Climate Change - increasingly horrible disasters loom
...............
there is so much out there about this - I don't really need to provide a lot of sources - a quick google search will find you thousands of links
of course there are the climate change deniers
and there are those who say what little we can do won't be nearly enough
just one link:
from the article:
"Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. "
couldn't resist one more link - story about Siberia, one of the coldest places on earth where there is human habitation - they now face 100 degree days and multiple wildfires caused by them
https://eos.org/articles/siberian-heat-w....
.
The most important scientific mind Great Thunberg told me the world would end last year . How Dare You ?
How dare me? How dare them!
What's "climate change"? Yes, the climate has and will continue to "change". It's like calling it "Sundown", yes the sun goes down every day what's the problem?
They tried calling it global warming but they had to switch it to "climate change" because we weren't all fried up to a crisp yet.
Well sometimes some people are actually aberrations and abominations though, or is your idea that no people are? is the idea that i cannot describe any group of people as a threat to society because otherwise "i am like them"?
Take a hint though, which group uses extralegal violence to push their agenda? them, not me. That's what makes us completly opposite. I ask for the state to defend itself from domestic aggression within the rule of law, they ask for other people to join in the illegal use o
You are only different in that you completely embrace your selfishness.
“97% of climate scientists believe humans are causing climate change” is a lie. It’s nothing like that proportion, but instead closer to a third. Two thirds don’t agree.
And here's the study that the fraudulent 97% consensus figure came from.
When you are at a point you need to find text dating like 15 years ago and an unknown unverifiable obscur German site , you should ask yourself some question .
The advanced in that field the last 15 years is big …
but you can't even find 10.
ps politician like AOC, Al Gore, and even a scientist who works for NASA or other agencies shouldn't be considered because of a possible bias. So to make it more legit, only include main stream independent from gov't scientists
Spoiler
Of course I can find much more then you lol .
But it’s ok u don’t believe in science .
I’ve been sharing all the proof necessary and owning bj on it already many times.
I won’t lose my time with someone like you who can’t even acknowledge what reality is …..
Anti science
Pro conspiracy
Pro deepstate paranoia
Election denier
Etc …
Ps: the problem isn’t climate changes , the problem is the speed it changes and u can’t even understand that simple principle which all the data confirm with a 5 sigma confidence …
Well sometimes some people are actually aberrations and abominations though, or is your idea that no people are? is the idea that i cannot describe any group of people as a threat to society because otherwise "i am like them"?
Take a hint though, which group uses extralegal violence to push their agenda? them, not me. That's what makes us completly opposite. I ask for the state to defend itself from domestic aggression within the rule of law, they ask for other people to join in the illegal use o
Which all communist states do right ?
That doesn’t make them right ….like you on the opposite side with the same extreme view of what society should be .
When you are at a point you need to find text dating like 15 years ago and an unknown unverifiable obscur German site , you should ask yourself some question .
The advanced in that field the last 15 years is big …
Because that's when the study that your 97% is based on was published. And the study is in English.
It proves that the 97% was and is bullshit.
Just read the first paragraph of the study (which I linked). They don't even hide it. The 97% figure is fraudulent nonsense.
Of course I can find much more then you lol .
But it’s ok u don’t believe in science .
I’ve been sharing all the proof necessary and owning bj on it already many times.
I won’t lose my time with someone like you who can’t even acknowledge what reality is …..
Anti science
Pro conspiracy
Pro deepstate paranoia
Election denier
Etc …
Ps: the problem isn’t climate changes , the problem is the speed it changes and u can’t even understand that simple prin
It's because I would make a bet to you that you're providing science that proves the climate is changing. Of course there's climate change. I'm not a climate change denier (or a sunrise denier). The climate on the earth changes every day, and it's been going through cycles for millions of years (as are the other planets in our solar system).
However, what the dems, libs, DS, and Al Gore (all non-scientists) are trying to say is unless we get rid of gasoline engines and cows, the hurricanes are gonna keep getting stronger... is there any proof of this and that cow farting causes the climate to change ?
I won’t lose my time with someone like you who can’t even acknowledge what reality is …..
You won't lose your time because you're looking for something that's not there. I have a much better understanding of reality than you by far, listen to PB you might learn something.
Spoiler
Spoiler
.
Keep in mind that those people are claiming that the "climate emergency" is ALREADY ongoing lol
It is. A few examples from the past couple years as we approached/passed 1.5C globally being the Canadian wildfires, bleaching of coral reef, explosive hurricane intensification like Otis, devastating flooding from Helene as a result of a warmer atmosphere holding more moisture.
But it's no big deal according to your logic because ppl in Europe need to wear jackets a couple weeks less per year *eyeroll*.
It is. A few examples from the past couple years as we approached/passed 1.5C globally being the Canadian wildfires, bleaching of coral reef, explosive hurricane intensification like Otis, devastating flooding from Helene as a result of a warmer atmosphere holding more moisture.
But it's no big deal according to your logic because ppl in Europe need to wear jackets a couple weeks less per year *eyeroll*.
Europe saves tens of billions in heating per year thanks to warming it's not just about wearing jackets, that's a huge insane benefit that isn't close to be canceled by the negatives, for Europe.
As for what you listed, looks like you drunk all the Kool aid and believe everything that happens is climate change.
Btw the coral reef is in far better conditions than 30-40 years ago so that's really pulled from some propaganda climate porn site, completely made up.
There aren't more hurricanes and they aren't more intense but I mean, who ever cared about actual measurable reality right? Just spam climate porn and get the clickbaited leftist pay your rent, that's "scientific journalism" these days.
