Climate Change is in Turbo Mode.

Tazx said:
Where is the unprecedented warming? Where exactly?
I have all the IPCC reports from the 90's in 1 large pdf, they conveniently altered the famous hockey stick graph to their wanted results. Maybe you should look at the info more closely. There is IPCC reports stating the opposite that were scrubbed from media. So, you can believe all you want, fall for the scam, go along with this charade. The truth always comes out.
This is another-oh my god the sky is falling!!
Click to expand...
2024 is projected to be the hottest year on record, with global temperatures expected to exceed pre-industrial levels by more than 1.5°C, driven mainly by human-induced climate change and partially by the El Niño weather pattern
1
4
7
. The IPCC's "hockey stick" graph, which shows a significant temperature rise in recent decades, has been debated but remains a key piece of evidence for human impact on climate
3
6
. Despite claims of media bias, most major print media have been found to report climate change accurately
2
5
.
 

JustDave said:
I won't be drinking yours.

Maybe you are interpreting the Society's facts and coming at entirely different conclusions. The American Meteorological Society position on climate change is clear.

AMS and Climate Change

"the official AMS statement on Climate Change, reads in part, “Warming of the climate system now is unequivocal, according to many different kinds of evidence.” It goes on to say, “It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases …” "


Similar conclusions have been reached by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the National Academies of more than 30 other countries, other scientific societies, including AGU and AAAS. We know of no scientific institution with relevant subject matter expertise that disagrees with these basic conclusions.
Click to expand...
Yeah their official position is that, but their statistics are not. I find that is the problem with most people who just swallow the garbage they feed you. You never dig into their statistics, you never look for yourself. Just believe. When others do the digging, in the cases above in the links and info in my post, you see that they find the truth is usually opposite. Just like covid was. Just another lie. Just hang on bit longer, there are hundreds of FOI and FOIR request being processed, plus when the truth eventually comes out, you will see.
But people like you just keep listening to what is said and believe every word. No research for yourself. Just parrot the same old garbage as its fed to you. You dont question anything or even have the integrity to think possibly CC could be overblown. You just live in fear.
Oil was running out in the 70's, then the 90's, then in 2010 we hit peak oil. Yet the production is greater than ever, and massive fields being discovered.
And if CC is real, why did Obama buy beach front property in Florida? Oprah in Hawaii, many rich people buying ocean front property. But, but, but the water is rising and we will all be under water in 5 years! Lol. What a bunch of sheep! But you keep believing like a good little serf.
 

Paco Dennis said:
2024 is projected to be the hottest year on record, with global temperatures expected to exceed pre-industrial levels by more than 1.5°C, driven mainly by human-induced climate change and partially by the El Niño weather pattern
1
4
7
. The IPCC's "hockey stick" graph, which shows a significant temperature rise in recent decades, has been debated but remains a key piece of evidence for human impact on climate
3
6
. Despite claims of media bias, most major print media have been found to report climate change accurately
2
5
.
Click to expand...
Once again you clearly don't read. In the info I posted, it shows where the temperatures are taken. In the downtown of major centers. of course it will be the hottest in the center of a city with glass buildings, millions of people and cars, reflection of heat off glass, absorption of heat then continued release during the day from materials. Take the temps outside the cities. Like the researchers did. The story is far different. I am not sure how the heck you don't see the distinction! Seriously? How old are you?
More importantly whats wrong with your logic? All the temp readings are at points inside major metropolitan centers. Are you that naive to think the temp measured in a city is the accurate indicator of actual temperature? We learned that when we were kids. It was always cooler in the suburbs than in the city. My parents went to their farm in hot summer days, where the temp in Wpg was plus 40, then at their farm about 20 mins out of town, the thermometer was 32-33. Thats a huge difference. Thats why people in cities go to parks and notice the temp is far cooler than near their house or apartment. Its a well known fact here in Europe. I didn't think there were people that didn't know that.
 
