon dioxide alone, and in the absence of climate feedbacks, should cause about 1°C warming for each doubling.”

I'm not going to get into a protracted nonsensicle argument with you regarding the sensitivities of a Sunday morning, but what is one supposed to infer from your original response (#106) to your request for evidence that has led to your sensitivity?

Sorry, but I don't have two hours to watch that and from what you describe it doesn't seem to answer my question anyway.

 

[Stu's Brews]

I'm not going to get into a protracted nonsensicle argument with you regarding the sensitivities of a Sunday morning, but what is one supposed to infer from your original response (#106) to your request for evidence that has led to your sensitivity?

I think the words you were looking for were: 'sorry I jumped to the wrong conclusion and made incorrect accusations about you'.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

I suspected as much, it indicates a lack of research on your behalf, you are disingenous in your approach, if you can't be bothered to read/listen/watch to information that you asked for,

Posting a two hour video then suggesting members who don't have time to watch it "cannot be bothered to watch it" is taking it a little too far i also don't think the thread makes good reading for those genuinely interested in the topic so could i ask members drop the personal stuff.

 

[Stan's Brew]

as public opinion tends to confuse climate with the environment, the current religious "crusade" being imposed on us against climate change can have a positive effect that we should take advantage of: to make society aware of the importance of preserving biodiversity

https://nitter.moomoo.me/ChGefaell/status/1616191120010285056#m

 

[Clarence]

By the time they really find the cause of this so called temp variation stuff, we will all be long gone and, they will be stood there wide eyed saying yep it was mother nature after all, never stops amazing me why folk argue about s--t they have no control over i mean people are still having debates about if Mr Armstrong really did step on the moon in 1969, i think it's best to just enjoy your little moment on the big ball we live on and remember nothing lasts forever

While I'm all for living for the moment, I'm a little confused by the above. If "we will all be long gone" who is that's going to be "stood there wide eyed and saying yep..."
Temperature variation in the outer spheres has nothing to do with the government, it's the result of the excessive use of alien death rays to substitute random people with evil lookalikes of their own kind. See the Conservative Party, The Royal Family, Trump etc, etc for examples.
Mick Jagger has an entirely different explanation.

 

[Rodcx500z]

While I'm all for living for the moment, I'm a little confused by the above. If "we will all be long gone" who is that's going to be "stood there wide eyed and saying yep..."

The next generation or the one after, my dad said Mick Jagger would be dead at 30 much as i loved him he got that wrong, as a lot of people do about all sorts of stuff

 

[BobShandy]

 

[Stu's Brews]

View attachment 81041

Fascinating pie charts but they are a bit meaningless without context; so to help people digest:

https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2... only about,to escape without being absorbed.
https://www.realclimate.org/index.p...e-facts-exxon-and-the-favorite-denial-tricks/
https://www-nytimes-com.cdn.ampproj...9&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw==#link-3f71c155

 

[Clarence]

View attachment 81041

that's an interesting diagram, but it doesn't really tell us how "strong" each component is. For example, I understand that methane (mainly from cow-farts) is many, many times worse than carbon dioxide. If that's the case, does methane count as man-made or cow-made (natural) even though beef and dairy farming is reckoned to be a major contributor to global warming.

 

[BobShandy]

Fascinating pie charts but they are a bit meaningless without context; so to help people digest:

https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2... only about,to escape without being absorbed.
https://www.realclimate.org/index.p...e-facts-exxon-and-the-favorite-denial-tricks/
https://www-nytimes-com.cdn.ampproj...9&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw==#link-3f71c155

I am glad you share my enjoyment of pie charts. We should really have a sub forum somewhere.

Firstly, do the actions of our governments seem consistent with the idea there is a CO2 emergency? Why would they be allowing Africans and other third world people to come to Europe to live a high CO2 life style? If this was an emergency, wouldn't they be repatriating Africans and others? It is an emergency, right? Just like with Covid, when no one but mass illegal immigrants were to travel, these restrictions are only employed to control the native population.

Number 1 made a claim about CO2 being the dominant greenhouse gas but he didn't give the figures for the comparative impact of water vapor compared to CO2. Neither did he address the insignificant contribution of humans to CO2. It is only 3.2% of that small CO2 greenhouse gas component. These people do not have reliable models that can project future temperatures varying by our small human contributions. The climate varies - a lot - for natural causes. The medieval warming period was pre-industrial. There was a mini ice age in Europe which ended in the 19th century.

These hoaxers are using natural variations in the climate to grab control of the population. That guy is a climate "scientist." His job depends on their being a climate "problem."

From 1940 to 1980 there was a proposal to pump CO2 into the atmosphere to combat supposed global cooling.



Number 2 suggests that "big oil" is an opponent of the movement to take control of the population supposedly to save us from CO2. But big oil benefits massively from increasing prices and reducing production.

https://www.amazon.com/Watermelons-Green-Movements-True-Colors/dp/0983347409
You don't have to deduce that these people are running a scam. The club of Rome produced a book "the limits of growth" in 1968 which proposed inventing a climate change scam in order bypass national sovereignty and take control of the earth. The World Economic Forum are advancing that legacy.

I want more CO2 in the atmosphere. People blow CO2 into green houses to increase crop yield. A warmer earth is a happier and more prosperous earth.

Bill Gates has a lunatic plan to put particles in the atmosphere in order to cool the earth. That psychopath could end up killing hundreds of millions of people while he sits in a bunker.