Hilarious response, it's weird living in a completely different version of reality. I see one thing accurate in your response, that is that the number of hurricanes have not become more frequent (though are becoming more intense).
I guess NOAA and the
are propaganda, surely your sources are far more reputable!
Hilarious response, it's weird living in a completely different version of reality. I see one thing accurate in your response, that is that the number of hurricanes have not become more frequent (though are becoming more intense).
I guess NOAA and the
are propaganda, surely your sources are far more reputable!Propaganda is listing "bleaching events" without giving us the only thing we care about which is an historical graph of overall conditions to gauge how the trend is.
Example
They literally can't celebrate objective improvement because it plays counter to the apocalyptic narrative
https://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/feature/is-...
So they only list bad events, no mention of the massive improvements, the narrative stays.
It's obscene taxpayer funded propaganda, those people should all be removed from any role that has to do with public money, banned for life to ever get a government contract directly or indirectly and so on.
Guess what, ocean temperatures have skyrocketed in the 2 years following that February 2023 article.
Not really the gotcha you were hoping for there when the more recent info I linked is not good.
"As of April 2024, observations indicate this event is one of the more extensive and serious on the Reef. Almost half the reefs (46%) in the Great Barrier Reef experienced record levels of heat stress. Nearly 60% of reefs in the Great Barrier Reef were exposed to levels of heat stress that causes coral bleaching and increases the risk of mortality from bleaching. However, as with previous bleaching events, the full impact of the event will not be known for some time. Bleaching is variable, and in-water surveys are continuing.
Aerial survey results show 73% of surveyed reefs in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park have prevalent bleaching (more than 10% of coral cover bleached) and 6% in the Torres Strait. For the first time, extreme bleaching (more than 90% of coral cover bleached) was observed in all three regions of the Great Barrier Reef. Very high bleaching (61-90% coral cover bleached) and extreme bleaching (more than 90% coral cover bleached) was observed on 39% of reefs across the entire Marine Park, but concentrated in the southern and central regions."
Europe saves tens of billions in heating per year thanks to warming it's not just about wearing jackets, that's a huge insane benefit that isn't close to be canceled by the negatives, for Europe.
As for what you listed, looks like you drunk all the Kool aid and believe everything that happens is climate change.
Btw the coral reef is in far better conditions than 30-40 years ago so that's really pulled from some propaganda climate porn site, completely made up.
There aren't more hurricanes and
This is absolutely false.
Number of category 5 hurricanes has skyrocketed in the 2000's both atlantic and pacific.
The reports are undisputable.
Which means the hurricanes are more intense (again not more hurricanes, just more intense)
How about billions per year in AC to offset heatwaves?
The stupids are in charge now. We get what we deserve. Maybe we just need to start all over anyway.
We need to rename this thread - Science! UH! What is it good for (absolutely nothing)
In cold countries, the amount of energy saved through lower heating needs is more than a magnitude higher than the increase in energy needs for more AC, because the number of days you need heating is higher than the number of days you need AC, and because heating you need 24/7 while AC is very rarely needed at evening/night anyway even with higher temperature (in cold countries).
How is that not absolutely obvious to you?
Then there is the "AC can be done with solar, heating can't" part to tackle, but later.
You have to also factor in the population size living in cold conditions who will use less heating, and the population size living in warmer conditions who will use more AC.
Mid to high latitudes US states + Canada + Scandi + N Europe + mid to high latitudes Russia
India + Southern China + SE Asia + tropical Africa + tropical S America + Southern US States + Mexico + Aus
You have to also factor in the population size living in cold conditions who will use less heating, and the population size living in warmer conditions who will use more AC.
Mid to high latitudes US states + Canada + Scandi + N Europe + mid to high latitudes Russia
India + Southern China + SE Asia + tropical Africa + tropical S America + Southern US States + Mexico + Aus
Man, lucia got me again, I didn't think I had to specify which countries would used more AC.
A lot of the cold places have relatively hardly anyone living there. LOL Luciom
You have to also factor in the population size living in cold conditions who will use less heating, and the population size living in warmer conditions who will use more AC.
Mid to high latitudes US states + Canada + Scandi + N Europe + mid to high latitudes Russia
India + Southern China + SE Asia + tropical Africa + tropical S America + Southern US States + Mexico + Aus
I would have to do that if I was the leader of the world government under a world constitution mandating equality of welfare to all human beings.
but there is no world government rather national ones and each nation has a moral and legal mandate for it's representatives to do the interests OF IT'S OWN CITIZENS, so every country should only reduce CO2 emissions if it benefits directly from doing that AND if doing that is a better way to spend money than mitigation (which it never is except perhaps for China given individual country contributions to CO2).
so I repeat for the millionth time, you don't have to agree with me on morality, but you can't keep going with the *objective, utter, anti-science lie* that citizens in the UK (and Canada, Germany and so on) benefit from mandated emission reductions in the UK (and Canada, Germany and so on).
it's false, they are getting scammed, raped.
they lose MASSIVELY , objectively, uncontroversially, from reducing emissions every time it is not economic convenient to do that anyway.
and that's what science adamantly tell us.
and you guys keep lying obscenely to deny this because you know very well that people wouldn't accept those huge costs if they knew that the reality is, they are paying that to be WORSE OFF, as an attempt to give charity (to help) to Bangladesh, Indonesia and so on.
an attempt that works far worse than donating the same money to them to mitigate btw, so even an incredibly wasteful form of charity
me: europe saves tens of billions in heating thanks to warming.
weez: what about increased ac costs?
me: just a small fraction of heating
weez: eh I meant other completely different countries.
wtf? bad faith arguing every single claim, you guys are the anti science party
