“climate emergency”

[Wireless1]

So now that the Earth is spinning faster. I'm waiting for someone to advance the theory that because the surface is exposed to solar radiation for shorter time periods (not cumulative mind you) that there's less heating and a new ice age coming. The next logical thing would then be that the ice buildup at higher altitudes leads to that old inertia thing that slows the revolutions down and people once again start screaming we're going to melt. Of course, since we're rotating faster there's the argument made to be made that increased friction will make heating worse. And the one that says the change isn't revolutionary enough to make a difference, but it's fun to watch people in a dither.

I hate to burst your bubble but I have science that the earth is not spinning faster. A faster spin should result in greater MOI thereby reducing the number on the scale each morning.....and that is not happening...

 

[AM64]

I hate to burst your bubble but I have science that the earth is not spinning faster. A faster spin should result in greater MOI thereby reducing the number on the scale each morning.....and that is not happening...

There are a couple of other things going around, too. One is that the magnetic poles have shifted - that one seems to be pretty much accepted. The other is that the Earth's axis has shifted. Sounds a little like the Earth is getting old and the parts are shifting - like the mantle has done lapped over the belts or something.

 

[82_VOL_83]

Mother Earth Matters. MEM.

I'll start shopping for my million dollar mansion now.

Earth's Life Matters.

 

[NorthDallas40]

that you dismiss the book out of hand because you've decided you have all the facts already and all the findings are settled in your mind.

It’s all he does

 

[NorthDallas40]

I’d be shocked if anyone could point out a factual reason why it wouldn’t be accurate.

You’d be shocked because that would mean you didn’t use yours goto play of just ignoring what doesn’t fit your narrative.

 

[hUTch2002]

The fake “climate emergency” has merged with fake “systemic racism” to create the ultimate fake storm. Lmao are these people serious?
The climate crisis demands a national Black climate agenda

That is quite possibly the dumbest thing I’ve ever seen, outside of some posts from a couple of individuals on here of course.

 

[05_never_again]

I'm old enough to remember back to May 13, 2014 when we were told we had "500 days to avoid climate chaos."

 

[McDad]

I'm old enough to remember back to May 13, 2014 when we were told we had "500 days to avoid climate chaos."

Are you old enough to remember the ozone layer crisis?

How about the coming ice age?

How about when it was forecast the massive starvation was around the corner because the world couldn't produce enough crops?

What about in the 1950s when "scientist" knew the world would deplete it's oil in another 30 years?

What about when scholarly types predicted riding in trains would suffocate people because humans couldn't breathe against the air pressure moving at the speed a steam locomotive could attain?

 

[05_never_again]

Are you old enough to remember the ozone layer crisis?

How about the coming ice age?

How about when it was forecast the massive starvation was around the corner because the world couldn't produce enough crops?

What about in the 1950s when "scientist" knew the world would deplete it's oil in another 30 years?

What about when scholarly types predicted riding in trains would suffocate people because humans couldn't breathe against the air pressure moving at the speed a steam locomotive could attain?

Or when we were about to run out of oil...

 

[McDad]

Or when we were about to run out of oil...

I was the last of 5 kids. I remember telling mom we learned in science class the world only had 30 years of oil left...this was in the mid 80s. My mom laughed and said, they told us the same thing.
I bet you can quess what they tell my children about oil reserve estimates.

 

[Volgolfer1618]

I was the last of 5 kids. I remember telling mom we learned in science class the world only had 30 years of oil left...this was in the mid 80s. My mom laughed and said, they told us the same thing.
I bet you can quess what they tell my children about oil reserve estimates.

Thats the beauty of it, you can keep guessing with no proof. I guess eventually you'll be right

 

[OHvol40]

Are you old enough to remember the ozone layer crisis?

How about the coming ice age?

How about when it was forecast the massive starvation was around the corner because the world couldn't produce enough crops?

What about in the 1950s when "scientist" knew the world would deplete it's oil in another 30 years?

What about when scholarly types predicted riding in trains would suffocate people because humans couldn't breathe against the air pressure moving at the speed a steam locomotive could attain?

I’m old enough to remember the Montreal Protocol.

I also don’t remember any of those other things being an overwhelming consensus.

Science incentivizes contrarian thought. If someone could convincingly argue against climate change they would win a Nobel Prize, be globally famous, get zillions of dollars in funding, floor seats for the Lakers, knighted by the queen, and the adoration of billions of people.

Alas, that person has yet to exist. Why do you think that is?

 

[hog88]

Are you old enough to remember the ozone layer crisis?

How about the coming ice age?

How about when it was forecast the massive starvation was around the corner because the world couldn't produce enough crops?

