Post by: Curly on August 25, 2019, 08:15:04 AM
Post by: Cougartail on August 25, 2019, 09:37:50 AM
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/08/michael_mann_creator_of_the_infamous_global_warming_hockey_stick_loses_lawsuit_against_climate_skeptic_ordered_to_pay_defendants_costs.html
CO2 causing our current warming is a theory that is poorly supported by raw data as the earths climate is so complex. I would like to congratulate anyone that believes the CO2 theory is a proven fact.
You just flunked 3rd grade science..
Post by: jstone on August 25, 2019, 11:22:48 AM
We are just a hot ball with a crust on it.
Post by: Katmai Guy on August 25, 2019, 11:34:47 AM
Post by: KFhunter on August 31, 2019, 07:23:01 PM
The sun isn't a giant consistent ball of fire, it waxes and wains in big cycles, cools off then heats up with a flurry of activity again
There's a whole myriad of factors that play into the average global temperatures, at one time in our history there were no ice caps at all and the whole world was one giant steamy jungle with a massive amount of life on land.
Post by: timberfaller on September 16, 2019, 11:52:39 AM
Now, if only they would stop the flow of MONEY to these wacko Bio-diversity groups and phony scientist! :tup:
Post by: Henrydog on September 16, 2019, 01:24:38 PM
More evaporation equals great cloud development.
Greater cloud development refracts sunlight and leads to cooling.
Those are all basic facts of science.
Therefore global warming equals global cooling.
The rest of the BS is not based on fact it is just away to control and push their socialist agenda
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on September 16, 2019, 03:28:40 PM
After a day or so start your lawn mower and see how long it takes for the air quality to decrease.
invite a handful of your friends over and have them bring their mowers....All of the sudden the "hockey stick" graph might get a little more real
then put seven and a half billion people on our planet and tell him to have at it.... It's ridiculous to think we don't have an impact on the climate of our planet. We may not know the ramifications, but its shocking that anyone could say with a straight face that we are not impacting the Earth's 1) air quality and 2) climate
Post by: KB88 on September 16, 2019, 04:07:59 PM
We could do an experiment. Go out to your garage and shut all the doors and windows and light a candle. See how long it takes for the air quality to decrease.
After a day or so start your lawn mower and see how long it takes for the air quality to decrease.
invite a handful of your friends over and have them bring their mowers....All of the sudden the "hockey stick" graph might get a little more real
then put seven and a half billion people on our planet and tell him to have at it.... It's ridiculous to think we don't have an impact on the climate of our planet. We may not know the ramifications, but its shocking that anyone could say with a straight face that we are not impacting the Earth's 1) air quality and 2) climate
One flawed experiment... and I never claimed to be a smart one. If your experiment were to be in perspective a human in a garage is way out of scale.
That post was brought to you by CNN
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on September 16, 2019, 04:28:18 PM
Post by: Igor on September 16, 2019, 04:29:41 PM
We could do an experiment. Go out to your garage and shut all the doors and windows and light a candle. See how long it takes for the air quality to decrease.
After a day or so start your lawn mower and see how long it takes for the air quality to decrease.
invite a handful of your friends over and have them bring their mowers....All of the sudden the "hockey stick" graph might get a little more real
then put seven and a half billion people on our planet and tell him to have at it.... It's ridiculous to think we don't have an impact on the climate of our planet. We may not know the ramifications, but its shocking that anyone could say with a straight face that we are not impacting the Earth's 1) air quality and 2) climate
WOW..................just WOW !!
Please remain calm: The Earth will heal itself
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/please-remain-calm-the-earth-will-heal-itself/article1389062/
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on September 16, 2019, 04:37:03 PM
Post by: Platensek-po on September 16, 2019, 04:45:46 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on September 16, 2019, 04:47:05 PM
:yeah: I wonder just how big the forest fires got when man had no influence on putting them out? trees, plants need co2 right? This planets temperature goes up and down in a thousand years........ lets party like it's 1999.We could do an experiment. Go out to your garage and shut all the doors and windows and light a candle. See how long it takes for the air quality to decrease.
After a day or so start your lawn mower and see how long it takes for the air quality to decrease.
invite a handful of your friends over and have them bring their mowers....All of the sudden the "hockey stick" graph might get a little more real
then put seven and a half billion people on our planet and tell him to have at it.... It's ridiculous to think we don't have an impact on the climate of our planet. We may not know the ramifications, but its shocking that anyone could say with a straight face that we are not impacting the Earth's 1) air quality and 2) climate
One flawed experiment... and I never claimed to be a smart one. If your experiment were to be in perspective a human in a garage is way out of scale.
That post was brought to you by CNN
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 16, 2019, 04:51:58 PM
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/08/michael_mann_creator_of_the_infamous_global_warming_hockey_stick_loses_lawsuit_against_climate_skeptic_ordered_to_pay_defendants_costs.html
CO2 causing our current warming is a theory that is poorly supported by raw data as the earths climate is so complex. I would like to congratulate anyone that believes the CO2 theory is a proven fact.
You just flunked 3rd grade science..
lol
We could do an experiment. Go out to your garage and shut all the doors and windows and light a candle. See how long it takes for the air quality to decrease.
After a day or so start your lawn mower and see how long it takes for the air quality to decrease.
invite a handful of your friends over and have them bring their mowers....All of the sudden the "hockey stick" graph might get a little more real
then put seven and a half billion people on our planet and tell him to have at it.... It's ridiculous to think we don't have an impact on the climate of our planet. We may not know the ramifications, but its shocking that anyone could say with a straight face that we are not impacting the Earth's 1) air quality and 2) climate
That's a fun little experiment that has no bearing on the question. Add a few billion trees, open the doors, add a giant heat sink of a few billion gallons of water, and you've still innacurately modeled the climate. Thanks for the side show.
Post by: Oh Mah on September 16, 2019, 04:52:13 PM
valcanoes around the world have been going off non stop for over 2 years dumping lava into the oceans(slowly heating the ocean waters)(building islands like hawaii) people don't come close to the carbon emitted from the valcano's.
the air tested by these groups is tested at a lab built in hawaii about 20 miles from the valcano.
The earth has been through periods of warming and periods of cooling since the beginning of time and will continue long after we are all gone.
The biggest is the ice sheets the size of Rhode Island falling into the ocean,Well the ice has always and always will move toward sea level.What do you think happens when a large object hanging over the ocean reaches a point where the thickness of the ice can no longer bare the weight of itself..........oh that's right gravity takes over and it falls into the ocean,As it has done since the beginning of the end of the ice age. :tup:
Post by: Oh Mah on September 16, 2019, 04:55:45 PM
The Earth doesn't rotate around the sun in a perfect circle but rather a wobbly out of centric circle, some some decades the rotation is closer to the sun than at other periods.exactly look to MILONKOVITCH CYCLES IN WIKI.
The sun isn't a giant consistent ball of fire, it waxes and wains in big cycles, cools off then heats up with a flurry of activity again
There's a whole myriad of factors that play into the average global temperatures, at one time in our history there were no ice caps at all and the whole world was one giant steamy jungle with a massive amount of life on land.
Post by: buckfvr on September 16, 2019, 05:10:25 PM
Natural global warming ( man out of the equation), comes and goes over the centuries. Evidence of current global warming and the effects of mans dalliances in virtually everything, brings the trend front and center for those who would be willing to blame it on something specific, aligning it with either an agenda or for profit.
Depopulization is a subject out of the main stream, but there none the less. Addressing the needs of say half as many people on this planet would have far less impact on air, water, and ecosystems that are over burdened today.
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on September 16, 2019, 05:27:40 PM
We can toss your house plant in there if it helps 😁https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/08/michael_mann_creator_of_the_infamous_global_warming_hockey_stick_loses_lawsuit_against_climate_skeptic_ordered_to_pay_defendants_costs.html
CO2 causing our current warming is a theory that is poorly supported by raw data as the earths climate is so complex. I would like to congratulate anyone that believes the CO2 theory is a proven fact.
You just flunked 3rd grade science..
lolWe could do an experiment. Go out to your garage and shut all the doors and windows and light a candle. See how long it takes for the air quality to decrease.
After a day or so start your lawn mower and see how long it takes for the air quality to decrease.
invite a handful of your friends over and have them bring their mowers....All of the sudden the "hockey stick" graph might get a little more real
then put seven and a half billion people on our planet and tell him to have at it.... It's ridiculous to think we don't have an impact on the climate of our planet. We may not know the ramifications, but its shocking that anyone could say with a straight face that we are not impacting the Earth's 1) air quality and 2) climate
That's a fun little experiment that has no bearing on the question. Add a few billion trees, open the doors, add a giant heat sink of a few billion gallons of water, and you've still innacurately modeled the climate. Thanks for the side show.
I'm curious what sorts of things would concern climate change deniers. Let's put aside all of the Doomsday scenarios and focus on things that might impact you already.
Is air quality and hazardous fallout a concern? Are emissions concerning to you?
Post by: kentrek on September 16, 2019, 06:31:52 PM
We can toss your house plant in there if it helps 😁https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/08/michael_mann_creator_of_the_infamous_global_warming_hockey_stick_loses_lawsuit_against_climate_skeptic_ordered_to_pay_defendants_costs.html
CO2 causing our current warming is a theory that is poorly supported by raw data as the earths climate is so complex. I would like to congratulate anyone that believes the CO2 theory is a proven fact.
You just flunked 3rd grade science..
lolWe could do an experiment. Go out to your garage and shut all the doors and windows and light a candle. See how long it takes for the air quality to decrease.
After a day or so start your lawn mower and see how long it takes for the air quality to decrease.
invite a handful of your friends over and have them bring their mowers....All of the sudden the "hockey stick" graph might get a little more real
then put seven and a half billion people on our planet and tell him to have at it.... It's ridiculous to think we don't have an impact on the climate of our planet. We may not know the ramifications, but its shocking that anyone could say with a straight face that we are not impacting the Earth's 1) air quality and 2) climate
That's a fun little experiment that has no bearing on the question. Add a few billion trees, open the doors, add a giant heat sink of a few billion gallons of water, and you've still innacurately modeled the climate. Thanks for the side show.
I'm curious what sorts of things would concern climate change deniers. Let's put aside all of the Doomsday scenarios and focus on things that might impact you already.
Is air quality and hazardous fallout a concern? Are emissions concerning to you?
The biggest thing that impacts people on this subject is not going against the grain of their political party....its really scary
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 16, 2019, 06:46:09 PM
I'm curious what sorts of things would concern climate change deniers. Let's put aside all of the Doomsday scenarios and focus on things that might impact you already.
Is air quality and hazardous fallout a concern? Are emissions concerning to you?
Lots of things that have nothing to do with the unproven theory of man-caused climate change.
Forest management. Water quality. Air quality. Urban defecation and hypodermic needles as landscaping.
For doomsday scenarios, magnetic reversal, surprise asteroids, and Yellowstone eruption are more concerning than less warming than pre-industrialization warming, none of which scenarios come prepackaged with socialist utopian control fantasies, so we don't talk about them.
Post by: Oh Mah on September 16, 2019, 07:09:55 PM
That said c-mon even you have to admit that some of these rules and regs are stupid at best.....DON'T DRIVE THROUGH THE CREEKS IT WILL DESTROY THE SALMON BEDS. :chuckle: :chuckle: Like the annual floods don't tear up the creeks.
Don't cut any trees down we need them and the animals need them... first off the animals need clearings for food growth,The only animals that want wall to wall trees are predators.Also they want to leave the trees but yet we have forest fires that get out of control and burn 1000's of acres every year.
THESE GROUPS CAUSE FAR MORE DAMAGE THAN GOOD IN EVERY PLACE THEY INTERFERE.Seals,wolves,blocking logging'etc :twocents:
Post by: NRA4LIFE on September 16, 2019, 07:59:10 PM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 18, 2019, 09:53:57 AM
Quote
One doesn’t have to look far today to find examples of a left-wing politician proposing a plan to regulate the use of carbon fuels out of existence. Earlier this month, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) released a plan calling for the United States to achieve 100 percent clean energy within the next 10 years by spending $3 trillion in federal money and forcing “additional trillions” in private sector spending through increased regulation and higher mandates.
The real cost of “decarbonizing” our economy is far more severe than many politicians on the Left are prepared to admit. Setting financial costs aside, renewable energy sources alone simply cannot meet the U.S. electrical grid’s ongoing baseload requirements (i.e., the minimum level of demand on a given grid over 24 hours).
In essence, plans like Warren’s not only would bankrupt the country but would literally plunge us into darkness given that no energy technology exists (or is likely to exist any time soon) to meet their arbitrary deadlines and demands.
. . .
The aggregate power production numbers make it quite clear that plants burning fossil fuels and using nuclear power not only provide the vast majority of total power generation in the United States—about 83 percent in 2018—they (along with a small contribution from hydropower) also provide nearly all of the critical baseload power generation. Government-subsidized and mandated alternative energy sources provide only intermittent power that can help to meet peak demand at certain times.
. . .
The obvious danger of absurd policy edicts such as Warren’s proposal is that critical and reliable baseload power-producing plants necessarily would be shuttered without technology on the horizon that could replace them. Because policymakers like Warren are rarely, if ever, forced to face the facts of power generation by reporters, they can throw out deadlines and edicts without any real fear of being called to account.
https://www.amgreatness.com/2019/09/17/the-real-cost-of-decarbonizing-the-economy/
While China remains free to power its economy and society at will.
Somebody likes China, presumably including their central planning, slave labor, religious persecution, human organ harvesting, and other human rights "triumphs."
https://www.nysun.com/national/elizabeth-warren-praising-communist-china-as/87918/
http://www.theamericanmirror.com/elizabeth-warren-praises-red-china-whole-of-government-strategy-against-nkorea/
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on September 18, 2019, 07:20:42 PM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 18, 2019, 08:02:57 PM
Although I agree with you about incandescent bulbs, crummy low flow toilets, and gas cans. Central planners could screw up a wet dream.
