Jump to content
Science Forums

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The thing is... change would be happening regardless. Mini-ice age that caused mass migration just a couple hundred years ago ring a bell? One a couple kilo years before that that pushed mankind aroun

The only problem is that Co2 levels in the jurrasic period would have been over 5 times greater than modern "skyrocketing" Co2 levels. If you look at the reconstructed georecord from ice coring we are

For the last four or five decades, atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased (gasp!) at a rate of approximately 1.3 parts per MILLION volume (ppmv). Today, that concentration is slightly over 400 ppmv.

Posted Images

I want to mention I don't care if the temperature of this planet is rising I have a Air Conditioner. Damned hippies don't even have 100 bucks for a air conditioner.

Ah so you're an exponent of the: "F*** you, Jack, I'm all right." philosophy. At least you are honest about it. But your insurance premiums will still go up......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not if they don't have a grasp on reality.  In fact, in that case it is a valid conclusion.

 

Your OPINION of what is factual does not carry any weight.  Two people can analyze the same information and arrive at completely different conclusions.

Each might think he is right, he has "a grasp on reality."  Both cannot have.   The arrogance of the Left is destructive and unintelligent.

 

"Heavier than air human flight is impossible." - Lord Kelvin, then President of the Royal Society, 1895

 

Eight years later, two bicycle mechanics flew at Kitty Hawk.

 

 

"If we all worked on the assumption that what is accepted as true is really true, there would be little hope of advance." - Orville Wright

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what?  There have of course been higher levels of CO2, oxygen, and what have you, at different times. The issue for us today is the rapid rate of change and the consequent disruption of the world before it has any chance to adjust through natural processes. In the past, such changes took place gradually over millions of years. We are compressing these changes into a couple of centuries. We face inundations, desertification and violent weather, causing billions of dollars of insurance claims, wars over water supply, mass migrations etc. In other words practical and highly damaging disruption to human societies, not to mention unpredictable effects on the wider ecosystem.

 

It may surprise you to know the dinosaurs didn't have to worry about that sort of thing.

 

If you really think the whole of climate science is some sort of conspiracy to profit from carbon credits, you don't have a grasp of reality.   

Dinosaurs had to worry about a lot of things, weather they had the sapience for the actual worrying is kinda off base from the point. the "rapid change" is a microcosm event. The data we've gathered (IMHO with more fidelity than the future-predictive models can offer) indicates that life-band can operate just fine even if we accelerated our burn and depleted all known carbon sources in a very short timescale.

ONE volcanic eruption can dump more into the atmos in a week than humanity as a whole does in a year. Nevermind just CO2, I'm talking multiple greenhouse gasses here. Historically, during the largest known life-booms we have uncovered, there was a full magnitude greater volcanic activity going on. That would seem to indicate that the "massive influence" industrialization is having is in effect, trivial to historic self-balancing.

 

A lot of the hysteria of climate change is centered around caps melting destroying ecology, but I just can't see it. Sure, coastal areas might need some dykes or they'll turn into reefs, but that's not necesairily a bad thing. "Desertification" can't even really be linked to climate change too much, since if/once the caps DO melt there will be a large influx to the hydro-cycle. If anything the mass redistribution of salts needs to be talked about for that part. That part I'll fully agree is an interesting side-effect of industrialization.

 

You kinda hit the nail on the head with insurance claims though: people DO love trying to link money to science like that's any level of credibility. :rofl:

 

"Change" isn't BAD just because it's change. "Natural" does not mean "good." Kindly disassociate these terms with each other and re-evaluate what you've been saying. It'll help ya in the long run. :goodbad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah so you're an exponent of the: "F*** you, Jack, I'm all right." philosophy. At least you are honest about it. But your insurance premiums will still go up......

 

You're a proponent of the Eco-Hypocrites, who puts vulgar, hateful words in other people's mouths and tell everyone else to stay home and burn no nasty fossil fuel, while YOU take "eco-tours" (sic) and drive to environmental protests and Earth Day celebrations.  You and Al Gore and Barack Obama and United Nations functionaries, and *academics* and all the rest of the Holier Than Thou Leftists.

Edited by TooMuchFun
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dinosaurs had to worry about a lot of things, weather they had the sapience for the actual worrying is kinda off base from the point. the "rapid change" is a microcosm event. The data we've gathered (IMHO with more fidelity than the future-predictive models can offer) indicates that life-band can operate just fine even if we accelerated our burn and depleted all known carbon sources in a very short timescale.

ONE volcanic eruption can dump more into the atmos in a week than humanity as a whole does in a year. Nevermind just CO2, I'm talking multiple greenhouse gasses here. Historically, during the largest known life-booms we have uncovered, there was a full magnitude greater volcanic activity going on. That would seem to indicate that the "massive influence" industrialization is having is in effect, trivial to historic self-balancing.

 

A lot of the hysteria of climate change is centered around caps melting destroying ecology, but I just can't see it. Sure, coastal areas might need some dykes or they'll turn into reefs, but that's not necesairily a bad thing. "Desertification" can't even really be linked to climate change too much, since if/once the caps DO melt there will be a large influx to the hydro-cycle. If anything the mass redistribution of salts needs to be talked about for that part. That part I'll fully agree is an interesting side-effect of industrialization.