Many climate change scientists do not agree that global warming is happening - PMC

Whether most scientists outside climatology believe that global warming is happening is less relevant than whether the climatologists do. A letter signed by over 50 leading members of the American Meteorological Society warned about the policies promoted by environmental pressure groups. “The policy initiatives derive from highly uncertain scientific theories. They are based on the unsupported assumption that catastrophic global warming follows from the burning of fossil fuel and requires immediate action. We do not agree.”2
Those who have signed the letter represent the overwhelming majority of climate change scientists in the United States, of whom there are about 60. McMichael and Haines quote the 1995 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is widely believed to “prove” that climate change induced by humans has occurred.3 The original draft document did not say this. What happened was that the policymakers’ summary (which became the “take home message” for politicians) altered the conclusions of the scientists. This led Dr Frederick Seitz, former head of the United States National Academy of Sciences, to write, “In more than sixty years as a member of the American scientific community ... I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report.”4

Policymaking should be guided by proved fact, not speculation. Most members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change believe that current climate models do not accurately portray the atmosphere-ocean system. Measurements made by means of satellites show no global warming but a cooling of 0.13°C between 1979 and 1994.5 Furthermore, since the theory of global warming assumes maximum warming at the poles, why have average temperatures in the Arctic dropped by 0.88°C over the past 50 years?

As with all govt corruption, hidden reports, cut and hide certain parts of reports, and so on.
 
The mainstream media peddle the claim that 97% of (climate) scientists believe in man-made Global-Warming and that, therefore, there is no debateto be had on the subject. This is false and irrelevant. To get the 97% figure,they basically counted people who had mentioned Climate-Change in an abstract or heading of a scientific paper. Dr Legates* has reviewed the work and shows that, in fact, only 0.3% of the papers claim that ‘man had caused most post-1950 warming’
 
The contentious - widely shown by the BBC, Exinction Rebelion and the IPCC -“Hockey Stick” graph, showing pretty uniform world temperatures for a thousandyears until a recent supposed man made large increase, is now proven fraud.• The recent court judgement in Canada in which Michael Mann lost his libel against Tim Ball for refusing to provide evidence that his (in)famous graph wasn’t fraud means the main icon and evidence of the Global warmist lobby is destroyed.
 

Attachments

  • Graph on CC fraud.pdf
    6.1 MB · Views: 2
Don’t Feed the Trolls — Center for Countering Digital Hate | CCDH

I've mentioned several times on this board DON'T FEED THE TROLLS and provided links one might better understand why. But of course some people, especially those emotional about whatever issue, just cannot resist. There are a few obvious trolls on this board that I just ignore because I understand their GAME regardless of baiting with inane personal attacks, name calling, and arguments that are purposely easy to attack because they just want responses. The above pdf link is longer than snippets below.

Defending Yourself is a Trap Trolls exploit the natural human instinct of self-defense. Social media is a new medium where our natural instincts can sometimes cause us to fall into traps and do harm without realizing it. When the targets of abuse by trolls respond, they do three things.

  • First, they rebroadcast troll memes to their own followers.
  • Second, they legitimize a dangerous ideology as valid for discussion – an honest point of view that you might disagree with, but nevertheless deserves the merit of acknowledgement and discussion.
  • Third, they confirm to the trolls that their targets are listening to them and are affected by what they see online, which reinforces the trolls’ behavior.

Propagandists know that all you have to do to spread a conspiracy theory is to get more people to hear it. The problem for the target of their activity is that the formats of most social media platforms allow little substantial debate. Complex arguments require more than the 280 characters to explain that Twitter allows, for example. Nor does it show the relative merits of a point of view. To the casual observer a thread looks like a debate between two different sides of an argument – the form legitimizes the content regardless of the merits of either side...

By inadvertently helping to expose their followers to conspiracy theories and aberrant information by engaging with trolls, public figures almost inevitably expand the number of people believing a rumor or conspiracy. Trolls know this; they do not seek to convert those who actively disagree with them; they seek to consolidate their hold over those who might already hold some prior misinformation or to misinform those who hold no strong beliefs or have no knowledge about the topic at all.

Quite often the techniques used by trolls – for example using memes to convey false information quickly and in a format that maximizes the probability of information retention – are simply more effective than the techniques used by those trying to refute their arguments. Engagement with trolls ultimately can cause considerable harm by giving them a much wider audience than they could achieve on their own and, ultimately, helps them grow their support base…

Troll networks are small, coordinated, densely interconnected and highly active clusters. What this means is that trolls within a cluster are usually following each other and therefore each trolls’ followers are for the main part within the same troll network. The total audience for one hundred trolls whose followers are within the same troll network of a thousand trolls accounts is really not much more that network itself. However, an unwitting target can be fooled into thinking that they are being exposed to much broader humiliation and ridicule.

This is a vital tactic for fringe groups because it vastly amplifies the threat they appear to pose. The reality, however, is that they are small groups of fringe believers who have little influence on the broader public without the undeserved and inadvertent amplification caused by engaging with them. Trolls want you to engage with their content to raise visibility of their propaganda. Our aim is, instead, to reduce harm to you and others…

Resist the urge to respond. You might think winning or losing relies on whether you “win the argument”. But for a troll, winning or losing is about how many people see their propaganda. They don’t have to convert many of your followers to increase their numbers substantially. When a troll targets you for abuse, block them immediately; this will ensure that they cannot tweet at you ever again, and removes mentions of them from your notifications. It is remarkable how few people you actually have to block to stop a troll storm in its tracks.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, the climate trolls are tiresome.

We seldom hear about the sacrifices they will make, and at best they'll brag about their pricy virtue signals that most people couldn't afford.
 
JustDave said:
It's easy to make a convincing argument when you make up your own facts.
Click to expand...
Except the facts about climate change aren't made up, people just have to take the time to listen to the talks and videos that show what the research is demonstrating. These aren't issues that can be adequately dealt with in 3 minute 'shorts' on Youtube and most people don't bother unfortunately. Like how many know what the AMOC is, how and why it's slowing down and what happens if it slows too much and changes the weather in Europe? My guess is that not a lot.
 
Last edited:
Tazx said:
Yeah their official position is that, but their statistics are not. I find that is the problem with most people who just swallow the garbage they feed you. You never dig into their statistics, you never look for yourself. Just believe. When others do the digging, in the cases above in the links and info in my post, you see that they find the truth is usually opposite. Just like covid was. Just another lie. Just hang on bit longer, there are hundreds of FOI and FOIR request being processed, plus when the truth eventually comes out, you will see.
But people like you just keep listening to what is said and believe every word. No research for yourself. Just parrot the same old garbage as its fed to you. You dont question anything or even have the integrity to think possibly CC could be overblown. You just live in fear.
Oil was running out in the 70's, then the 90's, then in 2010 we hit peak oil. Yet the production is greater than ever, and massive fields being discovered.
And if CC is real, why did Obama buy beach front property in Florida? Oprah in Hawaii, many rich people buying ocean front property. But, but, but the water is rising and we will all be under water in 5 years! Lol. What a bunch of sheep! But you keep believing like a good little serf.
Click to expand...
I can't read your words anymore. They sound condescending, and superior. I don't have relationships with people who put me down. Maybe it's a level thing. :) you now are on ignore.
 
The odd thing about climate change denial is that it can be calculated mathematically, not by me, but meteorologists, physicists, and chemists. We can calculate how much carbon dioxide goes into the atmosphere from each gallon of fossil fuel we burn, how much methane is being released from the thawing arctic etc. OK it's not easy to do, but it's not rocket science either.

We can calculate how much Carbon Dioxide is removed from the atmosphere from forests and seas and turned back into oxygen. True we can't do it to perfection, but we can get it close enough. We can also measure the changes in the amount of carbon dioxide and how much heat is retained by different amounts, which is the easy part and now provides us with the most definitive knowledge we need .

We knew all along that it was going to happen, but we couldn't predict all of the infinite ways the weather was going to change, but we knew that warmer oceans would increase hurricanes, melt glaciers, raise sea levels, and cause droughts. What surprised me the most was that I thought we wouldn't start to notice the changes until long after I was dead. I never gave a thought to the economic consequences either.

But here we are now at the very beginning of the changes. The forests are starting to burn, especially at the higher colder latitudes, and Asheville, NC just 100 miles from where I live was decimated by a hurricane a few months ago, when everyone thought hurricanes would never get that far inland. There are fewer deniers than there were 40 years ago, but the ones still around are still as angry at the people who recognize the problem as they were before, maybe even more so. They say we are drinking spiked koolaide like we are a bunch of nut jobs. lol
 
dilettante said:
It's kind of fruitless. This is a religion for many and no amount of fact is going to displace their faith. They are invested, sometimes financially as well as emotionally.
Click to expand...
That's the thing. they're invested in it financially. Nobody mentions this or considers its importance. :unsure:
 
JustDave said:
The odd thing about climate change denial is that it can be calculated mathematically, not by me, but meteorologists, physicists, and chemists. We can calculate how much carbon dioxide goes into the atmosphere from each gallon of fossil fuel we burn, how much methane is being released from the thawing arctic etc. OK it's not easy to do, but it's not rocket science either.

