Climate change

leatherback said:
What moron made that video?
Although I do not fully agree with the "I do not care what sexe you were born with, I will treat you as an It" attitude, I do believe giving kids space to be who they are, and not what society wants them to be is the right attitude. But the voie-over is just an obnoxious bully who just canot accept that people can be differnt from his own tunnel-vision world view.
And comments about muslims taing over? Where does he get that from (And nope, Sweden is not largely muslim. It has a high percentage, but with 10% not nearly at a switching point.
And what is it with the completely unrelated girls in underwear?

All in all a cheap, poorly executed propaganda movie by someone with an agenda against public freedom, concerned that his peronal interest in the size male sex organs could stem from a homosexual interest.
Click to expand...
You and Alain (and many others) have a very simplistic, fashion driven outlook on life with no regard given to causes, outcomes and potential future geo-political problems. The US, Australia, the UK but most of all Scandinavia and many parts of Europe are in decline. We are becoming weaker. The currant fashion for gender-bending is in my opinion partly driven by modern Western environmental pollutants. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2137123/ Therefore it will be imperative that this problem is tackled in the future if we are to continue as a society. We are a nutrient starved, sugar-fed, pill popping, over analysed society becoming more feeble every year. . Have you not noticed the pitch in the male voice (generally) has become higher when compared to say the 30's or 50's? I have. That is just one problem. There are many others, and one of the most insidious is the ideologically based ''liberal'' concepts about how the world ''should be'' We are obsessed with rights above and beyond whatever their impacts may be down the line. Humans are animals. They need structure in order to survive. But that structure has largely been abandoned. Anarchy is fashionable. Discipline has been removed entirely from schools - at least the kind of discipline which has an affect. Now students as young as five can tell their teachers to fuck off with no consequence. Kids don't walk to school anymore, they are wrapped in cotton wool and driven to and from school without the essential interaction (good and bad) which shapes character and instils resilience in people. The result is that we now have a generation (2?) of snowflakes which have no idea how to handle a threatening situation . We have 'safe spaces' at Universities. We have a generation of men which are terrified of talking to women should they say the wrong thing and be dragged across the coals for it. We have had several generations where life has been so easy that the real horrors of the past have been forgotten. History is hardly even taught in schools or universities anymore. I could go on and on. Lets hope we don't reach a situation where our defence forces end up respecting their enemies more than the people they are supposed to defend!
The rest of the world is not like us. For example Islam is strong and getting stronger. It rejects (at least a lot of it does) western values. It will always reject them. It is waiting and it has infinite patience. China is growing and gathering strength. Russia is not going anywhere. And meanwhile here we are. Pre-occupied with the weather getting a little warm lately, or weather we should let boys ware dresses or what the latest pill we should swallow might be.
The greatest civilizations in history displayed the kind of values and habits just before their downfall as the ones we are displaying right now.
 
SockUnicorn said:
I didnt realize the most ardent climate deniers would show up on a tree forum. The Bonsai community does not impress me at all.
Click to expand...

It's not too surprising when you realize that (at least in the US), bonsai is mostly practiced by old white men. if you know anything about American politics and History you can guess their politics. Ironically they believe the propaganda from the oil companies so much (and are very willing to believe it, since it aligns with their politics-- see the anti-feminist guy above) that they're convinced that we are the ones fooled by propaganda since we believe the scientists and experts.
 
MichaelS said:
AMO
Click to expand...
How much impact does this have on the global average temperature of the globe? You are talking about a 0.45 degree fluctuation of the surface temperature of 1 ocean, are we ignoring the rest of the oceans (and below the 'surface') and what about the air and the atmosphere and the soil and land and the snow? This AMO process is well known and is included in all calculations predictions and reports, and we are still warming up man, maybe next time you can cool down the planet with a random graph, keep trying man. Maybe you even become a scientists after reading all those papers.
 
