Results 1,376 to 1,400 of 3644
-
09-12-2019, 07:19 PM #1376
I read in another TGR thread that the earth is flat, why caint we all just move to the shady side?
I also think we need PG on this problem.watch out for snakes
-
09-12-2019, 07:42 PM #1377Funky But Chic
- Join Date
- Sep 2001
- Location
- The Cone of Uncertainty
- Posts
- 49,306
-
09-12-2019, 07:56 PM #1378Forum Cross Pollinator, gratuitously strident
-
09-12-2019, 09:14 PM #1379
Yo ron, we all see through your bullshit so why don't you just fuck off already?
I put him on ignore btw.
Here's something fun about how the warming arctic is not a good situation despite any new shipping lanes that might open up
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/2019...arctic-on-fire
Phil is a friend of mine and posted some additional comments on twitter here
https://twitter.com/PhilipHiguera/st...66256861941760
-
09-12-2019, 09:14 PM #1380Banned
- Join Date
- Aug 2019
- Posts
- 1,084
I guess I should have known I would get accused of cherry picking. You know the phrase, "97% of scientists agree global warming is real and man made?" Notice how they say 'scientists,' not 'climate scientists'? So it's fair to say this study says that 52% of scientists agree that global warming is real and mostly man made.
Anyway, have it your way. 78% of climate scientists believe climate change is happening and mostly caused by human. That's a far cry from 97%. Unfortunately none of these surveys ask the question of how dangerous global warming is.
I'm beating a dead horse here, but how many times do I need to show you that there has been no increase in drought, flooding, and desertification? Did you not see the link in the post you quoted? The earth is greening.
-
09-12-2019, 09:26 PM #1381
The dead horse is climate change denial. Stop beating it. Every stat and figure you present is wrong and a lie. Saying it over and over again does not make it true.
-
09-12-2019, 09:29 PM #1382Banned
- Join Date
- Aug 2019
- Posts
- 1,084
Wow, you posted something that supports my position. From the Forbes article, we can say something like 80-90% of scientists agree that humans are causing global warming. Just about everyone on here would call me a denier and I support the position that humans are causing global warming. These surveys are missing the most important question which is, how dangerous is this warming?
I don't know why you posted the Scientific American article about the Cook paper. I've already posted multiple times about it being garbage:
https://www.theguardian.com/environm...global-warming
"Most of the papers they studied are not about climate change and its causes, but many were taken as evidence nonetheless. Papers on carbon taxes naturally assume that carbon dioxide emissions cause global warming – but assumptions are not conclusions. Cook’s claim of an increasing consensus over time is entirely due to an increase of the number of irrelevant papers that Cook and co mistook for evidence."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesta.../#3bfa119b485d
"The question Cook and his alarmist colleagues surveyed was simply whether humans have caused some global warming. The question is meaningless regarding the global warming debate because most skeptics as well as most alarmists believe humans have caused some global warming. The issue of contention dividing alarmists and skeptics is whether humans are causing global warming of such negative severity as to constitute a crisis demanding concerted action. Either through idiocy, ignorance, or both, global warming alarmists and the liberal media have been reporting that the Cook study shows a 97 percent consensus that humans are causing a global warming crisis. However, that was clearly not the question surveyed."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2.../#2d8a131e205a
"My friend Will Happer believes that humans do affect the climate, particularly in cities where concrete and energy use cause what is called the “urban heat island effect.” So he would be included in the 97% who believe that humans affect climate, even though he is usually included among the more intense skeptics of the IPCC. He also feels that humans cause a small amount of global warming (he isn’t convinced it is as large as 1 degree), but he does not think it is heading towards a disaster; he has concluded that the increase in carbon dioxide is good for food production, and has helped mitigate global hunger. Yet he would be included in the 97%."
-
09-12-2019, 09:30 PM #1383
-
09-12-2019, 09:33 PM #1384
Did you read what I posted earlier?
And what is this, then?
https://www.un.org/en/events/deserti...de/value.shtml
You truly are like a flat-earther.
You have a profound inability to not see the Big Picture.
You are ‘Bogged Down In The Details’Forum Cross Pollinator, gratuitously strident
-
09-12-2019, 09:42 PM #1385
September 5, 2019
"The world’s vast oceans, glacial ice sheets and northern permafrost are poised to unleash disaster, including drought, floods, hunger and destruction, unless dramatic action is taken against human-caused carbon pollution and climate change, warns a leaked draft of a major U.N. report."
The Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (SROCC) sounds alarm bells over declines in fish stocks, plus “a hundred-fold or more increase in the damages caused by superstorms, and hundreds of millions of people displaced by rising seas,” according to news agency Agence France-Presse (AFP), which obtained a copy of the 900-page draft report.
Freshwater supplies for billions of people, including the world’s mountain dwellers, will be hit by melting glaciers that will first release far too much water, and then not enough, according to the report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a scientific body of the U.N. mandated to report the state of climate change. Melting permafrost in northern regions will also release billions of tons of carbon, adding to global warming, reports AFP, citing the IPCC report.
...
For the IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (SROCC), more than 100 scientists from over 30 countries have been assessing the latest knowledge about the physical science basis and impacts of climate change on ocean, coastal, polar and mountain ecosystems, as well as the human communities that depend on them. Their vulnerabilities as well as adaptation capacities are also evaluated.
-
09-12-2019, 09:52 PM #1386
What blows me away about dueche's like rj is, anything we do to limit co2, will be less pollution, and less pollution is good, even if it costs more. So do we study this for another 20 years, then it's even harder to implement and more expensive. For a bunch of conservatives, they act like hypocrites
-
09-12-2019, 10:05 PM #1387
if only pollutants were like e-cigs!
-
09-12-2019, 11:19 PM #1388
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...l-gas-drilling
Trump opens entire 1.6 million acre protected Alaskan Arctic refuge to oil drillers
Parts of BLM’s [Bureau of Land Management] final statement suggest – contrary to evidence – that the current rapid heating of the earth is cyclical rather than human-made.
“Much attention in recent decades has focused on the potential climate change effects of GHGs [greenhouse gasses], especially carbon dioxide (CO2), which has been increasing in concentration in the global atmosphere since the end of the last ice age,” the document said.
Global scientists, however, have concluded that human actions, including burning fossil fuels, are the primary driver of the 1C temperature increase observed since industrialization.Last edited by reckless toboggan; 09-12-2019 at 11:40 PM.
-
09-13-2019, 12:24 AM #1389
-
09-13-2019, 05:50 AM #1390
-
09-13-2019, 09:42 AM #1391Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Posts
- 9,824
-
09-13-2019, 10:51 AM #1392Banned
- Join Date
- Aug 2019
- Posts
- 1,084
What post are you referencing from earlier?
The land degradation stats have virtually nothing to do with global warming. It is largely the result of agricultural practices: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_degradation
I view land degradation/top soil loss as a massive overlooked threat to human civilization. I'm a big proponent of regenerative agriculture. Imagine that, a climate denier who is into regenerative agriculture.
-
09-13-2019, 10:56 AM #1393Banned
- Join Date
- Aug 2019
- Posts
- 1,084
Last edited by ron johnson; 09-13-2019 at 11:40 AM.
-
09-13-2019, 11:08 AM #1394
-
09-13-2019, 11:15 AM #1395Banned
- Join Date
- Aug 2019
- Posts
- 1,084
I'm all for less pollution, but it's not as simple as you make it sound. Significantly increasing the price of energy will have a profound impact on society. Proponents of 100% non carbon renewable plans seem to have no understanding of economics. Increased energy prices will lead to more poverty, wealth inequality, civil unrest, etc. Look at France's yellow vests movement. It's motivated by rising fuel prices and a high cost of living, and those prices are nothing compared to what will happen under GND type plans. I think these government mandated energy plans are very dangerous for a county already crippled in debt.
If you, your family, or your friends are unemployed and struggling to feed themselves the last thing you are going to care about is pollution and CO2 levels.
-
09-13-2019, 11:16 AM #1396
what if we all quit posting, would rj go on like ggs does, talking to himself, or will the "challenge" be gone and he'll stop?
-
09-13-2019, 11:20 AM #1397Banned
- Join Date
- Aug 2019
- Posts
- 1,084
-
09-13-2019, 11:21 AM #1398Banned
- Join Date
- Aug 2019
- Posts
- 1,084
-
09-13-2019, 11:22 AM #1399
"what's the velocity of an unladen swallow?"
Forum Cross Pollinator, gratuitously strident
-
09-13-2019, 11:24 AM #1400Banned
- Join Date
- Aug 2019
- Posts
- 1,084
Bookmarks