What will it take to convince you of climate change?

[Cali]

I'm not here to argue one way or the other...

Clearly you are.

just wondering how much evidence you need to be convinced A) climate change is (has been) happening

I addressed A and you had a fit

and B) it was caused by human activity.

I acknowledged B, I believe we contribute, and you still had a condescending attitude with personal, smart ass remarks. Claims had been made decades ago that predicted Earth's death would have already occurred, so how do we know today's claims are accurate? That's my reference to "I also believe people have been contributing to recent change, but how much, who knows." I don't know how much. I do believe people are a cancer to this world though.

I'm not here to argue one way or the other...

You sure about that?

 

[Gabe]

Clearly you are.



I addressed A and you had a fit



I acknowledged B, I believe we contribute, and you still had a condescending attitude with personal, smart ass remarks. Claims had been made decades ago that predicted Earth's death would have already occurred, so how do we know today's claims are accurate? That's my reference to "I also believe people have been contributing to recent change, but how much, who knows." I don't know how much. I do believe people are a cancer to this world though.



You sure about that?

Yes I am. I didn't start this thread to argue one way or the other, but that doesn't mean I can't express my opinion.

All the doubt in your responses ("how do we know?" "I don't know how much") despite the billions of data points pointing to human-caused climate change make it pretty clear that you don't want to believe it's true.

 

[Cali]

"I also believe people have been contributing to recent change"

I guess that's too difficult for you to understand

 

[Gabe]

"I also believe people have been contributing to recent change"

I guess that's too difficult for you to understand

You leave it open to doubt--is it 1% or 100%? You're saying, "yes, humans have an impact but it could be minimal, nothing we can do anything about. Who knows?" It's a nihilistic "out" that excuses us from any personal responsibility. I guess that's the pee in my Wheaties.

Roll coal!

 

[Cali]

You leave it open to doubt--is it 1% or 100%? You're saying, "yes, humans have an impact but it could be minimal, nothing we can do anything about. Who knows?" It's a nihilistic "out" that excuses us from any personal responsibility. I guess that's the pee in my Wheaties.

Roll coal!

Is that what I said? Nope, not at all. Of course we can get better, and we should. We also need other countries like China and India to get better. Global issue, not just a US issue.

BTW, I hate that rolling coal BS from some diesels

 

[Gabe]

Is that what I said? Nope, not at all. Of course we can get better, and we should. We also need other countries like China and India to get better. Global issue, not just a US issue.

BTW, I hate that rolling coal BS from some diesels

Then why all the reticence to get on board the train?

 

[AbsolutEnduser]

..attitude with personal, smart ass remarks.

who pissed in your Wheaties?

BTW:
https://www.wired.com/story/russias-laptev-sea-should-have-started-to-freeze-by-now/
"Uh-Oh. Russia's Laptev Sea Should Have Started to Freeze by Now"

Sorry for this inconvenient data....

The In-depth Story Behind a Climate Fraud
..

You gotta know--if it's on youtube--even if contrary to what you're seeing, then it must be true..

 

[Gabe]

BTW:
https://www.wired.com/story/russias-laptev-sea-should-have-started-to-freeze-by-now/
"Uh-Oh. Russia's Laptev Sea Should Have Started to Freeze by Now"

Stefan Hendricks, a sea ice physics specialist at the Alfred Wegener Institute, said the sea ice trends are grim but not surprising. “It is more frustrating than shocking. This has been forecast for a long time, but there has been little substantial response by decisionmakers.”

I'm thinking the Russians are LOVING climate change...Canadians, too. Suddenly, Putin will have a year-round open-ocean port, as well as a major percentage of the world's fresh water supply, as well as millions more acres of cultivatable land. Meanwhile, its enemies (ie the rest of the world) are all dealing with drought, storms, famines, wildfires and so on.

I don't know what is going to happen in the next 50 yerars, but I feel certain about one thing: hockey will become much more popular.

 

[brichter]

Claims had been made decades ago that predicted Earth's death would have already occurred, so how do we know today's claims are accurate?

Interestingly enough, the climate scientists figured out back in the late 60s-early 70s that the hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions from vehicles due to incomplete combustion and the inefficiency of the internal combustion engine were leading to global cooling.

In response to that, we did increase fuel efficiency, and we also increased the level of combustion to clean up the tail pipe emissions of HC and CO. Unfortunately, also adding as many more cars & trucks to the road as we did, means the pendulum is now swingIng in the opposite direction.

It's high school chemistry; HC + CO + 02, oxidizing completely in a catalytic converter, equals CO2 and H2O.

 

[Eldritch]

You leave it open to doubt--is it 1% or 100%? You're saying, "yes, humans have an impact but it could be minimal, nothing we can do anything about. Who knows?" It's a nihilistic "out" that excuses us from any personal responsibility. I guess that's the pee in my Wheaties.

Roll coal!

[youtube]2WOx4U3sCuQ[/youtube]

 

[nebulous]

Al Gore said Florida would be half submerged by now. Miami Beach is still just a beach...