Cypress187 said:
maybe next time you can cool down the planet with a random graph, keep trying man. Maybe you even become a scientists after reading all those papers.
Click to expand...

Huh huh huh...

Well said :cool:

BTW, I've just changed my "avatar" after hearing of the possible loss of lives in California. What seemed to me ironical when answering the fake news of some here, I realized that it could be felt as off-color in the context.
 
Last edited:
Cypress187, post: 606968, member: 18490"]How much impact does this have on the global average temperature of the globe?
Click to expand...

it matches the UAH spike for spike.

and we are still warming up man,
Click to expand...

We are not still warming up ''man''. The temp has been going down for 2 years. The 2016/17 enso spike came after the temps were exactly the same in 2015,14,13 and 12 as they were in 2001,2,3,4,5,6,7 and 8. You are looking as weather fluctuation noise NOT CLIMATE CHANGE.
 
Last edited:
10-brink, post: 606948, member: 19326"]
see the anti-feminist guy above)
Click to expand...

Let me educate you a little.

There are 2 kinds (basically) of feminists. Those who looked upon men and their achievements as inspiration to do the same. eg. Amelia Earhart. Quote.........''Women must try to do things as men have tried. When they fail, their failure must be but a challenge to others''.
Then there are ''feminists'' that blame all of life's woes on men. That men are basically evil and unnecessary and are all oppressors. The ideas of these women, and the men who agree with them, are staggeringly stupid, dangerous and doomed to failure.
So before you go ahead and label people with yet more meaningless, shallow throw away lines like ''anti feminist'', you should think a bit more deeply.
 
Cypress187 said:
Cherry picking, nice try tho (very tiny cherry as I may say so).. https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/did-global-warming-stop-1998

It's warming steady for like 40 years, 2 years don't even make a dent in the trendline.
Click to expand...
Why do refuse to use the satellite data which all scientists (on BOTH sides) agree is the most accurate and indisputable?

Your ''warming steady for 40 years'' is only one interpretation. It is the interpretation used by those with a political agenda (the UN) and it is complete nonsense.

The better interpretation is this....Starting in the 30's 40's temps where high, then there was a sharp fall (1) through the 70's (the start of your 40 years). This is when the scientists was frightened about a coming ice age.


Here is the conclusion of a recent study of climate science papers during the 70's (look familiar?)

70s.JPG

The temp then came back up to the base line 0 (we can call this equilibrium although it is never really achieved) during the mid 80's (2). From about '87 to '97 (a decade) the high temperature peaks did not go over 0.1 above the base line. In other words NO TREND! for 10 years (3). In '98 there was a huge ENSO spike. After this event, scientists say it caused a thermal shock (best explanation = possibly heat inertia in the oceans? Not sure) and the average temperature settled about 0.1 degree higher than previously (4). It remained there for another 15 years (not including the 2010spike) (5). In 2016 we had another ENSO event - and remember El Ninos have nothing to do with co2. In the last 2 years the temp is coming back down from the 2016 spike and as of Oct 2018, it has reached the 0.2 degrees above the base line as it was from 2001 to 2015. (6). So there you have it. No permanent trend to speak of. Also, if you go back far enough into history, you will see just how ridiculous the idea of finding a modern trend of any meaning whatsoever actually is. The only significant feature of temperature fluctuation here is the 0.1 degree step in 2001/2. There is no way you could detect that in a mercury thermometer with the naked eye. And that is what you are so concerned about! Tell me I'm cherry picking now when all the evidence is right in front of your face.
Global warming hypothesis if a fad invented by computer modellers, perpetuated the mainstream media, the IPPC, and taken to heart as the new religion by the loopy left. It will die off within the next few years and some other looming catastrophe else will take over.



