More Climate BS...

[Wireless1]

Climate change has been real for 4 billion years. It is the advent of Man-Made climate change for political purpose that is new.

Before man started burning fossil fuel, it was man made due to volcanos erupting because virgins weren’t sacrificed

 

[OrangeTsar]

Ah, kinda what I thought, another skeptic with no substance. What isn’t being done that should be done to determine the effects of increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, in your opinion?

Here’s a counter question. When have the climate scaremongers ever gotten a prediction RIGHT? I think the polar ice caps were supposed to have melted by now and several island nations be underwater.
Science is all about making predictions based on your theory and then seeing if the results match the predictions.

 

[OrangeTsar]

Climate change has been real for 4 billion years. It is the advent of Man-Made climate change for political purpose that is new.

Yup, we laugh at the Aztecs ripping the heart out of living sacrificial victims in order to appease the weather gods. We have just as much hope of changing the weather by our net zero folly.
Climate has always changed; and it will continue to do so whatever silliness we employ.

 

[85SugarVol]

Yup, we laugh at the Aztecs ripping the heart out of living sacrificial victims in order to appease the weather gods. We have just as much hope of changing the weather by our net zero folly.
Climate has always changed; and it will continue to do so whatever silliness we employ.

It is perfectly reasonable, as well as pragmatic, to adjust in the face of a changing climate environment.

We should be seeking out alternative fuel sources, new efficiencies, as well as protecting the natural scrubbers that regulate our planet.

Jacking taxes and upending the global economy as a “fix” is neither pragmatic, nor reasonable.

 

[OrangeTsar]

It is perfectly reasonable, as well as pragmatic, to adjust in the face of a changing climate environment.

We should be seeking out alternative fuel sources, new efficiencies, as well as protecting the natural scrubbers that regulate our planet.

Jacking taxes and upending the global economy as a “fix” is neither pragmatic, nor reasonable.

Yes indeed, find alternative energy sources and increase efficiency of energy using processes.
But don’t cripple the world’s economy by forcing us to try and meet arbitrary pre industrial limits.

 

[OHvol40]

Here’s a counter question. When have the climate scaremongers ever gotten a prediction RIGHT? I think the polar ice caps were supposed to have melted by now and several island nations be underwater.
Science is all about making predictions based on your theory and then seeing if the results match the predictions.

They have been spot on with CO2 ppm, the US dry line moving east, sunny day flooding, increase in extreme weather, the hottest decade in recorded history… you can put your head in the sand all you want. There are surely people who will try to financially gain off of climate change, and I understand the apprehension with that. Maybe it does make people scaremonger to some extent, but increasing the amount of CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) in a finite container has scientifically predictable consequences. That is not scaremongering. Have you actually listened to people who study this for a living? Have you read the reports from fossil fuel companies themselves dating back to the 70s expressing concern that the emissions from their products could cause atmospheric changes? They employed scientists too that recognized this long ago. They chose to bury it for decades and push forward in the name of profit.

 

[OHvol40]

Here’s a counter question. When have the climate scaremongers ever gotten a prediction RIGHT? I think the polar ice caps were supposed to have melted by now and several island nations be underwater.
Science is all about making predictions based on your theory and then seeing if the results match the predictions.

“As early as 1959, oil industry executives understood the connection between burning fossil fuels and climate change. Soon thereafter, industry scientists confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt that the burning of fossil fuels contributed to anthropogenic climate change. In response, oil companies scrambled to promulgate climate change denial and disinformation in order to avoid government regulation. It was not until the late 1990s and early 2000s that oil companies began publicly acknowledging the scientific consensus on climate change and responded by promoting market-based solutions to mitigating emissions.”

Defense, Denial, and Disinformation: Uncovering the Oil Industry’s Early Knowledge of Climate Change - Common Home

Georgetown Professor Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò explores the link between police brutality, climate change, and the Covid-19 pandemic.

commonhome.georgetown.edu

 

[OrangeTsar]

“As early as 1959, oil industry executives understood the connection between burning fossil fuels and climate change. Soon thereafter, industry scientists confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt that the burning of fossil fuels contributed to anthropogenic climate change. In response, oil companies scrambled to promulgate climate change denial and disinformation in order to avoid government regulation. It was not until the late 1990s and early 2000s that oil companies began publicly acknowledging the scientific consensus on climate change and responded by promoting market-based solutions to mitigating emissions.”

Defense, Denial, and Disinformation: Uncovering the Oil Industry’s Early Knowledge of Climate Change - Common Home

Georgetown Professor Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò explores the link between police brutality, climate change, and the Covid-19 pandemic.

commonhome.georgetown.edu

“beyond a reasonable doubt”
“link between police brutality and climate change and Covid-19”
Oh stop it, you’re killing me

 

[OHvol40]

“beyond a reasonable doubt”

Play semantics and ignore everything else eh? I could bombard you with information that you won’t read and likely won’t fully understand if you did. So, we can skip all that and watch this stinkin basketball game.

 

[OrangeTsar]

“As early as 1959, oil industry executives understood the connection between burning fossil fuels and climate change. Soon thereafter, industry scientists confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt that the burning of fossil fuels contributed to anthropogenic climate change. In response, oil companies scrambled to promulgate climate change denial and disinformation in order to avoid government regulation. It was not until the late 1990s and early 2000s that oil companies began publicly acknowledging the scientific consensus on climate change and responded by promoting market-based solutions to mitigating emissions.”

Defense, Denial, and Disinformation: Uncovering the Oil Industry’s Early Knowledge of Climate Change - Common Home

Georgetown Professor Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò explores the link between police brutality, climate change, and the Covid-19 pandemic.

commonhome.georgetown.edu

So in 1959, every one knew fossil fuels were warming the earth. But by the 1970s we had warnings of global cooling. And then back to global warming in the 1990s, and now it is vague climate “change”.
And you wonder why people are skeptical of climate change”experts”
Again, name one testable prediction that has actually come to pass.

 

[OrangeTsar]

Play semantics and ignore everything else eh? I could bombard you with information that you won’t read and likely won’t fully understand if you did. So, we can skip all that and watch this stinkin basketball game.

My undergrad degree is in environmental science. I was actually a foot solider activist in each environmental crisis of the last 40 years.
But sure, I don’t understand the stuff you keep pitching.

 

[Wireless1]

So in 1959, every one knew fossil fuels were warming the earth. But by the 1970s we had warnings of global cooling. And then back to global warming in the 1990s, and now it is vague climate “change”.
And you wonder why people are skeptical of climate change”experts”
Again, name one testable prediction that has actually come to pass.

Not to mention there are 3 times more fossil fuel consumed in 2020 versus 1960

 

[OrangeTsar]

Not to mention there are 3 times more fossil fuel consumed in 2020 versus 1960

Oh; but no problem. A few windmills and solar panels will surely make up the difference

 

[marcusluvsvols]

My undergrad degree is in environmental science. I was actually a foot solider activist in each environmental crisis of the last 40 years.
But sure, I don’t understand the stuff you keep pitching.

The Climate Change Grift religion functions like the Cult of Covid 19... some people are so convinced its "settled science" that they will never believe otherwise. They even changed the name of the "crisis" for the 8th time to "climate change" instead of "global warming" so that when we have blizzard conditions they can blame that on mankind as well.

As I am sure you are aware, there is a growing sentiment now among scientists that think we are headed into an Ice Age soon. This due to reduced activity on the surface of the Sun, which they believe has been quite active with solar flares etc recently. Many believe that the Sun is almost entirely responsible for changes in Earth's temperature and climate. Then theres the fact that CO2 is not a pollutant...its what all plants breathe in order to survive. Without them, we don't have the o2 levels that we need to survive. In extremely high concentrations under certain conditions, CO2 can function as a "greenhouse gas". We dont know that the levels of CO2 released by mankind have any effect on global temps though. Too many other variables and a tiny, miniscule, statistically insignificant amount of weather data on a planet believed to be ~4BN years old make drawing any reliable conclusions impossible. The couple hundred years of spotty data we have is nothing on a scale of 4BN years.

 

[OHvol40]

So in 1959, every one knew fossil fuels were warming the earth. But by the 1970s we had warnings of global cooling. And then back to global warming in the 1990s, and now it is vague climate “change”.
And you wonder why people are skeptical of climate change”experts”
Again, name one testable prediction that has actually come to pass.

