Discussion in 'The War Room' started by Aegon Spengler, Feb 15, 2016.
I don't let it bother me because I won't be around when the shit gets serious.
.................prepare the defenses. The current crop of leaders have no idea what's coming.
Naturally occurring through history when is was summer, it was once winter, and vice versa with other seasons.
it's a cyclic change that takes a long long time. It's natural, on a micro penis scale, the east of north america, winter is coming later. Snow and cold weather come after December. And is continuing that trend.
Again there are many natural occurrences and California is a great example.
In CA there is a natural cycle of draught, fire caused be lightening and, then land slide by too much rain.
. that natural cycle is the way the earth seems too keep the earth the freshest. The fire and draught and rain combined in that a cyclic manner creates fresh new soil and plant life..
And those Natural started fires produce a lot.of co2. In history humans fled those fires InStead of fighting them.
It was mother earth doing her natural thing and she was probably cleansing things . Way beyond human understanding
So you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, but you still feel like you are entitled to have an opinion?
Ladies and gentlemen...
This is a level 10 dipshit.
If I'm still kicking in 2050, chances are I'll be struggling to help the refugees from equatorial regions. ...and no doubt fighting the political opposition that wants to take on a fortress mentality and pretend we can still ignore it.
I am.actual a geologist, studied for years geology, ba, then masters to teach it. 3 years volunteer field work. It's not opinion.
So you think it's opinion that there is a cycle of draught, fire, flood in ca. Draught cause the land to become dry, lightening hits trees and ground which starts the fire, everything is burned until nothing can be burned. When. It Rains since the ground is burnes and bare it washes away easy. Producing the richest soil and vegation. Going with the old saying destruction brings life.
And the seasons have switched in the past. Your still thinking on your micro penis scale.
You sure you don't mean, "a rock"...?
Let's pump the breaks on the armageddon talk, we should do something about the problem and stop sounding like right wing lunatics.
Yea when I was in college we had a speaker in one of my classes that pointed out in the distant past lightning would start fires and then the ash would enrich the soil for a new forest. He said we have come along with forestry fire fighter units and we think we are doing right but we put out all the fires and what it does is allow all the dry brush and overgrowth to build up and then when a fire breaks out it burns down half the state. The natural system of allowing some fires to burn keeps the overgrowth under control and replenishes the soil. Its just one example of how humanity thinks it knows better than the natural state and balance of the planet that has been here for 3.5 billion years doing it over and over and over again. I suspect at some point we are going to monkey with the atmosphere, if we aren't already, to try to alter its content and unintended consequences will ensue. Keep in mind that c02 only makes up 400 parts per million in the atmosphere or 0.04%. Virtually none.
I don't really understand it, there are just a bunch of people saying that they do. CO2 is like 0.04% of the atmosphere, how could that be soooo bad? I know, science. Like I said I just don't have a good understanding of it. I think about it in a context of wondering if it's really us and wondering if it's really that bad.
I will continue to wait and see, not taking sides and marvelling at the obnoxiousness of climate alarmists*. Sincerely doubt sea levels around my home town will have risen by the predicted 0,82 meters by 2100, but by then I'll probably be dead anyway. Which, says my inner sceptic, is more or less what the alarmists are banking on.
Beyond that, I don't do much of anything. There hasn't actually been any climate change around my parts yet, so there nothing to adjust my behaviour to.
Really, you are disgusting. It is like you are trying to convince yourself you don't have to apologize for restricting my liberties and stealing my money.
I'm a liberal, I think we should do this.
Naturally, I assume all republicans think the opposite.
No debate necessary.
Literally everyone in America thinks 50% of the country are their enemy.
2 party system ladies and gentlemen.
I think international migration and climate refugees may be only one of many serious problems.
The rise of the oceans might make cities like Miami and New York uninhabitable. Dealing with moving everything inland (or whatever the solution is) will be unbelievably expensive. No, it won't cause the absolute catastrophe that will take place in 3rd-world nations but it'll still be pretty bad.
And in such a globalized world, it'll surely affect the global economy. All international markets will be negatively affected if they have to deal with billions of people being displaced, with natural disasters, etc.
This is extremely, extremely unlikely.
Or if there has been, it has been extremely, extremely imperceptible.
It doesn't rain more, it doesn't rain less, it isn't hotter, it isn't colder, the flora or fauna hasn't been affected beyond the introduction of a new breed of butterfly or two, and so on. There may be some statistical differences over the last decades, but nothing that is discernible to the human eye, so to speak.
You not noticing things is not the same as there not being effects. In much of Europe, particularly northern Europe, there have been major changes in timing of insect emergence, plant flowering, etc. This has also had major effects on migrating birds.
No, but me not having to adjust my behaviour in any way, is the same as me not having to adjust my behaviour in any way. Which was the gist of my point.
On a side note, and without drawing any conclusions, don't get me started on the data submitted by zoologists/botanists etc. I've personally dealt with them on a number of occasions, and they base much of their findings on anecdotal evidence. Last fall I interviewed a zoologist working for my local municipality, who was utterly convinced squirrels no longer existed outside of city parks and rec areas (the forests being cut down and replanted too often for squirrels to establish themselves, he said). Needless to say, squirrels are everywhere. Including on my parents tract of land in the countryside, which has been used for forestry for the last hundred years. Ants were also extinct outside of primary forest, apparently.
My impression is they are basically left to do their work completely without scrutiny, since no-one can really be bothered to care about what they do. A small group of oddballs making huge conclusions, basically.
So you talked to one person, a municipal employee apparently, and that invalidates research. Cool story.