Climate change

[Cypress187]

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/09/reu...rnment-to-do-more-against-climate-change.html

Finally some action.

 

[Silentrunning]

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/09/reu...rnment-to-do-more-against-climate-change.html

Finally some action.

Cypress186, the article says the Netherlands is one of the largest polluters in Europe. What causes this?

 

[Cypress187]

Cypress186, the article says the Netherlands is one of the largest polluters in Europe. What causes this?

We have much cows And tulips.

 

[Stormwater]

Climate change is a communist lie made up by crazy liberal’s who care nothing about helping Americans. In fact , I’m sure there was never any ice on the North Pole. Those satellites are fake. Next thing they’ll tell us that Santa cannot come because we melted the ice and a polar bear ate his raindeer. Fake lies about fake bears.

My trees will be fine.

 

[Vance Wood]

If there really is a Global Warming going on and there are a multitude of studies and statistics claiming it is not so, then what are we, as human beings, going to do about it?

 

[Zach Smith]

If there really is a Global Warming going on and there are a multitude of studies and statistics claiming it is not so, then what are we, as human beings, going to do about it?

First understand it for what it is. What is the correct temperature for the earth? Or the correct range? What do variations, which have going on for millennia or billions of years, do to the planet? And perhaps most critically at this juncture, why can't computer models showing purported accurate fractional changes in planetary temperatures 100 years from now predict with fractional accuracy the temperature anywhere and everywhere next week? Anyone familiar with the concept of extrapolation should understand the difficulty posed by that question, and more importantly the absurdity of believing it can be done.

Of course, being granted life and death power over everyone is the wet dream of the power-mad. Maybe that's the key.

 

[Cypress187]

If you don't 'believe' in science there is nothing I can do for you. Science is true whether you believe in it or not. Blogs are not science.

 

[Velodog2]

First understand it for what it is. What is the correct temperature for the earth? Or the correct range? What do variations, which have going on for millennia or billions of years, do to the planet? And perhaps most critically at this juncture, why can't computer models showing purported accurate fractional changes in planetary temperatures 100 years from now predict with fractional accuracy the temperature anywhere and everywhere next week? Anyone familiar with the concept of extrapolation should understand the difficulty posed by that question, and more importantly the absurdity of believing it can be done.

Of course, being granted life and death power over everyone is the wet dream of the power-mad. Maybe that's the key.

Your ability to understand climate modeling is irrelevant to the conclusions of people who do. However even I can predict with near 100% accuracy what will happen when a thread like this is started.

 

[GSCarlson]

If you don’t ‘believe’ in religion there is nothing I can do for you. Religion is true whether you believe in it or not. Blogs are not religion.

 

[Stormwater]

Your ability to understand climate modeling is irrelevant to the conclusions of people who do. However even I can predict with near 100% accuracy what will happen when a thread like this is started.

Ya, they kill Santa

 

[Cypress187]

If you don’t ‘believe’ in religion there is nothing I can do for you. Religion is true whether you believe in it or not. Blogs are not religion.

Religion is not a fact, it's a believe.

 

[Zach Smith]

Your ability to understand climate modeling is irrelevant to the conclusions of people who do. However even I can predict with near 100% accuracy what will happen when a thread like this is started.

I love it! Yes, that a sure bet.

 

[peterbone]

First understand it for what it is. What is the correct temperature for the earth? Or the correct range? What do variations, which have going on for millennia or billions of years, do to the planet? And perhaps most critically at this juncture, why can't computer models showing purported accurate fractional changes in planetary temperatures 100 years from now predict with fractional accuracy the temperature anywhere and everywhere next week? Anyone familiar with the concept of extrapolation should understand the difficulty posed by that question, and more importantly the absurdity of believing it can be done.

Of course, being granted life and death power over everyone is the wet dream of the power-mad. Maybe that's the key.

Weather prediction and climate prediction are two very different things. Short term weather varies significantly and is therefore very difficult to predict, but when you average it out over years or decades you get something with much less variability. This is climate study. Looked at in this way over long periods there's a very steady increase in global temperatures and a very strong correlation with carbon emissions that makes it very easy to predict future climate trends.