I did. You conveniently ignored it.

 

[OrangeTsar]

I did. You conveniently ignored it.

Sorry, I missed it apparently. Can you repeat it?
Edit: okay, I scrolled back and found your post that i had indeed missed. My apologies.

CO2 ppm predictions are not synonymous with climate predictions. There is a correlation between CO2 and temperature for sure; but all predictions that an increase of x ppm CO2 will result in y degrees of temperature increase have been wildly inaccurate. We should all be underwater now based on the climate models from the 1990s.
Warmer years have happened for sure; but there is no way to link that to emissions as climate warms and cools naturally throughout history. Surely you know about the medieval little ice age; long before fossil fuels. The 1930s heat waves and dust bowl come to mind as well.
All you have provided are a) a slight change in atmospheric chemistry and b) a description of changing weather which of course always has happened. Correlation does not equal causation.
When scientists 20 years ago predicted they the world would be ice free by now; THAT is a prediction and it failed miserably.

 

[OrangeTsar]

Man but this global warming is getting out of hand

 

[OrangeTsar]

They have been spot on with CO2 ppm, the US dry line moving east, sunny day flooding, increase in extreme weather, the hottest decade in recorded history… you can put your head in the sand all you want. There are surely people who will try to financially gain off of climate change, and I understand the apprehension with that. Maybe it does make people scaremonger to some extent, but increasing the amount of CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) in a finite container has scientifically predictable consequences. That is not scaremongering. Have you actually listened to people who study this for a living? Have you read the reports from fossil fuel companies themselves dating back to the 70s expressing concern that the emissions from their products could cause atmospheric changes? They employed scientists too that recognized this long ago. They chose to bury it for decades and push forward in the name of profit.

Ah yes, accurate predictions….

 

[OrangeTsar]

 

[OHvol40]

Ah yes, accurate predictions….
View attachment 822718

You’re trying too hard lol. Trying to manufacture my responses just so you know how to respond is a weak move. You invoke Al Gore and try to pin the invocation on me. Mildly sneaky, but failed.

 

[OrangeTsar]

You’re trying too hard lol. Trying to manufacture my responses just so you know how to respond is a weak move. You invoke Al Gore and try to pin the invocation on me. Mildly sneaky, but failed.

Not trying to pin Gore’s goofiness on you at all. Just pointing out how ridiculously wrong the predictions of the climate grifters have been

 

[OHvol40]

Not trying to pin Gore’s goofiness on you at all. Just pointing out how ridiculously wrong the predictions of the climate grifters have been

I acknowledged there are inherently grifters and scaremongers with any perceived money-making venture, that’s the capitalistic world we live in here… but that doesn’t mean you forego simple science.

 

[OrangeTsar]

I acknowledged there are inherently grifters and scaremongers with any perceived money-making venture, that’s the capitalistic world we live in here… but that doesn’t mean you forego simple science.

Simple science means results match predictions.
Climate “science “ has not delivered IMHO.

If you want to derail the economy of the world; you better have some really ironclad proof.

And the proof has to be quantified. Not simply that “last year was warm”

 

[OHvol40]

Simple science means results match predictions.
Climate “science “ has not delivered IMHO.

If you want to derail the economy of the world; you better have some really ironclad proof.

And the proof has to be quantified. Not simply that “last year was warm”

“Derailing the economy of the world” is clearly hyperbolic, especially when you consider how shackled we are by the fossil fuel industry, as evidenced by endless wars driven by engery producers vs consumers, sudden price hikes, volatility in the market almost always, hell a global economy that is intrinsically tied to gas and oil prices. The greatest weapon Iran has deployed is an interruption of oil flowing to market. That’s it, and it could potentially bring us to our knees if it goes on long enough.

Can’t you imagine progressing past these restraints placed on society-at-large by our dependence on an environmentally unfriendly, non-renewable fuel source? We will have to at some point, and we have the technology to start progressing that way now. Why not?

 

[CagleMtnVol]

Good Grief. This loser is still out there preaching his money making scam.

Why do people still listen to that guy? He said in the mid 90's that Miami would be under water by 2015.