How do you deal with the fact of climate change/greenhouse effect?

[sloppypie]

...that would be becuase the image i posted showed temperature and not co2

so i'm not sure what you thought you were talking about, snarky asshole

that's b/c you quoted me and said "that graph" which meant you were talking about my graph. i'm sorry that you have the writing skills of a 4 year old - next time be more clear.

also, your graph is incorrect in failing to show the spike in temperature and acts as though it's rounding off.

far more indicative of what global temperatures look like and what a serious issue this is.

edit: also, i'm not sure what the purpose is of trying to distort this issue. the science community is redundantly clear on this issue - yet we have all these internet scientists spending a bizarre amount of energy trying to do mental gymnastics around it. to each their own i guess, but i'll listen to scientists on this issue rather than an internet detective with a masters degree in horseshit.

 

[Hallelujah]

What does that have to do with man made pollution.

Out of curisotiy.

It means our contribution is minimal and the earth can easily handle whatever happens. Just one volcano could blot out the sun and kill the planet. Even if we launched all nuclear weapons we could not achieve this.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

It means our contribution is minimal and the earth can easily handle whatever happens. Just one volcano could blot out the sun and kill the planet. Even if we launched all nuclear weapons we could not achieve this.

Once again what does a volcano have to do with humans polluting the earth.

Personally your post is extremely dumb.

"Wel a meteor can hit the earf and we nos be here nos more"

So that means we should pollute the fuck outta he earth.

I don't expect any hint else from someone with a screen name HALLELUJAH

 

[Hallelujah]

Once again what does a volcano have to do with humans polluting the earth.

Personally your post is extremely dumb.

"Wel a meteor can hit the earf and we nos be here nos more"

So that means we should pollute the fuck outta he earth.

I don't expect any hint else from someone with a screen name HALLELUJAH

haha umad and emotional, good prole. The point is it's a scam. Al Gore is not going to sell his mansion or cease flying to Aspen. Do tell how many of Al Gore's famous predictions have turned out to be true?

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

haha umad and emotional, good prole. The point is it's a scam. Al Gore is not going to sell his mansion or cease flying to Aspen. Do tell how many of Al Gore's famous predictions have turned out to be true?

Yes you're correct 98% of earths scientists are in Gores pockets.

He's spent trillions and gotten back nothing yet.

Pretty good conspiracy

 

[CauseImbetta]

Lets all become Jesus freaks and deny any of this stuff...ironically something Jesus wouldn't have done but who cares..we are Americans and we are dumb.

 

[Hallelujah]

Yes you're correct 98% of earths scientists are in Gores pockets.

He's spent trillions and gotten back nothing yet.

Pretty good conspiracy

I repeat which of Al Gore's predictions have come true? This whole entire man made global warming climate change bullshit stems from that stupid fucking Al Gore movie.

 

[UpaLoompa]

I repeat which of Al Gore's predictions have come true? This whole entire man made global warming climate change bullshit stems from that stupid fucking Al Gore movie.

Or, you know, scientific discussion and research going back to the 70's.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

Or, you know, scientific discussion and research going back to the 70's.

What's funny is if you go back and watch a specific episode of Cheers from the 1980s they talk about climate change.

Fast forward a few more years to the early 1990s they bring up climate change in an episode of Frasier.


I'll try and post the episodes if and when I find them again.

 

[My Spot]

haha umad and emotional, good prole. The point is it's a scam. Al Gore is not going to sell his mansion or cease flying to Aspen. Do tell how many of Al Gore's famous predictions have turned out to be true?

His gimmick has really been slacking lately.

 

[genecop]

Don't really understand why this topic was ever turned into a political point, just silly people trying to have opposing views and enjoying the creation of sides...The Op is just as closed minded as the people he accuses of burying heads in sand..his head is also buried, just in a different sand pile. The bottom line, no one really knows the final outcome of any of this, unless you think your Nostrodomus..What will be, will be. Live your life well, love , laugh and live..if you need to have opinions and causes, pick your spots carefully..or not.

 

[Throttlehead]

It means our contribution is minimal and the earth can easily handle whatever happens. Just one volcano could blot out the sun and kill the planet. Even if we launched all nuclear weapons we could not achieve this.

From this site: https://www.skepticalscience.com/volcanoes-and-global-warming.htm
The solid Earth contains a huge quantity of carbon, far more than scientists estimate is present in the atmosphere or oceans. As an important part of the global carbon cycle, some of this carbon is slowly released from the rocks in the form of carbon dioxide, through vents at volcanoes and hot springs. Published reviews of the scientific literature by Mörner and Etiope (2002) and Kerrick (2001) report a minimum-maximum range of emission of 65 to 319 million tonnes of CO2 per year. Counter claims that volcanoes, especially submarine volcanoes, produce vastly greater amounts of CO2 than these estimates are not supported by any papers published by the scientists who study the subject.

The burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use results in the emission into the atmosphere of approximately 30 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide per year worldwide, according to the EIA. The fossil fuels emissions numbers are about 100 times bigger than even the maximum estimated volcanic CO2 fluxes. Our understanding of volcanic discharges would have to be shown to be very mistaken before volcanic CO2 discharges could be considered anything but a bit player in contributing to the recent changes observed in the concentration of CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere.



Another article.

