• 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!

The drought across Europe is drying up rivers, killing fish and shriveling crops

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
57,296
Reaction score
18,999
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
“There has been no significant rainfall for almost two months in Western, Central and Southern Europe. And the dry period is expected to continue in what experts say could be the worst drought in 500 years

Climate change is exacerbating conditions as hotter temperatures speed up evaporation, thirsty plants take in more moisture and reduced snowfall in the winter limits supplies of fresh water available for irrigation in the summer. Europe isn't alone in the crisis, with drought conditions also reported in East Africa, the western United States and northern Mexico.”


Nah, there’s no global warming.
Another predictable farce. Every time something uncommon happens, blame AGW. You guys have cried wolf so many times, nobody believe s you.

The Danube river is low, and we apparently have the worse drought since 1840. Maybe this is an approximate 200 years natural cycle.

The Thames, lowest since what? 1935?

These two rives are supplying water to lots of agriculture and people. The doughts are no worse than historical droughts, except now the rivers run out of water because more people use it.
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
57,296
Reaction score
18,999
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Britain is experiencing unprecedented drought, as is much of Western Europe, to include France and Spain.
Precipitation is not at its historical lowest. We do however have more people and more irrigation than in the past.
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
57,296
Reaction score
18,999
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I'm so god-damned sick of that ridiculous talking point, I could puke.

If you think that the highest level of CO2 EVER in our atmosphere has zero to do with the climate change and patterns we're seeing today then common sense and keep observation are not your strong suits. Sure climate has historically changed but never ever, ever, ever, ever, as fast as the last 100 years. Not even close. And that is the anomaly; THAT is the difference. So take your talking point and stick it in the useless as tits on a bull bin.
Have you considered the effects of land use changes and pollution in the atmosphere?

I don't think anyone is claiming CO2 has zero effect. The disagreement is how much of an effect it has. Not if it does or not.

I find it very unsettling that the whole agenda only is concerned about greenhouse gasses, and almost nothing said about pollution or land use changes. Greenhouse gases are always to blame. Worse yet, any time we have something that can be a natural cyclical event of any magnitude, the cult like mentality of the pundits cry wolf, claiming we are causing it, with no actual evidence. Over and over, they cry wolf. They have completely lost any credibility. One day they will be right, and nobody with an ounce of knowledge and intelligence on the topic, will believe them.

Do you know the fable of the boy who cried wolf?
 

Middleground

Fly Eagles Fly!
Bartender
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 15, 2005
Messages
27,746
Reaction score
14,276
Location
Canada's Capital
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
Have you considered the effects of land use changes and pollution in the atmosphere?
The less fossil fuel we use, the clearer the atmosphere. Goes hand-in-hand.
I don't think anyone is claiming CO2 has zero effect. The disagreement is how much of an effect it has. Not if it does or not.
I have been at DP long enough to remember deniers arguing that we're warming let alone agreeing that indeed CO2 has an effect on climate. Amazing what happens when proof becomes undeniable. And what is perfectly clear right now is never in the history of the world has climate changed so quickly. It's a matter of time before you deniers come on board. Shame it will take as long.

I find it very unsettling that the whole agenda only is concerned about greenhouse gasses, and almost nothing said about pollution or land use changes. Greenhouse gases are always to blame. Worse yet, any time we have something that can be a natural cyclical event of any magnitude, the cult like mentality of the pundits cry wolf, claiming we are causing it, with no actual evidence. Over and over, they cry wolf. They have completely lost any credibility. One day they will be right, and nobody with an ounce of knowledge and intelligence on the topic, will believe them.
Pollution and Climate Change remediation go hand-in-hand. You go on-and-on about believers trying to get the message across. Do you know what it's like hitting your head against a brick wall? I am telling you that you will have no choice to come on board in the near future, to get with the program. Not sure what it's going to take but you will get there. And I bet dollars to doughnuts that you'll be all like "I always knew that man-made climate change was real!" :rolleyes:
 

Queen Margo

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2020
Messages
7,171
Reaction score
3,003
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
You are just trolling. You have no intention of having a serious conversation. You deserve what you are getting from me.
Nah, IF you had anything you would be happy to share your insight. We see how it is!
 

Queen Margo

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2020
Messages
7,171
Reaction score
3,003
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
I see. So you can’t actually answer the question with any specificity. Just as I thought. You haven’t a clue about any of this.
How specific do you want me to be about nature? It is out of my control.
Plus, why do you keep quoting me and then call me a troll? There IS an ignore button function you know.
 

Middleground

Fly Eagles Fly!
Bartender
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 15, 2005
Messages
27,746
Reaction score
14,276
Location
Canada's Capital
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
Good luck with getting everybody on board, never gonna happen. You know that.
Agreed. There are all kinds of people in the world and the messaging is all over the place thanks to misinformation. But when things become just too unbearable (and they are most certainly happening), opinions will change. Funny thing about human nature... we ABSOLUTELY suck at being proactive. On the flipside, we ROCK when it comes to action when it's ABSOLUTELY needed. So I am banking on that; I have to.
 