Make gas cans great again.
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on September 18, 2019, 08:37:54 PM
Development of alternative power would devastate the economy about like development of coal and oil did... Except the folks that count on coal and oil would have to get re trained....unless they own the company, then it might cost them.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 19, 2019, 05:18:52 AM
. . .
The obvious danger of absurd policy edicts such as Warren’s proposal is that critical and reliable baseload power-producing plants necessarily would be shuttered without technology on the horizon that could replace them. Because policymakers like Warren are rarely, if ever, forced to face the facts of power generation by reporters, they can throw out deadlines and edicts without any real fear of being called to account."
The jig is up. It is time to reveal these secret, reliable alternate power sources that promise to replace existing baseload power generation, such as coal, oil, and natural gas do. That or It's time to admit that no such sources exist.
Make your choice.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 19, 2019, 06:35:06 AM
https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on September 19, 2019, 08:00:34 AM
:rolleyes: I'm unclear if you're proposing anything or just finding problems with any potential solutions. It seems like your only proposal is to continue with the same dirty technology and continue to mine coal, oil and gas without exploring other options.
The jig is up. It is time to reveal these secret, reliable alternate power sources that promise to replace existing baseload power generation, such as coal, oil, and natural gas do. That or It's time to admit that no such sources exist.
Make your choice.
There is no simple solution, or cheap one (including the status quo) that will meet everyone's needs. I think the obvious first step is to conserve energy wherever we can, and find ways to make our current power grid more efficient, including long term plans for hydro, wind, and solar development and maintenance. We should also continue to regulate industry that has the potential to pollute our air and water. They're not going to spend money to scrub their emissions without Gov regulations and we need to make sure it happens.
As much as I hate regulations, they exist for a reason.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 19, 2019, 09:36:36 AM
:rolleyes: I'm unclear if you're proposing anything or just finding problems with any potential solutions. It seems like your only proposal is to continue with the same dirty technology and continue to mine coal, oil and gas without exploring other options.
The jig is up. It is time to reveal these secret, reliable alternate power sources that promise to replace existing baseload power generation, such as coal, oil, and natural gas do. That or It's time to admit that no such sources exist.
Make your choice.
There is no simple solution, or cheap one (including the status quo) that will meet everyone's needs. I think the obvious first step is to conserve energy wherever we can, and find ways to make our current power grid more efficient, including long term plans for hydro, wind, and solar development and maintenance. We should also continue to regulate industry that has the potential to pollute our air and water. They're not going to spend money to scrub their emissions without Gov regulations and we need to make sure it happens.
As much as I hate regulations, they exist for a reason.
Eyeroll until your heart is content.
Your answer is that there are no "reliable alternate power sources that promise to replace existing baseload power generation, such as coal, oil, and natural gas." So any plan proposed by current pols and their followers is nothing but an empty promise designed to emotionally manipulate non-thiinkers.
I am proposing the status quo, unless and until there is a reasonably reliable replacement for current baseload power generation requirements, in response to the non-problem of man's CO2 emissions. Clear?
Sure, go ahead and primp and prune around the edges with efficiency and infrastructure improvements while exploring alternatives that can provide some intermittent power. (Just so you know, hydro is a no no to green types, too. So it is not fair to include such in a littany of alternate sources, especially when hydro is a long-standing non fossil fuel power source that we are already exploiting.)
Unless you are willing to talk about large scale nuclear power generation projects, you simply are not going to get to baseload power generation requirements with wind and solar.
You seem to want to pick a fight over clean air and water that nobody else is having. :dunno:
Are you hiding an implicit assumption that you would like to share? Because I don't believe anyone here is suggesting we pollute air and water, rollback improvements to the IC engine that has drastically reduced emissions, and/or stop using improvements made in coal power production that has also lead to emissions improvements.
I think you are going to have to allege that CO2 is a pollutant at some point, and we can discuss whether natural CO2, pre-industrial CO2, or prehistoric CO2 emissions is more a pollutant than your respiration.
Some regulations exist for the sole reason to pick winners and losers, chosen by central planners, so that they can line their pockets. I think we can agree on that.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 19, 2019, 01:13:45 PM
Post by: Chesterdog on September 19, 2019, 02:02:21 PM
https://komonews.com/news/local/feds-propose-adding-15000-sq-miles-of-west-coast-as-protected-habitat-for-orcas
You guys in Eastern Wa. are lucky. They only pumped the brakes on the bike lane thing here in Seattle when people realized that a majority of users were affluent white men (who probably would have used public transportation anyway). Now they're removing car lanes and adding more bus lanes in a similar fashion. Because after they install heroin injection sites downtown and legalize drug use, the bus will be a safe place for everyone. Take away guns and give away heroin is what I'm hearing.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 19, 2019, 03:00:02 PM
Quote
Democrat Tim Ryan says the that government needs to be involved in "family planning" to stop overpopulation
https://mobile.twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1174800273325187072
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on September 19, 2019, 04:00:00 PM
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/11062019/epa-climate-change-anti-science-rebuke-gop-former-administrators-thomas-whitman-reilly-mccarthy
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hotpolitics/etc/cron.html
The GOP hasn't always ignored climate change. This is a fairly recent phenomenon and one that has only to do with money. The idea that trying to address climate change is too expensive is embarrassing and is a narrative that they sold to paint anyone looking for solutions in a negative light. Now you're denying that elevated levels of CO2 is a threat to our climate? You are scratching a place into a more radical space.
I am proposing the status quo, unless and until there is a reasonably reliable replacement for current baseload power generation requirements, in response to the non-problem of man's CO2 emissions. Clear?
Its astonishing to me that you can take such a smug, and willfully ignorant, position on an important environmental issue. Sadly, I don't think I can point you towards any science that would help you understand the issue.
Are you hiding an implicit assumption that you would like to share? Because I don't believe anyone here is suggesting we pollute air and water, rollback improvements to the IC engine that has drastically reduced emissions, and/or stop using improvements made in coal power production that has also lead to emissions improvements.Sorry if I've been unclear with my assumptions. I assume that lots of folks are suggesting exactly those things under the guise of "too much regulation". I assume they are doing it because they are hearing such nonsense from Fox news, 45, et al., who have a lot to gain by polluting our air and water and denying responsibility for climate change.
"Climate Change Deniers" make a point to reject good science to further some agenda, typically it's financial but I suspect in this case it is 100% based on an opportunity to counter any kind of progressive policy. Good luck with your messaging, I hope you're right, but literally every reputable scientist and scientific organization in the world agrees that anthropogenic climate change is a reality. https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
We're not going to agree on this and any effort to persuade you with data or science (NOAA, NASA...) is going to get shrugged off as 'fake news'... It's also fair to say that I think your Weaselzippers, twitter, and blog posts are ridiculous and were shrugged off immediately.
Cheers- I'm done here.
Post by: idaho guy on September 19, 2019, 04:13:19 PM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 19, 2019, 04:31:29 PM
I am proposing the status quo, unless and until there is a reasonably reliable replacement for current baseload power generation requirements, in response to the non-problem of man's CO2 emissions. Clear?
Its astonishing to me that you can take such a smug, and willfully ignorant, position on an important environmental issue. Sadly, I don't think I can point you towards any science that would help you understand the issue.
Watch your tone, and stop acting like the science is settled.
You had your chance to ram down your pie in the sky envirotopia fantasies on a bunch of indoctrinated, easily emotionally manipulated children the last administration, and just like with all lefty pipe dreams, you (the royal you) overreached, and people said whoa, wait a minute, let's have a rational conversation about this.
Remember when the left was discussing jailing so-called "deniers" the last administration.
:sry:
If the science is so strong, it would stand for itself. It doesn't, and so it gets politicized by likely well-meaning but useful tools. Politicized science is not science at all.
We agree on one thing. You can't point me toward any science that would help me understand why you need to be bamboozled by the issue into thinking humans are a pollutant.
Cheers, to you too, sir. I'll be here, when you are ready to come back and be civil.
Oh and stop trying to wrap up every objection you have into "climate change." Nobody is calling for polluting air and water, for profit or otherwise.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 19, 2019, 04:40:31 PM
Now you're denying that elevated levels of CO2 is a threat to our climate?
Except for the present discussion on proposed "solutions" and their inability to meet baseload power requirements (where it is presumed that man-made CO2 is an actual problem), that has always been my premise, and it seems to have proven out over the many interations and revisions of models and doom and gloom predictions.
But hey, we only have 12 more years, right?
:chuckle:
Face it, you've been bamboozled by a bunch of hucksters pimping their prepackaged socialist utopias, because it feels good or affirms your biases.
Instead, look at the data and what they have to do to it to get these doom and gloom predictions, positive feedback mechanisms, and exaggerated CO2 sensitivities. Be a scientist.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 19, 2019, 04:46:13 PM
If only a magical clean power source could be erected overnight instead of this dirty, portable, highly efficient, diesel engine as a power source then the unicorns could be happy.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 20, 2019, 05:16:26 AM
Quote
Williamson made the remarks while answering a question from a college student who wanted to know why she thought that nuclear energy was problematic.
"Well I know Germany had said at one point 'we're just going no nuclear,' but then when they said no nuclear there was a problem because they had a hard time keeping up with the other standards they agreed to," Williamson said. "What is wrong with it? If something goes wrong with nuclear energy, I don't think people have really stopped to take in the horror."
"See we need an integrated politics, we need to go beyond hard data, we need to go beyond just thinking about the facts," Williamson continued. "I want you to think about this with your heart."
https://www.dailywire.com/news/51992/marianne-williamson-nuclear-energy-dont-use-hard-ryan-saavedra
I don't know. Sounds like "willful ignorance" to me.
:chuckle:
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 20, 2019, 05:20:26 AM
Yes . . . Good . . . .
Now get yourself a sandwich board and find yourself a street corner. The end is near, climate sinners. Repent by voting for the green new deal.
:chuckle:
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 20, 2019, 06:16:04 AM
The GOP hasn't always ignored climate change. This is a fairly recent phenomenon . . . .
Credit where it is due. You are right.
We took a look at the data, we took a look at all the wild-eyed projections, and we said: What a minute. What is going on with these data manipulations designed to make the problem seem more dire? What about the past warming trends pre-industrialization? How does your models explain these?
(https://cei.org/sites/default/files/24.jpg)
https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions
You know what you said? HERETIC!! DENIER!! JAIL THE DENIERS!! BURN THE HERETICS!!
So naturally, that piqued our interests and caused us to investigate further. Know what we found? More unjustified manipulations of data. More silencing tactics used to shut down critics. An entire mechanism of casting out critics of climate orthodoxy. You know what we found, my friend? Not science at all. Religion.
So yeah. You bet. It is a recent phenomenon. Good thing, too. You squeaky wheels almost had the American public hoodwinked with another of your ecological doomsdays, likely indoctrinated and impressed upon you throughout your school, before you were able to think critically about things, just so you could usher in your grand socialist utopia.
This is a fairly recent phenomenon and one that has only to do with money.
Funny. You are right here again, but not in the way you think. Rather than go back and double down on the science, showing the American people the data that is supposedly imminently there and in our faces (rising oceans, no more snow, islands under water, famine, etc.), it is now a grand dark conspiracy of a secret cabal plotting to end the world in ten years (how that is supposed to be profitable for anyone, we are left to just believe). This is politicization of science.
You point the fingers at deniers for doing the same when data manipulations are legitimately questioned, indicating or implying that there is no personal profit motive for slipshod science. This is a topic for another thread, but I think you and I both know that this is not the case.
The left has a long history of climate doomsday predictions which haven't panned out. Just taking AGW into consideration, its legacy of failed predictions is embarrassing enough. Apparently, we continue to pay these people good money for their shoddy work, because it is like a cottage industry with certain disciplines. It's as predictable as it is arrogant to think that current crop of doomsayers will be any more accurate than the last several crops.
Politicization of science is not science. It is the labor of propagandists.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go deposit my secret coal and oil cabal dividend check before the bank closes.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 20, 2019, 06:23:17 AM
Quote
Child Hostages Obey Their Climate Captors
The emotional, physical, and intellectual damage wrought by the climate change movement now is coming into clear view. It’s an outcome that should enrage every parent.
On Friday, schoolchildren around the world will be prompted to walk out of class as part of the “Global Climate Strike.” These young “climate strikers” will protest alleged inaction on climate change and promote an end to fossil fuel use.
“Our house is on fire—let’s act like it. We demand climate justice for everyone,” the event’s website warns.
It is the latest stunt orchestrated by the international climate cabal and yet another example of how the Left shamelessly exploits and manipulates children to propagandize any cause. (Think of the high school students in Parkland, Florida.) But this time, the climate cabal is using a special-needs teenager from Sweden to indoctrinate more children and adults with climate change dogma.
Greta Thunberg is a 16-year-old from Stockholm—which is ironic because the teen exhibits many traits associated with a hostage attempting to please her captors.
In a way, Thunberg is not the face of a climate crisis but an alarming example of how the climate cabal has needlessly terrified two generations of young people. The emotional, physical, and intellectual damage wrought by the climate change movement now is coming into clear view and it’s an outcome that should enrage every parent.
https://www.amgreatness.com/2019/09/19/child-hostages-obey-their-climate-captors/
Or continue to be manipulated as a child.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 20, 2019, 08:25:16 AM
As much as I hate regulations, they exist for a reason.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/09/yang-ill-cut-down-on-meat-consumption-by-making-it-expensive/
These regulations will exist to pick winners and losers and force some central planner's life choices on others as a "solution" to the non-existent problem of humans exhaling plant food.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 20, 2019, 10:20:06 AM
https://www.weaselzippers.us/433012-nbc-news-asks-americans-to-confess-their-climate-change-sins/
:o
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 21, 2019, 07:38:32 AM
Stop mentally abusing the children.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 23, 2019, 09:39:35 AM
https://www.weaselzippers.us/433224-jerry-nadler-dont-know-if-human-life-will-survive-50-years-bacteria-and-plants-may-be-all-thats-left/
Now we have 50 years. It seems that all we have to do to combat "climate change" is wait for dems to give us more time.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 23, 2019, 02:37:29 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on September 23, 2019, 03:04:09 PM
Post by: idaho guy on September 24, 2019, 09:35:20 AM
The US has reduced carbon emissions more than any other industrialized country on earth over the last 40 years. Most of the signers of the Kyoto Pact and Paris Accord have not only not reduced emissions but increased them. This includes not just China and India, but many Euro countries, too. The push for a global green deal is another way of bankrupting economies to create the new socialist order of the world. While I think we should do whatever we can to limit our footprint on the Earth, it is incumbent upon us to pressure the world's major polluters through trade, to clean up their acts and environments. Capitalism is a strong tool. Just ask El Salvador, Guatemala, and Mexico. All of a sudden, illegal crossings into the US have dropped by 90% since early Spring. This was achieved through exerting economic pressure. We can do the same with the world's polluters.
:yeah: My brother lives in South korea and they call it china dust-so much air pollution floats in you cant hardly see. I don't think I am a conspiracy theorist :chuckle: but it seems like they want to bring the us down to the level of other countries economically rather than try and bring others up to our standard of living. If you have any question on that look at the way carbon credits would work with non -developed countries its a huge transfer of wealth from the us to other other countries. We have the best track record on reducing emissions yet our companies would be paying billions to foreign nations.
Post by: Machias on September 24, 2019, 02:51:36 PM
The other is if you really want to go green, you can't, unless you are already wealthy. I have been turned down by about 20 financial institutions this year for a Construction Loan for a home, all because I am not hooked up to the grid. I can show them I have a perfect spot for Solar and Wind power, but no dice. The whole Green thing is pure BS.
Post by: OutHouse on September 24, 2019, 03:10:00 PM
Two things just crack me up, the thought that in order to save the Planet from ourselves we have to hand power over to the Clowns in the Democratic Party. If this is true, well we are already screwed!
The other is if you really want to go green, you can't, unless you are already wealthy. I have been turned down by about 20 financial institutions this year for a Construction Loan for a home, all because I am not hooked up to the grid. I can show them I have a perfect spot for Solar and Wind power, but no dice. The whole Green thing is pure BS.
That's too bad you can't find a lender, sounds like a cool idea. However, if the whole green thing is BS why do you want to do solar and wind power?
Post by: KFhunter on September 24, 2019, 03:13:56 PM
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 24, 2019, 03:27:42 PM
Two things just crack me up, the thought that in order to save the Planet from ourselves we have to hand power over to the Clowns in the Democratic Party. If this is true, well we are already screwed!
The other is if you really want to go green, you can't, unless you are already wealthy. I have been turned down by about 20 financial institutions this year for a Construction Loan for a home, all because I am not hooked up to the grid. I can show them I have a perfect spot for Solar and Wind power, but no dice. The whole Green thing is pure BS.
That's too bad you can't find a lender, sounds like a cool idea. However, if the whole green thing is BS why do you want to do solar and wind power?
I think the point was that if the green thing was not BS and we really are doomed in 12^X years, then it would make sense to make it easier to do individual hydro, wind, solar, and/or other off-grid development projects. Instead, it seems only suited to control and enriching big money players who can in turn grease the palms of those in power.
Not speaking for Machias, but I would like to be off-grid for the sole reason of being left alone, green thing being BS notwithstanding.
Post by: Machias on September 24, 2019, 03:30:08 PM
Two things just crack me up, the thought that in order to save the Planet from ourselves we have to hand power over to the Clowns in the Democratic Party. If this is true, well we are already screwed!
The other is if you really want to go green, you can't, unless you are already wealthy. I have been turned down by about 20 financial institutions this year for a Construction Loan for a home, all because I am not hooked up to the grid. I can show them I have a perfect spot for Solar and Wind power, but no dice. The whole Green thing is pure BS.
That's too bad you can't find a lender, sounds like a cool idea. However, if the whole green thing is BS why do you want to do solar and wind power?
$62,000 to bring power in or $16,000 for a complete solar system. Pretty easy one to figure out. ;)
Post by: Pegasus on September 24, 2019, 03:44:02 PM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 24, 2019, 03:54:54 PM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 25, 2019, 04:06:07 AM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 28, 2019, 07:02:02 PM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on October 01, 2019, 10:45:19 AM
Quote
Teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg has had the distinction of being proclaimed the Messiah's successor by none other than Swedish Church
https://sputniknews.com/viral/201812041070366099-sweden-church-jesus/
Confess your sins CO2 "polluters."
Post by: Machias on October 01, 2019, 01:42:13 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 01, 2019, 02:10:41 PM
Post by: ribka on October 01, 2019, 04:43:31 PM
Forgive me Father, for I have sinned, I took a sip of soda and used a plastic straw. :yike:
Say 25 Hail Marys , state all gun owners are terrorists 50 times and donate $10000 to the trannies twerking for young children in public libraries program
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 02, 2019, 07:29:24 AM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on October 07, 2019, 09:07:15 PM
Quote
"We need to move away from coal, oil, and gas and phase out nuclear," Castro said. "Nuclear is definitely preferable when it comes to carbon emissions versus those other three and the way that I think about it is, sort of the worst-first approach to working on immediately getting the worst of the types of energy that produces carbon emissions out first."
Democratic presidential candidate Julián Castro
https://freebeacon.com/politics/castro-we-need-to-phase-out-nuclear-energy/
Quote
Nuclear Power in the USA. The USA is the world's largest producer of nuclear power, accounting for more than 30% of worldwide nuclear generation of electricity. The country's nuclear reactors produced 807 billion kWh in 2018, about 20% of total electrical output. There are two reactors under construction.
https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-t-z/usa-nuclear-power.aspx
Post by: Fl0und3rz on October 08, 2019, 12:00:17 PM
Quote
BRADBOOK: “And what that means is we need a lot of human labor. So humanity has to rise up in a really beautiful way and tend to the damage that we’ve done. And that means all of us, it’s all of us together in the places that the Earth is going to sustain life working together, to re-wild areas, to restore ecosystems, to clean up the rivers ,to plant trees, to basically sort the plastic out in the ocean and so on. And I actually think there are so many beautiful innovations out there and humanity could do that together and it needs all of us. For me this is part of re-weaving a human family back together again. It’s part of dealing with systemic racism, white supremacy and the wounds of patriarchy that want to separate us, make us feel powerless and destroy our togetherness and make us think that the whole planet is kind of scarce when actually nature is abundant and it replenishes itself.”
https://www.weaselzippers.us/434701-climate-change-moonbat-fixing-the-climate-addresses-systemic-racism-white-supremacy-and-the-wounds-of-patriarchy/
Moonbat says what.
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on October 08, 2019, 12:11:42 PM
According to satellite monitoring by the NOAA, the US has reduced carbon emissions over the last 40 years more than any other developed country.
NOAA is a reputable source. What else do they have to say about climate change?
Post by: Fl0und3rz on October 08, 2019, 12:25:16 PM
According to satellite monitoring by the NOAA, the US has reduced carbon emissions over the last 40 years more than any other developed country.
NOAA is a reputable source. What else do they have to say about climate change?
On some matters, when they are not politicizing the science.
https://realclimatescience.com/2016/11/noaa-us-temperature-fraud-update/
Since you won't read the link.
Quote
NOAA claims January-October was the second hottest on record in the US, and that the US is getting much hotter.
. . .
Their actual thermometer data shows that January-October was sixth warmest after 2012, 1921, 1934, 1938 and 1998. There has been no January-October warming over the last 80-90 years.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 08, 2019, 12:41:04 PM
According to satellite monitoring by the NOAA, the US has reduced carbon emissions over the last 40 years more than any other developed country.
NOAA is a reputable source. What else do they have to say about climate change?
They show a map of the Earth where there's very small carbon emissions coming from anywhere in North America. Everything is emitting from South America, Africa, Europe, South Asia, Asia and southern Russia
Post by: konradcountry on December 24, 2019, 10:35:30 AM
According to satellite monitoring by the NOAA, the US has reduced carbon emissions over the last 40 years more than any other developed country.
It's really quite telling that this is NEVER mentioned in the media.
The liberal media always depicts the issue as if it is merely a problem of stubborn Americans not wanting to give up SUVs or hamburgers.
Liberals still have not come up with an excuse for why China and India get a free pass.
It's always about what Americans are doing wrong and why Democrats are needed to save us.
The clear anti-American agenda in the climate debate is overwhelming.
China is building a coal plant per week and that never comes up in these discussions.
It is always about how Americans need to have fewer kids and order garden burgers.
This is all about controlling Americans and not reducing CO2.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 24, 2019, 10:53:42 AM
Post by: Cougartail on December 24, 2019, 11:25:14 AM
Yep, Brazil has something like 3x the amount of cattle that we do, Inda more than twice and China about 50% more; but until recently the cattle issue was only pointed at the US. Brazil started getting some flak last year due to clearing land for more cattle--which the climate crowd was saying were record wildfires in the Amazon, but were really slash burning to promote grazing.
..and all the animal rights activists claim killing 10 to 20 million buffalo was a travesty. They were just fighting global warming!
Think of all the methane gas they were producing.. lol