 

[Zach Smith]

Weather prediction and climate prediction are two very different things. Short term weather varies significantly and is therefore very difficult to predict, but when you average it out over years or decades you get something with much less variability. This is climate study. Looked at in this way over long periods there's a very steady increase in global temperatures and a very strong correlation with carbon emissions that makes it very easy to predict future climate trends.

I call BS on that assertion. So-called climate science has been around for at least 50 years. Show us the models from say 1980 or thereabouts, from non-government funded scientists, correlating today's CO2 levels with accurate temperature predictions. Somebody must have that answer. They were telling us then that a new ice age was coming. Then they told us excessive heat. When the fraud was discovered they changed the name to climate change, so whatever happens humans get blamed and we get to redistribute wealth from producers to parasites. Those who manage this noble undertaking will be our Marxist friends, of course. The bloodshed will be spectacular. And that, in a nutshell, is the purpose of climate science.

 

[peterbone]

I call BS on that assertion. So-called climate science has been around for at least 50 years. Show us the models from say 1980 or thereabouts, from non-government funded scientists, correlating today's CO2 levels with accurate temperature predictions. Somebody must have that answer. They were telling us then that a new ice age was coming. Then they told us excessive heat. When the fraud was discovered they changed the name to climate change, so whatever happens humans get blamed and we get to redistribute wealth from producers to parasites. Those who manage this noble undertaking will be our Marxist friends, of course. The bloodshed will be spectacular. And that, in a nutshell, is the purpose of climate science.

I'm not sure why you need predictions from the 1980s to prove it to yourself, although I'm guessing that they do exist. I can do better though and give you this article from 1912. It summarises the threat of man made climate change brilliantly. The only error is that it took a lot less than a few centuries to take effect.

 

[M. Frary]

Climate change is a communist lie made up by crazy liberal’s who care nothing about helping Americans. In fact , I’m sure there was never any ice on the North Pole. Those satellites are fake. Next thing they’ll tell us that Santa cannot come because we melted the ice and a polar bear ate his raindeer. Fake lies about fake bears.

My trees will be fine.

You listened to too much of that info war guy.
Your brain is now cottage cheese.

 

[BuckeyeBonsai]

Too bad there's almost nothing we can do about it. Who wants to be the one to tell China and India to stop burning coal? There is almost no chance that any country (let alone all of them) is going to get on board and make all the changes the environmentalists demand within the new twelve year window they've created. All of the hysteria within 21st century North America and Europe is pretty exhausting. One day we're going to wake up and realize that the rest of the world has passed us by because they didn't give a damn about our silly nonissues.

Cheers

 

[Cypress187]

very strong correlation

Why / don't argue with people who don't want to 'believe' climate change, there is no use in explaining it. They heard somewhere from some blog by someone that it's a hoax or a conspiracy or that it conflicts with god so they stick to that, you can't change their minds, I've tried it many times.

 

[peterbone]

Why / don't argue with people who don't want to 'believe' climate change, there is no use in explaining it. They heard somewhere from some blog by someone that it's a hoax or a conspiracy or that it conflicts with god so they stick to that, you can't change their minds, I've tried it many times.

Yeah, but I like to try to try to understand their justification and see how they react to actual logic and data. Point them to an actual plot of global temperatures over the last 100 years made by multiple groups all over the world as well as our understanding of how increased carbon dioxide increases temperature and see their ridiculous attempts to refute it. Actual measurements don't contain any politics or opinions and it's very easy to see the facts from the data.

 

[Cypress187]

Yeah, but I like to try to try to understand their justification and see how they react to actual logic and data. Point them to an actual plot of global temperatures over the last 100 years made by multiple groups all over the world as well as our understanding of how increased carbon dioxide increases temperature and see their ridiculous attempts to refute it. Actual measurements don't contain any politics or opinions and it's very easy to see the facts from the data.

Cognitive dissonance.