• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

IPCC Report: Trouble Ahead

Media_Truth said:
And this backs up your claim - "Not much warming"? From 1980 to 2015 --- looks like a fairly steady ramp upwards. 17 of the 18 warmest years since 2000. Really? "Not much warming"?
Click to expand...
Once again warming and warmest, are not the same measurement.
 
BrainNebula said:
Are you telling me that climate scientists get funded by showing global warming is not a serious threat to humanity?
Click to expand...

Oh. You don’t even know how SCIENCE works, much less funding.

Don’t know how intensive paleoclimate data in a single area, or measurement of oceanic temperature or coral stability results in a ‘threat to humanity’ to get showered with money.
 
Threegoofs said:
Oh. You don’t even know how SCIENCE works, much less funding.

Don’t know how intensive paleoclimate data in a single area, or measurement of oceanic temperature or coral stability results in a ‘threat to humanity’ to get showered with money.
Click to expand...

None of those individually show the claims scientist make about global warming. We're talking about climate scientists here, and their claims that humanity is to be exterminated if we don't deal with this issue and fast. Nothing about paleoclimate data in a single area, measurement of oceanic temperature, or coral stability tells us that we will be beyond repair by 2050. Nothing about those tells us that the only way to solve the problem is through massive solar and wind energy, too. In fact, I'd go as far to say that we don't need wind energy at all to solve global warming, and we certainly won't be beyond repair by 2050. The recent NCA found that by 2100, the USA's GDP would be harmed by 10%. Do you realize how little a 10% loss is over the course of 80 years?
 
BrainNebula said:
None of those individually show the claims scientist make about global warming. We're talking about climate scientists here, and their claims that humanity is to be exterminated if we don't deal with this issue and fast. Nothing about paleoclimate data in a single area, measurement of oceanic temperature, or coral stability tells us that we will be beyond repair by 2050. Nothing about those tells us that the only way to solve the problem is through massive solar and wind energy, too. In fact, I'd go as far to say that we don't need wind energy at all to solve global warming, and we certainly won't be beyond repair by 2050. The recent NCA found that by 2100, the USA's GDP would be harmed by 10%. Do you realize how little a 10% loss is over the course of 80 years?
Click to expand...

I guess when you get called out on not knowing what you’re talking about, just change the subject to another thing you dont understand.
 
Threegoofs said:
I guess when you get called out on not knowing what you’re talking about, just change the subject to another thing you dont understand.
Click to expand...

Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black...
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
You didn't read anything or watch the video. Biochar is about more than just carbon sequestration.
And I said "decent" soil.
Click to expand...

I usually don't waste my time on propaganda. You said soil is not a renewable resource. It is. Soil is continuously made. Putting carbon dioxide into soil doesn't do anything.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Cornucopeans? There's a lot of them out there.
Robert Rapier, globally acclaimed petroleum, nat gas and renewables expert, has had a ten thousand dollar bet going for over a decade to anyone who can demonstrate an abiotic petroleum well that can consistently produce twelve thousand barrels a day for over two years.

Twelve thousand is chicken feed, by the way.


And, it's not that abiotic oil is impossible, reports say that Titan, one of Saturn's moons, might just be mostly MADE OF abiotic oil.
But here on Earth, unless you can drill down twenty miles or so below the mantle, you're not going to find any.

Cornucopeans generally think that God blessed the Earth with continually replenishing supplies of abiotic oil.
Click to expand...

Oil comes closest to the surface generally near the edges of tectonic places, especially where spreading action is taking place. I am not talking about God. I am talking about chemistry.
 
Northern Light said:
You just have to look at local weather patterns everywhere to know that the report is true. More and stronger hurricanes.
Click to expand...
Neither the frequency of storms nor their intensity has increased. See the historic Natl Hurricane Center raw data.
Northern Light said:
Recording breaking temperatures.
Click to expand...
Normal.
Northern Light said:
Flooding.
Click to expand...
Normal.
Northern Light said:
Severe drought in other areas.
Click to expand...
Normal.
Northern Light said:
I don't really care what the ignorant or denialists think. The government knows the truth, as do the vast majority of scientists.
Click to expand...
The vast majority of scientists are government scientists. There is no 'global warming'. No one has been able to explain the 'greenhouse effect' without violating the 1st or 2nd laws of thermodynamics or the Stefan-Boltzmann law.
Northern Light said:
However, if governments keep pushing the reckless capitalism model without factoring in environmental costs, we are doomed. Money isn't real. Nature is.
Click to expand...

Money is real. So is nature. Capitalism per se is not destructive to either nature or science. Socialism is far more destructive to nature. Examples are China, the USSR (especially during it's days of communism), NAZI Germany, and even Cuba.
The United States is very clean compared to any of these other nations.

Good ole' capitalism did that.

It's capitalism that created the EGR system on cars, severely reducing the smog problem. It's capitalism that built instrumentation for sewage treatment plants, so they can achieve tertiary treatment without the use of sand (the effluent from such plants is potable water!). It's capitalism that created the computer chips that allow aircraft, cars, ships, and trains to burn fuel far more efficiently than ever before (the FADEC engine). It's capitalism that puts an electronic map in your car along with your position on it to make getting lost (and inefficiently driving around lost) much less of a problem. It's capitalism that created the communications systems we have today so that we can monitor the conditions on some remote river head somewhere out there in the wilderness from the comfort of our offices. It's capitalism that built every city, town, village, etc. in the United States and brought civilization out of the wilderness. It's capitalism that feeds you ever day, provides clean water every day, gives you a place to flush your toilet into, and takes your trash and either recycles it or places it in a clean landfill that later turns into a park or a golf course.

I'll take capitalism any day.
 
CanadaJohn said:
As a Canadian, living in a country where we are a net negative when it comes to CO2 contributions to climate change, I'm one of millions who believe the science and yet strongly oppose the remedies proposed. While the three largest net contributors to man made climate change are allowed to skate by, their economies suffering no ill effects, we are expected to reduce our lifestyle and wealth while pouring money into government coffers to be distributed elsewhere around the world. The majority of us now say **** that. We'll continue to do our individual parts in environmentally friendly ways, but we refuse governments taxing us to death to pay for inefficient alternatives that are doing virtually nothing to address the global causes.
Click to expand...

If it makes you feel better to 'contribute' on your own, do so. At least you are discovering the evil of forcing people to do so.

If it's any comfort to you, please realize that CO2 is not capable of warming the Earth. You really don't have to worry about it.

Yes, CO2 does absorb some frequencies of light emitted by the Earth's surface. Emitting that light cools the Earth's surface. Like the hot land heating the cooler air by conductive heating, the CO2 absorption is just another way of hot land heating cooler air. That cooler air cannot in turn heat the already hotter land, either by conduction or by radiance.
 
Northern Light said:
You just have to look at local weather patterns everywhere to know that the report is true. More and stronger hurricanes. Recording breaking temperatures. Flooding. Severe drought in other areas.

I don't really care what the ignorant or denialists think. The government knows the truth, as do the vast majority of scientists. However, if governments keep pushing the reckless capitalism model without factoring in environmental costs, we are doomed. Money isn't real. Nature is.
Click to expand...

This is the chicken little syndrome, "Stronger hurricanes" I hate to break it to you but the top 25 hurricanes to ever hit the US, only Katrina makes it on the list for this century (Katrina 2005) all the rest happened prior to 2000.
" Flooding" the worst floods in US history, all of them prior to 1977.
" Drought" the worst droughts in US history we all before the 1980's
So have fun with that.
 
Terryj said:
This is the chicken little syndrome, "Stronger hurricanes" I hate to break it to you but the top 25 hurricanes to ever hit the US, only Katrina makes it on the list for this century (Katrina 2005) all the rest happened prior to 2000.
" Flooding" the worst floods in US history, all of them prior to 1977.
" Drought" the worst droughts in US history we all before the 1980's
So have fun with that.
Click to expand...

Boom! Chukka-lukka-lukka!
 
Jack Hays said:
Yes, he did, multiple times.
Regardless, the problem I now face is that Ryan Maue's data are in such demand they are now only available via subscription service.
Click to expand...

You must remove your post.

DP rules demand it.

Not sure what rules, since 9 and 9(a) don’t apply, but I have it on good authority that posting a ‘graph’ without a link is a shameful event.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom