One giant hoax

Chucktin said:
How do you define severely. Things like Sandyhook are certainly severe. But other events, those on the shoulder of being unique, are debatable if you choose to take sides. Other than that I'd have to say "Nothing's quite as sure as change."
The nub of all this is that unless you work _with_ change, change tends to bite you right where you're sitting and that can hurt.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

What on earth does Sandy Hook have to do with climate change??
 

Don M. said:
Do a little searching on what has been happening in Bangladesh in recent years...due to flooding of low lying coastal areas, and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of those people. There are probably dozens of other examples of changing weather patterns and its impact on people...if you do a little research. Search for information on how the worlds glaciers are melting at an increasing pace, and the effect that is starting to have on people who rely on this melt for their freshwater supplies...Mount Kilimanjaro in Africa, and the Himalayas in Asia....etc.

A person's individual back yard is Not a valid perspective for determining how the global weather patterns are changing.
Click to expand...

Bangladesh has been flooding for centuries. It's monsoon season that causes it and has nothing to do with climate change.

Do some research yourself and find out the actual ocean rise in the last century.

Excerpt:

Rise of sea levels is 'the greatest lie ever told'
The uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story, writes Christopher Booker.

But if there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change. And the uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner, who for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe, is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story.

Despite fluctuations down as well as up, "the sea is not rising," he says. "It hasn't risen in 50 years." If there is any rise this century it will "not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm". And quite apart from examining the hard evidence, he says, the elementary laws of physics (latent heat needed to melt ice) tell us that the apocalypse conjured up by
Al Gore and Co could not possibly come about.

The reason why Dr Mörner, formerly a Stockholm professor, is so certain that these claims about sea level rise are 100 per cent wrong is that they are all based on computer model predictions, whereas his findings are based on "going into the field to observe what is actually happening in the real world".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.html
 
Last edited:
[h=3]Monsoon season in Bangladesh | Make a difference - Plan ...[/h]https://plancanada.ca/monsoon-season-in-bangladesh


For months at a time, monsoon season brings heavy rainfall to the country. In fact, approximately 80% of Bangladesh's yearly rainfall will occur from June to October, and by the end of monsoon season, almost one third of the country is underwater.
 

Leonie said:
It's a pity this question has become a political football because a lot of people take their stance from the side of politics they happen to favour, and it has been kicked around and dragged out for so long that the point (what do we do about it?) might actually be moot soon.

Stephen Hawking recently said that he fears we are almost at the tipping point, where nothing we do can turn it around or slow it down and that's a pretty scary thought.
Click to expand...

Stephen Hawking has been wrong so many times it's not worth worrying about. No one can predict the future with certainty.
 
Leonie said:
It's a pity this question has become a political football because a lot of people take their stance from the side of politics they happen to favour, and it has been kicked around and dragged out for so long that the point (what do we do about it?) might actually be moot soon.

Stephen Hawking recently said that he fears we are almost at the tipping point, where nothing we do can turn it around or slow it down and that's a pretty scary thought.
Click to expand...

Stephen Hawking has been wrong so many times it's not worth worrying about. No one can predict the future with certainty.



Michael Guillen
By Michael Guillen Ph.D.
Published May 08, 2017
Fox News

Stephen Hawking warns humanity has only 1,000 years of sustainable existence. Urges mankind to explore space, colonize stars and planets to survive end of the world



Stephen Hawking is at it again, with a Sybil-like prediction that’s going viral. But his latest contention – that humans will be wiped out within 100 years and must escape into space – leaves me wondering if the good professor hasn’t already left the planet.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017...ning-is-all-wrong-about-humans-and-earth.html
 
I still don't understand what is so terrible about developing renewable sources of energy instead of continuing with fossil fuels which is limited, is dirty and fouls our planet that we all humans live on. What is the problem with that? And it's all because you think it's money out of your pocket? Maybe think long term? I don't have progeny, but guess what, I still worry about future generations even when I'll be gone. Although I am often tempted to think hell with all of you. But still, something in me just doesn't like thinking that way.
 
Camper6 said:
Stephen Hawking has been wrong so many times it's not worth worrying about. No one can predict the future with certainty.

Stephen Hawking warns humanity has only 1,000 years of sustainable existence. Urges mankind to explore space, colonize stars and planets to survive end of the world.
Click to expand...
I doubt very much that Stephen will be alive in a thousand years. Bristlecone Pines that are now three thousand years old will make it, but not Stephen.
 
Big Horn said:
I doubt very much that Stephen will be alive in a thousand years. Bristlecone Pines that are now three thousand years old will make it, but not Stephen.
Click to expand...