What about in the 1950s when "scientist" knew the world would deplete it's oil in another 30 years?

What about when scholarly types predicted riding in trains would suffocate people because humans couldn't breathe against the air pressure moving at the speed a steam locomotive could attain?

I remember in elementary school watching films about the coming ice age.

 

[hog88]

I’m old enough to remember the Montreal Protocol.

I also don’t remember any of those other things being an overwhelming consensus.

Science incentivizes contrarian thought. If someone could convincingly argue against climate change they would win a Nobel Prize, be globally famous, get zillions of dollars in funding, floor seats for the Lakers, knighted by the queen, and the adoration of billions of people.

Alas, that person has yet to exist. Why do you think that is?

Except nobody is going to finance that work and if financing were found it would be shunned by all major publications. You yourself dismissed out of hand a book without reading it because it's potentially contrary to your beliefs.

 

[McDad]

I’m old enough to remember the Montreal Protocol.

I also don’t remember any of those other things being an overwhelming consensus.

Science incentivizes contrarian thought. If someone could convincingly argue against climate change they would win a Nobel Prize, be globally famous, get zillions of dollars in funding, floor seats for the Lakers, knighted by the queen, and the adoration of billions of people.

Alas, that person has yet to exist. Why do you think that is?

The history of people who go against the consensus is not one of adulation. It is a history shaming, shunning, ostracization, and even threatening of death.

 

[LookinUp]

We do not have a climate emergency. We have a liberal and democrat emergency.

 

[OHvol40]

The history of people who go against the consensus is not one of adulation. It is a history shaming, shunning, ostracization, and even threatening of death.

Occasionally... then again the backlash almost always comes from politicians, religious institutions, or capitalists rather than other scientists. I would challenge you to find another universal consensus as strong as this one (90-98%) that was wrong.

 

[McDad]

Occasionally... then again the backlash almost always comes from politicians, religious institutions, or capitalists rather than other scientists. I would challenge you to find another universal consensus as strong as this one (90-98%) that was wrong.

 

[Wireless1]

I’m old enough to remember the Montreal Protocol.

I also don’t remember any of those other things being an overwhelming consensus.

Science incentivizes contrarian thought. If someone could convincingly argue against climate change they would win a Nobel Prize, be globally famous, get zillions of dollars in funding, floor seats for the Lakers, knighted by the queen, and the adoration of billions of people.

Alas, that person has yet to exist. Why do you think that is?

Have you read Hans Christian Anderson's "The Emperor's New Clothes"

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Have you read Hans Christian Anderson's "The Emperor's New Clothes"

I'm sure that has been banned and burned in Leftyland. If not yet, it will be

 

[hndog609]

Occasionally... then again the backlash almost always comes from politicians, religious institutions, or capitalists rather than other scientists. I would challenge you to find another universal consensus as strong as this one (90-98%) that was wrong.

I'm not entering the Climatocalypse but the "concensus" thing has been a sore spot for me for some time regarding science. Crichton did a better job with the explanation than I ever could.

Michael Crichton explains why there is 'no such thing as consensus science' | American Enterprise Institute - AEI

 

[GroverCleveland]

Occasionally... then again the backlash almost always comes from politicians, religious institutions, or capitalists rather than other scientists. I would challenge you to find another universal consensus as strong as this one (90-98%) that was wrong.

So when is the world going to end?

 

[NorthDallas40]

I'm not entering the Climatocalypse but the "concensus" thing has been a sore spot for me for some time regarding science. Crichton did a better job with the explanation than I ever could.

Michael Crichton explains why there is 'no such thing as consensus science' | American Enterprise Institute - AEI

The next to last paragraph is solid gold.

Finally, I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E=mc2. Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.

But the Ohio kid has consensus saying he’s right

 

[OHvol40]

I'm not entering the Climatocalypse but the "concensus" thing has been a sore spot for me for some time regarding science. Crichton did a better job with the explanation than I ever could.

Michael Crichton explains why there is 'no such thing as consensus science' | American Enterprise Institute - AEI

Sure, philosophically I agree there is no such thing as consensus science, but that is a semantics position in this case. The fact is, depending on how you word a poll, people in the relevant science fields will agree somewhere at between 90% and 98% clip that climate change is real and is caused or exasperated by man.

 

[allvol123]

Sure, philosophically I agree there is no such thing as consensus science, but that is a semantics position in this case. The fact is, depending on how you word a poll, people in the relevant science fields will agree somewhere at between 90% and 98% clip that climate change is real and is caused or exasperated by man.

Lol. "I agree consensus science is not science, but the consensus is this science is correct".

Omg. You have to be doing this for sh$ts and giggles.