Read it! http://www.earthmagazine.org/articl...pogenic-carbon-dioxide-missing-science?page=1

 

[Throttlehead]

So 95% (or more) of the world's scientists believe that humans have a large input to global warming, and every other country in the world also believes global warming is real. Why is it that only conservatives in USA and Canada don't believe it?

Because Al Gore and Obama ?

 

[sloppypie]

So 95% (or more) of the world's scientists believe that humans have a large input to global warming, and every other country in the world also believes global warming is real. Why is it that only conservatives in USA and Canada don't believe it?

Because Al Gore and Obama ?

i remember studying this issue back in the 90s and early 2000s. the big deal at the time was how to deal with it; i don't recall any republicans saying it was fake or a hoax, they were proposing cap and trade.

then there was the kyoto protocol, which bush dumped the second he got into office on the premise it would hurt the economy too much. then 9/11 happened and we totally forgot about doing anything about it.

then republicans really went awol when gore released an inconvenient truth in 2006. rather than spreading the issue, gore's movie ended up fueling republican dogma on how it's all part of a leftist agenda to tax and take over america. which then morphed into the whole thing being a hoax.

it really just snowballed from there. internet forums, bloggers, charlatan radio show hosts (rush limbaugh said NASA was part of a liberal agenda to fake data on CO2 levels), conspiracy theorists, etc. when future generations look back on this, i can only imagine how stupid we are going to look. assuming we recover from this anti-intellectualism movement - maybe we'll just keep getting dumber instead.

 

[Halge]

So you talked to one person, a municipal employee apparently, and that invalidates research. Cool story.

I specifically wrote "without drawing any conclusions".
I specifically wrote that.
Right at the beginning of the spoiler piece.

 

[oldshadow]

Yes there is climate change.

The earth has natural cycles and the climate is affected by many things.

Man does have some effect on the climate the amount of effect is up for debate. So if the earth was say in a cooling period and man was actually slowing it down then is that good or bad and how much of an effect are we having. The same as if we are in a warming cycle. What is our effect.

The bottom line is it's better to reduce our pollution and any harm we are doing.

However climate change for a large section has become a money making industry and some with blinders refuse to see the shit they are being sold.

Lets take the pollution required to make a wind turbine.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/mos...er-experiment-Pollution-disastrous-scale.html

The answer is complicated but the start is producing cleaner products that the people want to buy because they like them and want them.

It will never work on a large scale to try and guilt people into spending more money for a inferior product.

The auto industry has made great strides in cleaning up and can continue in that direction but its and product and you have to still sell it.

 

[SODACKER]

i remember studying this issue back in the 90s and early 2000s. the big deal at the time was how to deal with it; i don't recall any republicans saying it was fake or a hoax, they were proposing cap and trade.

then there was the kyoto protocol, which bush dumped the second he got into office on the premise it would hurt the economy too much. then 9/11 happened and we totally forgot about doing anything about it.

then republicans really went awol when gore released an inconvenient truth in 2006. rather than spreading the issue, gore's movie ended up fueling republican dogma on how it's all part of a leftist agenda to tax and take over america. which then morphed into the whole thing being a hoax.

it really just snowballed from there. internet forums, bloggers, charlatan radio show hosts (rush limbaugh said NASA was part of a liberal agenda to fake data on CO2 levels), conspiracy theorists, etc. when future generations look back on this, i can only imagine how stupid we are going to look. assuming we recover from this anti-intellectualism movement - maybe we'll just keep getting dumber instead.

Posts like this do more harm than good and are the reason we have this debate. People having been alarmist about global warming since the late 80s and using it to sell papers and push politcal agendas. Seems to me it got to a point where countries werent getting wiped off the map and people actually started coming skeptical of it. Apparently that is an anti intellectual movement, when I would categorize it more as the era of critical thinking. Seeing is believing right, and after so many false prophecy or just straight lies used for purposes other than helping the planet people begin getting wise to it.

 

[Hallelujah]

From this site: https://www.skepticalscience.com/volcanoes-and-global-warming.htm
The solid Earth contains a huge quantity of carbon, far more than scientists estimate is present in the atmosphere or oceans. As an important part of the global carbon cycle, some of this carbon is slowly released from the rocks in the form of carbon dioxide, through vents at volcanoes and hot springs. Published reviews of the scientific literature by Mörner and Etiope (2002) and Kerrick (2001) report a minimum-maximum range of emission of 65 to 319 million tonnes of CO2 per year. Counter claims that volcanoes, especially submarine volcanoes, produce vastly greater amounts of CO2 than these estimates are not supported by any papers published by the scientists who study the subject.

The burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use results in the emission into the atmosphere of approximately 30 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide per year worldwide, according to the EIA. The fossil fuels emissions numbers are about 100 times bigger than even the maximum estimated volcanic CO2 fluxes. Our understanding of volcanic discharges would have to be shown to be very mistaken before volcanic CO2 discharges could be considered anything but a bit player in contributing to the recent changes observed in the concentration of CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere.



Another article.

Read it! http://www.earthmagazine.org/articl...pogenic-carbon-dioxide-missing-science?page=1

 

[Hallelujah]

Or, you know, scientific discussion and research going back to the 70's.

In the 70's the scam was global cooling lmao you people will believe anything.

 

[Forkfoot]

All this talk about the seventies and eighties. Scientists were predicting that human emissions could cause global warming in the 1800s. But they were probably in Al Gore's pocket, too.