Queen Margo

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2020
Messages
7,171
Reaction score
3,003
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Agreed. There are all kinds of people in the world and the messaging is all over the place thanks to misinformation. But when things become just too unbearable (and they are most certainly happening), opinions will change. Funny thing about human nature... we ABSOLUTELY suck at being proactive. On the flipside, we ROCK when it comes to action when it's ABSOLUTELY needed. So I am banking on that; I have to.
OK, humor me.... according to your prediction things become unbearable, and we ROCK into action. What do you think will be done to push back this unbearable existence? What will we ALL do that will give immediate relief and how long will it take?
 

Lord Tammerlain

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
26,449
Reaction score
12,672
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Have you considered what an increased population does to water usage?

This would be due to lack of rain, rather than increased usage. It is not a dam, or lake at issue but where the stream starts. If it was usage, the issue would have shown up last year and other years
 

Middleground

Fly Eagles Fly!
Bartender
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 15, 2005
Messages
27,746
Reaction score
14,276
Location
Canada's Capital
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
All governments will have to act. We need to replace fossil fuels. Not going to happen overnight, unfortunately. But there's got to be a push. We have the technology but we don't yet have the will (especially vs. oil wealth and power).
There's an amazing 3 part series on PBS (Frontline) about this. Can I entice you to watch? BTW, did you know that in the 70s, Shell had staff that researched climate change? Would it surprise you to know that their conclusions predicted a dire outcome? Let me know and I will send you the link.
 

watsup

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
25,287
Reaction score
8,297
Location
Springfield MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
OK, humor me.... according to your prediction things become unbearable, and we ROCK into action. What do you think will be done to push back this unbearable existence? What will we ALL do that will give immediate relief and how long will it take?

One trick pony.
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
57,296
Reaction score
18,999
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
The less fossil fuel we use, the clearer the atmosphere. Goes hand-in-hand.
Fossil fuels can be burned with zero pollution.
I have been at DP long enough to remember deniers arguing that we're warming let alone agreeing that indeed CO2 has an effect on climate. Amazing what happens when proof becomes undeniable. And what is perfectly clear right now is never in the history of the world has climate changed so quickly. It's a matter of time before you deniers come on board. Shame it will take as long.
Amazing that you mustt call us names. We are not deniers. Is that out of spite or ignorance that you call us names?
Pollution and Climate Change remediation go hand-in-hand. You go on-and-on about believers trying to get the message across.
I think you need to learn a little more about the applicable sciences, because that remark is has exceptions.
Do you know what it's like hitting your head against a brick wall?
Yes, I feel like that every time I try to educate the ignorant indoctrinated AGW devotees.
I am telling you that you will have no choice to come on board in the near future, to get with the program. Not sure what it's going to take but you will get there. And I bet dollars to doughnuts that you'll be all like "I always knew that man-made climate change was real!" :rolleyes:
Man made "Climate Change?" I see you use the misnomer instead of facts. There is no evidence that we have actually changes the climate. Yes, we have made it a little warmer with greenhouse gasses. Yes, we have dramatically increased the temperatures of populated areas with land use changes. Yes, the pollutants from poorly burning fossil fuels melt glacier ice.

I am with the program. I understand these sciences, probably more than anyone else here at DP.
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
57,296
Reaction score
18,999
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
This would be due to lack of rain, rather than increased usage. It is not a dam, or lake at issue but where the stream starts. If it was usage, the issue would have shown up last year and other years
It's a combination. Every time someone proposed that a drought was caused by AGW reducing rainfall, a look at the historical record have shown we have had less precipitation at other times in history. Droughts become more concerning when you have more people using the water.
 

Lord Tammerlain

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
26,449
Reaction score
12,672
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It's a combination. Every time someone proposed that a drought was caused by AGW reducing rainfall, a look at the historical record have shown we have had less precipitation at other times in history. Droughts become more concerning when you have more people using the water.


I never said anything about AGW, just that the start of the Thames river has dried up, and moved miles down stream. Something that occurred in the most severe drought the UK faced since the 1930's
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
57,296
Reaction score
18,999
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
All governments will have to act. We need to replace fossil fuels. Not going to happen overnight, unfortunately. But there's got to be a push.
It is already being pushed too fast. We have wind farms that generate more energy than can be used in remote areas with insufficient transmission line to get it to users who need it. Wind farms are far less efficient than advertised. Wind farms change the climate by adding resistance to the wind patters, changing them. Turbine blase wear out about three times faster than predicted, need costly maintenance, and are not recyclable. Wind farms kill endangered raptors. Solar is a better choice, bet neither wind or solar generate power 24/7/365, which means we need some kind of power storage. Wind and solar are only affordable because of subsidies, and adding enough power storage for peak usage, and night, will dramatically increase electricity prices to consumers.
We have the technology but we don't yet have the will (especially vs. oil wealth and power).
Invalid assumption.

The energy companies will enjoy making a profit off of renewables, just like they do with oil.
There's an amazing 3 part series on PBS (Frontline) about this. Can I entice you to watch? BTW, did you know that in the 70s, Shell had staff that researched climate change? Would it surprise you to know that their conclusions predicted a dire outcome? Let me know and I will send you the link.
Yet you don't link it. As for Shell, I believe you are in error as them claiming it would have a dire outcome. Link please. I have read accounts of Shell and Exxon doing research in cooperation with government agencies, and I do not remember "dire predictions."
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
57,296
Reaction score
18,999
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I never said anything about AGW, just that the start of the Thames river has dried up, and moved miles down stream. Something that occurred in the most severe drought the UK faced since the 1930's
And before the 30's, did our fossil fuel usage cause them?
 

Steve Case

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2013
Messages
1,908
Reaction score
1,330
Location
USA - Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What caused the 1540 European Drought? What is causing the present drought?
The cause of the 1540 drought was NOT an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide.
Your original post (OP) linked to National Public Radio's page on Climate Change
which didn't say anything about carbon dioxide. So what's your point?

My point is that all things climate change related have happened before the
relatively recent increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide. Your OP said, "it could be
the worst drought in 500 years
" So yes, it happened before.

The current Wikipedia entry on Climate Change says, "There have been previous
periods of climate change, but the current changes are distinctly more rapid and
not due to natural causes.[2] Instead, they are caused by the emission of green-
house gases, mostly carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane.
"

A fact free assertion if ever there was one.

There have always been droughts, floods, hurricanes, tornados, heat waves, and
cold snaps. The only thing that can be distinctly caused by the emission of
carbon dioxide is the greening of the planet and once again, here are those two
pages from NOAA and NASA to illustrate to point.

You sarcastically said in the OP, "Nah there's no global warming" Yes there is,
and it's about a degree of warming since 1850 and some of that is probably
caused by the increase in carbon dioxide. And that degree of warming then
gives us hysterical head lines in the press like this:

Nature
Climate change is making hundreds of diseases much worse
Heatwaves, droughts, floods and storms push up the number
of cases, make diseases more severe and hamper people's
ability to cope.


In other words, the bullshit from your side of the coin never stops.
 

watsup

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
25,287
Reaction score
8,297
Location
Springfield MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The cause of the 1540 drought was NOT an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide.
Your original post (OP) linked to National Public Radio's page on Climate Change
which didn't say anything about carbon dioxide. So what's your point?

My point is that all things climate change related have happened before the
relatively recent increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide. Your OP said, "it could be
the worst drought in 500 years
" So yes, it happened before.

The current Wikipedia entry on Climate Change says, "There have been previous
periods of climate change, but the current changes are distinctly more rapid and
not due to natural causes.[2] Instead, they are caused by the emission of green-
house gases, mostly carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane.
"

A fact free assertion if ever there was one.

There have always been droughts, floods, hurricanes, tornados, heat waves, and
cold snaps. The only thing that can be distinctly caused by the emission of
carbon dioxide is the greening of the planet and once again, here are those two
pages from NOAA and NASA to illustrate to point.

You sarcastically said in the OP, "Nah there's no global warming" Yes there is,
and it's about a degree of warming since 1850 and some of that is probably
caused by the increase in carbon dioxide. And that degree of warming then
gives us hysterical head lines in the press like this:

Nature
Climate change is making hundreds of diseases much worse
Heatwaves, droughts, floods and storms push up the number
of cases, make diseases more severe and hamper people's
ability to cope.


In other words, the bullshit from your side of the coin never stops.

I see. I ask a simple and direct question. You avoid answering it and go into a Gish Gallop instead.
So let me try again: what caused the 1540 European Drought? What is causing the present droughts in many areas of the world? These are the primary questions asked by actual climate scientists. Care to try again with actual answers instead of an unfocused rant?
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
57,296
Reaction score
18,999
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I see. I ask a simple and direct question. You avoid answering it and go into a Gish Gallop instead.
So let me try again: what caused the 1540 European Drought? What is causing the present droughts in many areas of the world? These are the primary questions asked by actual climate scientists. Care to try again with actual answers instead of an unfocused rant?
Let me borrow your time machine, and I'll give you an answer.
 

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
57,296
Reaction score
18,999
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Apparently not. So what?
If precipitation was less when we generated an insignificant amount off greenhouse gasses, then doesn't it stand to reason that greenhouse gasses might not have caused the current drought?
 
Top Bottom