But you'll never know about the Bristlecone Pines, will you? And that makes it a safe bet.
 
Olivia said:
But you'll never know about the Bristlecone Pines, will you? And that makes it a safe bet.
Click to expand...

No one alive today will ever know if Stephen is right or wrong on this one either. Another safe bet.

Olivia said:
I still don't understand what is so terrible about developing renewable sources of energy instead of continuing with fossil fuels which is limited, is dirty and fouls our planet that we all humans live on. What is the problem with that? And it's all because you think it's money out of your pocket? Maybe think long term? I don't have progeny, but guess what, I still worry about future generations even when I'll be gone. Although I am often tempted to think hell with all of you. But still, something in me just doesn't like thinking that way.
Click to expand...

I think you've already answered your own question. There's a really simple explanation - money. There are quite a few people around here who have become very, very rich thanks to coal, and our Governments (both sides) bend over backwards to cater to them. Throw in a public outcry over power costs - and Bob's your uncle.
 
Don M. said:
A person's individual back yard is Not a valid perspective for determining how the global weather patterns are changing
Click to expand...
Quite true but the perspective from satellite technology does reveal what we cannot observe for ourselves. They reveal a picture of rising temperatures on a global scale. There is no hoax.
 
Olivia said:
I still don't understand what is so terrible about developing renewable sources of energy instead of continuing with fossil fuels which is limited, is dirty and fouls our planet that we all humans live on. What is the problem with that? And it's all because you think it's money out of your pocket? Maybe think long term? I don't have progeny, but guess what, I still worry about future generations even when I'll be gone. Although I am often tempted to think hell with all of you. But still, something in me just doesn't like thinking that way.
Click to expand...

There is absolutely nothing wrong with developing renewable sources of energy, provided it is done by private enterprise. HOWEVER, there is no possible way to fuel the millions of jet planes and locomotives without fossil fuels. If someone wants to go from L.A. to Miami, what is he/she to do. Do you honestly expect those people to go "green" and spend 5 arduous days driving a little putt-putt electric car all that way ?

Most importantly, however, is that people object to "Big Brother Government" forcing citizens to pay heavier and heavier taxes in order to implement "green" technology. Renewable sources of energy do not come free. It costs vast sums implement. And, who pays ? Yep, the average Mr and Mrs citizen will be paying for it.

Even IF America was 100% green, do you honestly believe that would "cure" the so-called global warming ? No, of course not. When countries like Brazil are "slashing and burning" the rainforests and China is burning coal in hundreds and hundreds of power plants, nothing America does could possibly have ANY effect. I, for one, have no intention of carrying the weight of the entire world on my shoulders. When the rest of the world is doing it's bit, then and only then, would I even consider doing more.
 
Last edited:
Camper6 said:
Stephen Hawking has been wrong so many times it's not worth worrying about. No one can predict the future with certainty.



Michael Guillen
By Michael Guillen Ph.D.
Published May 08, 2017
Fox News

Stephen Hawking warns humanity has only 1,000 years of sustainable existence. Urges mankind to explore space, colonize stars and planets to survive end of the world



Stephen Hawking is at it again, with a Sybil-like prediction that’s going viral. But his latest contention – that humans will be wiped out within 100 years and must escape into space – leaves me wondering if the good professor hasn’t already left the planet.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017...ning-is-all-wrong-about-humans-and-earth.html
Click to expand...

Quite frankly I'd be much more inclined to believe Stephen Hawkins (when it comes to things scientific) than any of the climate change deniers
 
Anyone who believes Hawkins claim that we have to get off the planet either flunked science or slept through classes or the teachers failed to get basic science across.

He is wrong. Even the most uneducated person on the planet can understand that.

He should stick to black holes. Wait he got that wrong as well.
 
Sunny said:
Yeah, Camper, we all realize that you are a lot smarter than Stephen Hawking.
Click to expand...

Well back in the good old days when I was 12 years old I knew that smoking was harmful and never smoked in my life.

I even talked all the players on my team out of smoking because I told them they couldn't run as fast if they smoked. We won the championship that year.

And yet. There were all kinds of ads touting cigarettes as not being harmful.

See . You don't have to be an expert or a chef to recognize a good meal.

On this one point. Hawkins is wrong.

And humans are not 100% to blame for global warming because if it was we could reverse it and we can't.

No humans and the Earth would continue to get warmer as it has from 10,000 years ago when there weren't significant humans impacting it.

You stick with Hawkins. I'll stick with just observing nature.
 
Last edited:
Someone should tell Michael Gullien, Fox News' so-called Ph.D., that there is a difference between 100 and 1000. See note #180. ;)
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top