We can calculate how much Carbon Dioxide is removed from the atmosphere from forests and seas and turned back into oxygen. True we can't do it to perfection, but we can get it close enough. We can also measure the changes in the amount of carbon dioxide and how much heat is retained by different amounts, which is the easy part and now provides us with the most definitive knowledge we need .

We knew all along that it was going to happen, but we couldn't predict all of the infinite ways the weather was going to change, but we knew that warmer oceans would increase hurricanes, melt glaciers, raise sea levels, and cause droughts. What surprised me the most was that I thought we wouldn't start to notice the changes until long after I was dead. I never gave a thought to the economic consequences either.

But here we are now at the very beginning of the changes. The forests are starting to burn, especially at the higher colder latitudes, and Asheville, NC just 100 miles from where I live was decimated by a hurricane a few months ago, when everyone thought hurricanes would never get that far inland. There are fewer deniers than there were 40 years ago, but the ones still around are still as angry at the people who recognize the problem as they were before, maybe even more so. They say we are drinking spiked koolaide like we are a bunch of nut jobs. lol
Click to expand...
Yes the calculations are there. For instance in Canada, the rough calculations were done by a researcher at UBC. Canada is such a carbon negative, that we absorb 5-7 times what we produce at minimum. Most countries with extensive forests are the same. I imagine the US would be less than Can, but still in a negative. Poland, Germany, many of the countries with large forests would be at below positive carbon.
So we have 2 or 3 issues here...1, you assume a storm because it hit inland means its somehow related to cc.
2, what in the world is the point of being carbon neutral here in the west, when according to numbers almost all western nations are carbon neutral or negative. Then you have the worlds largest polluters of carbon-Africa, India, China-that will never stop. And nothing we can do about it. Trade embargo, sanctions, then the west collapses. Where do you think all our garbage comes from? Everything is made in Indonesia, Bangladesh, China, India where this is not even a thought?

So we can be all righteous here in the west (even though we are carbon neutral or negative) but if 60-70 percent of the world is going to pollute co2 like its a faucet running full bore, then what the hell does it matter.

Another point, there is no research that co2 drives temp. In fact the ipcc date shows the opposite.

Also, at cop 29 there was a scientist that asked a panel of scientists this question...if co2 at less than 0.04 percent of atmospheric gas is responsible for all of this climate change at this level of 0.04 percent, then why hasn't that level of 0.04 percent changed in the time we have recorded measurements? If so much co2 is being released into the atmosphere, it should be a larger component of the atmosphere.
After all, in the 70's the famous ozone layer hole was caused by an increase of certain gases thatt replaced other gases to create a weak spot. So if according to the laws of chemistry, laws of nature and so on, by those very indisputable laws we should be increasing its levels of co2 to greater levels. Shouldn't we be at 1 percent by now or greater?

Too many unanswered questions to say cc and co2 is causing anything. CO2 is life. All plants, grasses, bushes live or die on it. Without co2 they die and we die.
 
Basically, it has become a religion for many people who have hollow lives.

Bjørn Lomborg is a Danish author, having written numerous books on climate change such as “False Alarm,” “The Skeptical Environmentalist,” and “How to Spend $75 Billion to Make the World a Better Place.” He is the president of the think tank Copenhagen Consensus Center that focuses on doing the most good, for the most people, with increasingly limited budgets. Previously, Lomborg was the director of the Danish government's Environmental Assessment Institute.​

Jordan Peterson and Bjørn Lomborg Explain What Climate Activists Get Wrong

Bjorn Lomborg
 
dilettante said:
Basically, it has become a religion for many people who have hollow lives.

Bjørn Lomborg is a Danish author, having written numerous books on climate change such as “False Alarm,” “The Skeptical Environmentalist,” and “How to Spend $75 Billion to Make the World a Better Place.” He is the president of the think tank Copenhagen Consensus Center that focuses on doing the most good, for the most people, with increasingly limited budgets. Previously, Lomborg was the director of the Danish government's Environmental Assessment Institute.​

Jordan Peterson and Bjørn Lomborg Explain What Climate Activists Get Wrong

Bjorn Lomborg
Click to expand...
Awesome video.
 
That was a fascinating video. They seem to have a disagreement with the solutions but do not deny there is a problem.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top