 

You kinda hit the nail on the head with insurance claims though: people DO love trying to link money to science like that's any level of credibility.

 

"Change" isn't BAD just because it's change. "Natural" does not mean "good." Kindly disassociate these terms with each other and re-evaluate what you've been saying. It'll help ya in the long run.

Rapid change affecting the whole world, including poor and populous communities, will lead to some very serious problems for human societies, as I have outlined. There are likely to be migrations of large numbers of people, due to flooding and changes in land fertility. There are likely to be wars over water supply.  Such things would not only exact a toll of human lives, but would lead to large costs incurred by nations involved in managing the aftermaths. 

 

You may not be able to see this but I think it will be clear enough to most other readers.

 

P.S. thanks for including the word "ya" and thus conforming to one of my theories about internet discussions :)        

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your a proponent of the Eco-Hypocrites, who tell everyone else to stay home and burn no nasty fossil fuel, while YOU take "eco-tours" (sic) and drive to environmental protests and Earth Day celebrations.  You and Al Gore and Barack Obama and United Nations functionaries, and *academics* and all the rest of the Holier Than Thou Leftists.

 

Yep that's right I'm one of the Lizard People, conspiring to redistribute wealth around the globe and causing heart attacks to fat, selfish Midwesterners. I love it and live for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rapid change affecting the whole world, including poor and populous communities, will lead to some very serious problems for human societies, as I have outlined. There are likely to be migrations of large numbers of people, due to flooding and changes in land fertility. There are likely to be wars over water supply.  Such things would not only exact a toll of human lives, but would lead to large costs incurred by nations involved in managing the aftermaths. 

 

You may not be able to see this but I think it will be clear enough to most other readers.

 

P.S. thanks for including the word "ya" and thus conforming to one of my theories about internet discussions :)        

 

There have been migrations of large numbers of people for centuries.  Read some history, please.  Flooding  is an annual occurrence in India, in Bangaladesh, in Southern Asia and the South Pacific.  Read, please.  There have been wars over everything, for thousands of years.   Most other readers understand these things. Unfortunately you do not.

 

Because someone used the slang "ya" does not remotely discount everything else they had to say.  Your pettiness is pretty revolting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your OPINION of what is factual does not carry any weight.  Two people can analyze the same information and arrive at completely different conclusions.

Each might think he is right, he has "a grasp on reality."  Both cannot have.   The arrogance of the Left is destructive and unintelligent.

 

"Heavier than air human flight is impossible." - Lord Kelvin, then President of the Royal Society, 1895

 

Eight years later, two bicycle mechanics flew at Kitty Hawk.

 

 

"If we all worked on the assumption that what is accepted as true is really true, there would be little hope of advance." - Orville Wright

 

Yep.  Fortunately, progressives have refused to accept that things are impossible, and have done them anyway.

 

I have found that there are four kinds of climate change denialists:

1) "The climate isn't warming, stupid!"

2) "OK so maybe the climate is changing, but man has nothing to do with it, stupid!"

3) "OK so maybe we sorta caused it, but the changes will all be good, stupid!"

4) "OK so maybe some will be bad, but it's too late to change ANYTHING, stupid!"

 

What's funny about them is that they will hop back and forth between these political platforms frequently, sometimes within the same post.  i.e. "NASA admits that they fudged the climate numbers, so it's not really warming.  And even if it is, the climate changes all the time even without man here!"  And they will maintain this self-contradictory position while calling other people stupid, which is always amusing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to mention I don't care if the temperature of this planet is rising I have a Air Conditioner. Damned hippies don't even have 100 bucks for a air conditioner until the atmosphere turns to a plasma it will be fine.

That's true.  Someone in Denver won't care much about climate change, at least until he runs out of water and food.

 

Someone in New York, Louisiana or Florida on the other hand . . . .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep.  Fortunately, progressives have refused to accept that things are impossible, and have done them anyway.

 

I have found that there are four kinds of climate change denialists:

1) "The climate isn't warming, stupid!"

2) "OK so maybe the climate is changing, but man has nothing to do with it, stupid!"

3) "OK so maybe we sorta caused it, but the changes will all be good, stupid!"

4) "OK so maybe some will be bad, but it's too late to change ANYTHING, stupid!"

 

What's funny about them is that they will hop back and forth between these political platforms frequently, sometimes within the same post.  i.e. "NASA admits that they fudged the climate numbers, so it's not really warming.  And even if it is, the climate changes all the time even without man here!"  And they will maintain this self-contradictory position while calling other people stupid, which is always amusing.

 

You Leftists are always putting YOUR words, and hateful, bitter words at that, into other people's mouths.  Then you proceed to attack on the basis of YOUR words placed into others' mouths.  

 

The models of eco-hypocrites have been wrong, the predictions of eco-hypocrites have been wrong, the promised warming of a tenth or two of a degree is no big deal compared with normal seasonal changes, but the panic and paranoia continue from the preachy, fearful Left, unabated.

 

Nobel Laureate, Ivar Giaever, explains how the global warming fraud is costing trillions of dollars and accomplishing nothing.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=445&v=TCy_UOjEir0

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...