Royspencedata.JPG
 
MichaelS said:
(on BOTH sides)
Click to expand...
There are no 'both sides', there are people who agree with scientific consensus and people who deny it (and there are people who deny the denial). Also btw, I don't know all this science stuff, and I don't claim I know it, I only know there is a concensus and some people try to cast doubt (merchants of doubt - Naomi Oreskes). You are cleary in the denying category and trying to cast doubt, which/where there isn't any. Btw, what is your profession / education, are you a scientist? Why should we believe you over the other scientists who work in this field and made all those papers and arrived at this concensus?
 
  • Like
Reactions: n8
Interesting. Still no solution.

Still talking the talk and never walking the walk.
 
Cypress187 said:
There are no 'both sides', there are people who agree with scientific consensus and people who deny it (and there are people who deny the denial). Also btw, I don't know all this science stuff, and I don't claim I know it, I only know there is a concensus and some people try to cast doubt (merchants of doubt - Naomi Oreskes). You are cleary in the denying category and trying to cast doubt, which/where there isn't any. Btw, what is your profession / education, are you a scientist? Why should we believe you over the other scientists who work in this field and made all those papers and arrived at this concensus?
Click to expand...
There are most definitely 2 sides. One side (the right one) is suppressed whenever possible because of media brainwashing from those with an endless supply of funds and a reputation to protect, and the other (the wrong one) gets frequent publicity. Don't you get it that the mainstream media is left leaning and refuse to air contrary views because many of these contrary views originally came from the fossil fuel industry and it's conservative supporters? Check the latest BBC directive...https://www.thegwpf.com/bbc-freezes-out-climate-sceptics/
There are many real scientists (probably the majority now (?) that don't go along with the co2 hypothesis at all) You don't hear about them because you don't care to look for them. Check out this Lindzen lecture if you can manage the concentration.
I'm a horticulturist be profession not a scientist. Neither are the climate modellers scientists. You don't need to be a scientist to seek out facts. As for consensus, I just showed you that in the 70's there was a consensus that we were headed for a deep freeze. I know because I was there. This so consensus turned out to be completely wrong just as this current one will. So consensus has nothing to do with science. It just takes one person to find the truth and destroy consensus. That has already been done by not one but hundreds of scientists. If you really need to see a list of them, I can supply that too. So you should stop just repeating what you here from the warmanistas and do your own research. If you could not be bothered, that's fine but you then should stop commenting on things you know nothing about.
 
Bananaman said:
Interesting. Still no solution.

Still talking the talk and never walking the walk.
Click to expand...
No solution and nothing will get done because we cannot do without fossil fuels and also no solution needed because there is no problem with fossil fuels. (as far as co2 is concerned)
 
Thanks but I was kinda hoping to hear what the snowflakes propose. I mean it’s all well and good to post up 23 pages of crap but one good solution should make this go away right?
 
Carbon credit exchange. That's Al Gore's solution and apparently everyone is cool with it.

Make it so. Let's get the climate to cease changing

On three. 1, 2, 3 go!

Now how does this financial abstraction work again?
 
Bananaman said:
Thanks but I was kinda hoping to hear what the snowflakes propose. I mean it’s all well and good to post up 23 pages of crap but one good solution should make this go away right?
Click to expand...
Well one of their proposals (or their champion's proposals) is throwing you in jail for using electricity from coal.

I kid you not!!! (notice too how the media continues to show cooling towers with H20 coming out of them)

greens.JPG
 
You do understand that if we take your route we will have much more suffering and taking huge risks (economically and environmentally) and probably won't be able to do anything about it anymore the longer we wait (multiplying the costs each year), and if I am right we will have free energy in the same time.

Also, about the 2 sides, there aren't 2 sides (well maybe there are 2 sides, on the one side you have scientists and the other side you have capitalism).
 
We have to make corporations use cleaner energy to reduce emissions. On the new report that was released yesterday there are several suggestions on things to assist. Like stop flying and take a bus instead. Insulate your home better. Two examples.
Wind and solar energy is the future.
Why wouldn’t we want to use those if they are available over other options???
A lot of blame was placed on individual uses but the corporate sector does way more damage than individuals. I am willing to do my share.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom