Is climate change real?

[Deleted member 303751]

Like I said, you're a moron.

 

[Boba Fett]

Oh dear, is little man a climate change denier as well as all of his other dogma driven drivel?

I should have expected that really.

They never have any reason to think that it's fake other than the conservatives and elite telling them to. There's no logic behind denying it, especially when the ones denying it and pushing the lies are doing so to protect their assets.

Then they shame climate activists who fly on planes, like, how else are they going to get over seas, a catapult?

 

[Deleted member 303751]

They never have any reason to think that it's fake other than the conservatives and elite telling them to. There's no logic behind denying it, especially when the ones denying it and pushing the lies are doing so to protect their assets.

Then they shame climate activists who fly on planes, like, how else are they going to get over seas, a catapult?

Did I say it's "fake" or that climate change isn't happening? No. Are you aware more people die from the cold than from the heat? Probably not. Page one of this thread you said quote "a private jet is no different than using a gas powered car" lol idiot.

You also said quote "there's no financial benefits for addressing climate change" the earth's climate is cyclical it changes. That doesn't mean it's a climate crisis or a climate emergency, you're just unaware of what climate change means.

 

[Deleted member 303751]

They never have any reason to think that it's fake other than the conservatives and elite telling them to. There's no logic behind denying it, especially when the ones denying it and pushing the lies are doing so to protect their assets.

Then they shame climate activists who fly on planes, like, how else are they going to get over seas, a catapult?

The same climate activists who were going to a climate change protest then it got cancelled because of the snow. "How else are they going to get overseas" by boat, cruise ship. Flying overseas to "protest" about climate change just produces more carbon emissions. Their ethos is do as we say, not as we do.

 

[Deleted member 303751]

Climate change predictions from the "experts" 1. April 1970, Air pollution "expert" James Lodge "Air pollution may obliterate the sun and cause a new ice age in the first third of the new century" 2.April 1970 Boston globe article, "Scientists predict a new ice age by 21st century 3. July 1971 washington Post article citing a nasa scientist " The world could be as little as 50 years away from a disastrous new ice age 4.January 1974 guardian newspaper "space satellites show new ice coming fast"

5.January 1978 New york times article "An international team of specialists have concluded from eight indexes of climate that there is no end in sight to the cooling trend of the last 30 years, at least in the northern hemisphere 6. February 1979 New york times article "There is a real possibility that some people now in their infancy will live to a time when the ice at the North Pole will have melted, a change that will cause swift and catastrophic changes in climate 7.May 1982 New York Times article citing the executive director of the united nations environmental program "If the world doesn't change course it will face an environmental catastrophe which will witness devastation as complete, as irreversible, as any nuclear holocaust by the year 2000.

8. September 1988 "The Maldives will have a gradual rise in sea level, in 30 years the end of the Maldives and it's people, could come sooner if drinking water supplies dry up by 1992 as predicted 9.June 1989 San Jose Mercury news article " A senior environmental official at the United nations, Noel Brown, says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000. 10. March 2000 The independent article by Charles Onians "Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past, children aren't going to know what snow is, within a few years winter snowfall will become a very rare and exciting event in the uk"

11.December 2001 George Hurtt, co- author of a 2001 global warming report commissioned by the US Congress "The changes in climate could potentially extirpate "eradicate, destroy" the sugar maple industry in New England. 12. January 2006 Al Gore " Unless drastic measures to reduce greenhouse gases are taken within the next 10 years the world will reach a point of no return" 13. November 2007 Canwest news service, in canada citing a "climate expert" " The artic ocean could be free of ice as soon as 2010 or 2015, something that hasn't happened in more than a million years 14. December 2007 Associated press article citing a Nasa scientist "At this rate, the artic ocean could be nearly ice- free at the end of summer 2012

15. April 2008 New scientist magazine article citing the director of the national snow and ice data centre " The North Pole could be ice free in 2008, there is this thin first year ice even at the north Pole at the moment, that raises the spector the possibility that you could become ice free at the North Pole this year 16 June 2008 National Geographic News article citing an environmental scientist " we're actually projecting this year that the North Pole may be free of ice for the first time in history

 

[Deleted member 303751]

Continued - 17. June 2008, same month, The associated press citing a Nasa scientist " In 5 to 10 years the artic will be free of ice in the summer 18 .December 2009, Former us vice president Al Gore " the artic ocean may be nearly ice- free in summer as early as 2014" 19. September 2012. The Australian newspaper article " Enjoy snow now, by 2020 it will be gone" 20. July 2013. Professor Peter Wadhams, Co- author of New nature paper on costs of artic warning " ice free artic in two years heralds methane catastrophe" 21. January 2018 Forbes article citing a harvard University professor " The chance that there will be any permanent ice left in the artic after 2022 is essentially zero" 22. June 2018. Greta Thunberg on twitter " A top climate scientist is warning that climate change will wipe out all of humanity unless we stop using fossil fuels over the next five years"
Can you see a pattern here ^^ 🤔

 

[emileh]

Let me put my original post back here to explain what cyclical climate change means and why our current situation is completely unrelated to the normal cycles.

I don't expect little man to engage with it because it goes against his small minded dogmatic world view but here we go:

The planet's climate is cyclical that part is true. What you omit to say is that you're referring to the Milankovitch cycles of which there are three. One is governed by the eccentricity of the Earth's orbit and has a periodicity of approximately 100,000 years so it's definitely not that one. The second is governed by the Earth's obliquity to it's orbital plane and has a periodicity of approximately 41,000 years so it's not that either, and the third is governed by the precession of the Earth's pole in it's obliquity and has a periodicity of approximately 26,000 years so it's not that one either.

The rate of change of the global mean surface temperature as governed by the Milankovitch cycles isn't sudden, it's quite smooth over time. We have periods of glaciation, and periods of no glaciation. There are other governing factors that can induce spikes in the system like massive igneous events, weather cycles like El Nino etc, and of course, the global thermohaline systems are important as well.

The issue is one of a significant increase in the rate of change in the natural cycles and for that, there is only one clear explanation. Increase in greenhouse gas emissions due to anthropogenic influences on planetary systems most notably, the carbon cycle.

Weather systems are becoming increasingly unstable (storms, hurricanes and cyclones, wildfires due to drought while catastrophic floods happen elsewhere). All of these things are on the increase and what might have been a once in a hundred year weather event is becoming more common. Sea level changes are happening, slowly at the moment but the great ice sheets on Antarctica and Greenland are becoming increasingly unstable and are being undercut...

The science is out there, the data is out there. FFS even an oil company (Exxon) predicted it (and then promptly buried it to protect their profiteering).

I should add that this is all my own work from a project I did as a part of an Environmental Science exam I took (and passed with an A) last year. I've taken the pertinent information and condensed it and put it into context for this. It was carefully researched and checked. Some of the sources are below:

Information sources included:

The Open University
The Met Office
NOAA
The Sedimentary record of sea level change (Coe)
The Great Ice Age (Coe and Hyden)

All properly accredited and reliable sources.

Oh and speaking of reliable sources, you should read this (although you probably won't)

The science is solid. The denial isn't.

 

[UrDumb]

Climate deniers arguments boil down to "THE JOOS/ELITES/GLOBALISTS/DEEP STATE/*insert bogeyman here*!!!!". A cherrypicked old prediction about things that didn't happen fully but are in the process of happening isn't the win they think it is. The timescales can be wrong but not the underlying process, so they still lose. Fact is global temperature is rising day after day as predicted in the 1800s, period.

You can literally just logic this out. When you go to sleep, is your blanket made of saran wrap or cotton/silk/wool/sherpa? The latter because it's more insulating, trapping heat in. The same difference applies to gases. So what happens when you pump an insulating gas into the atmosphere for 200 years? At 97% of scientists agreeing, it's not a debate, it's one side being willfully stupid because they have an agenda and an inferiority complex because they know they are mentally inadequate.

 

[Deleted member 303751]

Climate deniers arguments boil down to "THE JOOS/ELITES/GLOBALISTS/DEEP STATE/*insert bogeyman here*!!!!". A cherrypicked old prediction about things that didn't happen fully but are in the process of happening isn't the win they think it is. The timescales can be wrong but not the underlying process, so they still lose. Fact is global temperature is rising day after day as predicted in the 1800s, period.

You can literally just logic this out. When you go to sleep, is your blanket made of saran wrap or cotton/silk/wool/sherpa? The latter because it's more insulating, trapping heat in. The same difference applies to gases. So what happens when you pump an insulating gas into the atmosphere for 200 years? At 97% of scientists agreeing, it's not a debate, it's one side being willfully stupid because they have an agenda and an inferiority complex because they know they are mentally inadequate.

Your username is very apt. YOU'RE dumb. Heed the word you're. Your username is proof of your stupidity before you even utter a single word lol by having that username you're exactly what you purport other people of being. "A cherrypicked old prediction" 22 of them "cherrypicked" really?

Also do you understand that when we look back on previous predictions ALL of them are old hence they are predictions. "97 per cent of scientists agreeing" complete bs and the ones that go against the narrative guess what happens to them? Yeah they get cancelled. "Global temperature rising day after day as predicted in the 1800's " again bs. more people die from the cold than from the heat. Welcome to forums.

 

[H.R. PufnStuf]

Why does everything have to distill to single sentence labels? Calling people a "deniers" or "activists" or dogmatic" because they disagree doesn't prove anything.

There can be little doubt that climate change is happening. The real questions are is this part of a natural cycle, and/or how much is man made emissions driving it (if at all)- and what if anything can/should be done about it?

There is more than one canary dying in the coalmine....,

 

[little cindy lou who]

You Follow Science .....

Or You Flush Your Common Sense Down The Toilet And Become A Conspiracy Theory Science Denier ....

Yanno .. A Moron

 

[emileh]

Why does everything have to distill to single sentence labels? Calling people a "deniers" or "activists" or dogmatic" because they disagree doesn't prove anything.

There can be little doubt that climate change is happening. The real questions are is this part of a natural cycle, and/or how much is man made emissions driving it (if at all)- and what if anything can/should be done about it?

There is more than one canary dying in the coalmine....,

Like I said. The science is solid on this. Even Exxon discovered it in their research in the 1970s (and promptly buried it because y'know stockholders and profits trump humanity).

Deniers have their heads in the sand or somewhere else dark and uninviting.

 

[Deleted member 303751]

@UrDumb said qoute " Fact is global temperature is rising day after day as predicted in the 1800's. Period.

In the 1800's for example 1724 people never even knew what climate change was, in those days there were no climate scientists hence there were no "climate predictions" in the 1800's

 

[Deleted member 303751]

Like I said. The science is solid on this. Even Exxon discovered it in their research in the 1970s (and promptly buried it because y'know stockholders and profits trump humanity).

Deniers have their heads in the sand or somewhere else dark and uninviting.

Yeah guess what, stockholders make massive profits in "green energy" companies. People like you have no problem with many people dying from the cost of living "to go green " just to decrease the planets temperature slightly, which makes very little difference anyway. It makes you feel good about yourself with your virtue signalling bs.

They coined the term 'carbon footprint ' because it's a way for them to shift the blame to YOU. Then when they make you poor as a result of "going green" you think you have "done your part" for the climate , all the while the rich elites continue to take private jets and lecture you. They laugh at your stupidity and how easy it is to manipulate you.

China is responsible for over 30 per cent of the world's carbon emmisions "about that" and what are they doing? Not much. In contrast the uk has a tiny fraction of that and, alas it makes very little difference what we do.

When it was nice sunny weather the weather forecast on tv used to show a smiley face sun symbol 🌞 and now it's replaced with a red emergency alert sign. It's complete fear narrative for profit and control.More people die from the cold than from the heat.

 

[little cindy lou who]

Yeah guess what, stockholders make massive profits in "green energy" companies. People like you have no problem with many people dying from the cost of living "to go green " just to decrease the planets temperature slightly, which makes very little difference anyway. It makes you feel good about yourself with your virtue signalling bs.

They coined the term 'carbon footprint ' because it's a way for them to shift the blame to YOU. Then when they make you poor as a result of "going green" you think you have "done your part" for the climate , all the while the rich elites continue to take private jets and lecture you. They laugh at your stupidity and how easy it is to manipulate you.

China is responsible for over 30 per cent of the world's carbon emmisions "about that" and what are they doing? Not much. In contrast the uk has a tiny fraction of that and, alas it makes very little difference what we do.

When it was nice sunny weather the weather forecast on tv used to show a smiley face sun symbol 🌞 and now it's replaced with a red emergency alert sign. It's complete fear narrative for profit and control.More people die from the cold than from the heat.

Muthuurr Phuuckerr ...... You Are So Obtuse .. Is It Intentional ?

 

[Tams]

Yeah guess what, stockholders make massive profits in "green energy" companies. People like you have no problem with many people dying from the cost of living "to go green " just to decrease the planets temperature slightly, which makes very little difference anyway. It makes you feel good about yourself with your virtue signalling bs.

They coined the term 'carbon footprint ' because it's a way for them to shift the blame to YOU. Then when they make you poor as a result of "going green" you think you have "done your part" for the climate , all the while the rich elites continue to take private jets and lecture you. They laugh at your stupidity and how easy it is to manipulate you.

China is responsible for over 30 per cent of the world's carbon emmisions "about that" and what are they doing? Not much. In contrast the uk has a tiny fraction of that and, alas it makes very little difference what we do.

When it was nice sunny weather the weather forecast on tv used to show a smiley face sun symbol 🌞 and now it's replaced with a red emergency alert sign. It's complete fear narrative for profit and control.More people die from the cold than from the heat.

yeah and 4 countries usa, india, russia and japan make up another 30% so amost 60% is only 5 countries!

australia is 14 and uk is 17 fyi

 

[emileh]

It's worth mentioning that China has a long term plan for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from memory by approximately 65% by 2030. Their emissions fell by 4% between 2020 and 2022 as more renewables came online.

 

[Deleted member 303751]

It's worth mentioning that China has a long term plan for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from memory by approximately 65% by 2030. Their emissions fell by 4% between 2020 and 2022 as more renewables came online.

Lol 65 per cent reduction by 2030. Impossible.

 

[Bread.]

The same climate activists who were going to a climate change protest then it got cancelled because of the snow. "How else are they going to get overseas" by boat, cruise ship. Flying overseas to "protest" about climate change just produces more carbon emissions. Their ethos is do as we say, not as we do.

 

[Deleted member 303751]

@bread yeah virtue signalling bs they must be seen to be "caring" for the climate. It's all a PR exercise.