 

[mikev]

almost like people have noticed and tried to change things.

odd.

 

[m0t0_ryder]

Trying to pull that rabbit out the hat is going to be especially tough in an area that has been literally on fire the past few years as one small example.

And it looks like we're heading into yet another drought! arty

So are you implying that you agree with the 97% Consensus?

Note here: I am not agreeing nor disagreeing with the Climate Change topic.
I am challenging the abnormally high degree of alleged "scientific consensus" that seems to be reported by agenda driven individuals.

Here's a TEDx presentation that also shows how the 97% consensus is erroneous... with research data. They actually broke down several prominent AGW (Anthropological Global Warming) reports (claiming 97% consensus) to show how those statistical numbers were (incorrectly) reached.

[youtube]hJujb-VnaCM[/youtube]

I challenge everybody to watch this video and tell me where it is incorrect.
It did introduce me to a new word... Statisticulation. I like it.

And as for using Youtube to find info... It sure has more options/diversity/information/data than the MSM provides.
Yeah, it may be a "controlled" database of info (which aren't?), but it's better in scope than I can find elsewhere.

I also was inclined to follow the section of the above video to the Asch Conformity Experiment which I believe has a major role in guiding public belief in not only AGW but many arenas. (note: longest URL I've seen in a long time)
This was a very interesting read.

 

[Gabe]

So are you implying that you agree with the 97% Consensus?

Note here: I am not agreeing nor disagreeing with the Climate Change topic.
I am challenging the abnormally high degree of alleged "scientific consensus" that seems to be reported by agenda driven individuals.

Here's a TEDx presentation that also shows how the 97% consensus is erroneous... with research data. They actually broke down several prominent AGW (Anthropological Global Warming) reports (claiming 97% consensus) to show how those statistical numbers were (incorrectly) reached.

[youtube]hJujb-VnaCM[/youtube]

I challenge everybody to watch this video and tell me where it is incorrect.
It did introduce me to a new word... Statisticulation. I like it.

And as for using Youtube to find info... It sure has more options/diversity/information/data than the MSM provides.
Yeah, it may be a "controlled" database of info (which aren't?), but it's better in scope than I can find elsewhere.

I also was inclined to follow the section of the above video to the Asch Conformity Experiment which I believe has a major role in guiding public belief in not only AGW but many arenas. (note: longest URL I've seen in a long time)
This was a very interesting read.

Lulz at being critical of “agenda-driven individuals” while uncritically gushing about how awesome a propaganda video from a petro-dollar-fueled non-profit.

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Friends_of_Science

 

[mean dad]

 

[Karbon]

Lulz at being critical of “agenda-driven individuals” while uncritically gushing about how awesome a propaganda video from a petro-dollar-fueled non-profit.

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Friends_of_Science

Lol it seems damn near every one of those "no climate change" videos which attack the science and/or consensus are fucking garbage shill videos and have been debunked in some way.

 

[Mike95060]

I strongly suggest everyone watch

"Merchants of Doubt"

[youtube]j8ii9zGFDtc[/youtube]

 

[tuxumino]

cus in a way it's about this

[youtube]27ZiixkruCY[/youtube]

 

[ctwo]

We are doomed as a species. There is no way we will reverse our course in time, (before terminally affecting the global ecosystem,) barring some major catastrophic event.

From the NASA article posted earlier.

The effects of global warming on the timescale of human lifetimes are irreversible, are happening now and will continue to worsen in decades to come:

“The removal of human-emitted CO2 from the atmosphere by natural processes will take a few hundred thousand years (high confidence). Depending on the RCP scenario considered, about 15 to 40% of emitted CO2 will remain in the atmosphere longer than 1,000 years. This very long time required by sinks to remove anthropogenic CO2 makes climate change caused by elevated CO2 irreversible on human time scale. {Box 6.1}”

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter06_FINAL.pdf

("how do we know?" "I don't know how much") despite the billions of data points pointing to human-caused climate change make it pretty clear that you don't want to believe it's true.

And then there is this reconstructed data.

 

[Gabe]

Al Gore said Florida would be half submerged by now. Miami Beach is still just a beach...

How underwater do you need it to be? Arguably, he's kinda right.

https://www.thenation.com/article/environment/florida-flooding-miami/

Miami is not viewing climate change just as a future threat; its effects are already part of daily life. Florida, former swampland that is just above sea level, is the US state at greatest risk from increasingly regular floods. The sea is rising fast, and “king tides,” huge surges in autumn, are especially destructive. Drain outlets are below high-tide level during the surges, so salt water enters the drainage system and bubbles up from storm drains, submerging roads and underground parking lots for days. In 2016 a photograph of an octopus washed up in a Miami Beach car park gained widespread attention. This recent surge phenomenon is called “sunny day flooding,” because it happens even when there is no rain. In some parts of the Florida Keys, the archipelago south of Miami, the 2019 floods lasted an unprecedented 90 days.

Very confused octopus in Miami parking garage, 2016