• 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

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
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.

Invalid assumption.

The energy companies will enjoy making a profit off of renewables, just like they do with oil.

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."
Here you go.


I urge you to watch this 3 part doc from PBS:


 

Steve Case

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2013
Messages
1,908
Reaction score
1,330
Location
USA - Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
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?
I don't know, and neither do you nor do those actual climate scientists.
If those climate scientists say it is due to anthropogenic emission of
carbon dioxide, then they need to spell out how the 1540 drought
wasn't and the 2022 drought is caused by anthropogenic emissions of
carbon dioxide. It's a good guess that they would point to the climate
models as proof.

As far as climate models go, there's this oldie but goodie from the IPCC:

IPCC TAR Chapter 14 Page 774 Paragraph 14.2.2.2
Balancing the need for finer scales and the need for ensembles
...
In sum, a strategy must recognise what is possible. In climate
research and modelling, we should recognise that we are dealing
with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the
long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.


The answer to your question is I don't know what caused the 1540
drought or the current 2022 drought.

Suppose you answer your own question since you started the
discussion, "Climate change is exacerbating conditions..."
Suppose you tell us how Climate Change is exacerbating the
drought in Europe.
 

watsup

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
25,287
Reaction score
8,297
Location
Springfield MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
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?

Ummm—no. That is extremely simplistic thinking. That’s why you are a dilettante in a online chat room instead of a climate scientist. Each and every drought may have different reasons. For instance, climate scientists bel very that the Great Plains drought of the 1930s was a result of changes in land use, namely stripping the landscape bare of native plants and exposing the underlying dirt through widespread plowing. Why do I still have to explain the obvious to you?
 

watsup

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
25,287
Reaction score
8,297
Location
Springfield MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I don't know, and neither do you nor do those actual climate scientists.
If those climate scientists say it is due to anthropogenic emission of
carbon dioxide, then they need to spell out how the 1540 drought
wasn't and the 2022 drought is caused by anthropogenic emissions of
carbon dioxide. It's a good guess that they would point to the climate
models as proof.

As far as climate models go, there's this oldie but goodie from the IPCC:

IPCC TAR Chapter 14 Page 774 Paragraph 14.2.2.2
Balancing the need for finer scales and the need for ensembles
...
In sum, a strategy must recognise what is possible. In climate
research and modelling, we should recognise that we are dealing
with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the
long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.


The answer to your question is I don't know what caused the 1540
drought or the current 2022 drought.

Suppose you answer your own question since you started the
discussion, "Climate change is exacerbating conditions..."
Suppose you tell us how Climate Change is exacerbating the
drought in Europe.

Here’s the difference between an internet denier troll (you) and a climate scientists: instead of posting in a chat room, they spend their time actually looking into the conditions that cause drought, both past and present.
And to answer your last question, the excess (over otherwise) of human-produced CO2 is causing the atmosphere to heat up and this ADDITIONAL heat is EXACERBATING the droughts all across the world, not only in Europe but also in Siberia, the western United States, and elsewhere. Do you really not know this?
 

Davin

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 23, 2022
Messages
2,920
Reaction score
2,851
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Some of us use common sense!
You mean the idiot climate deniers who spent decades saying there was no climate change when there was? Yeah, there is no common sense with moron climate change deniers.
 

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?

People have answered you. You then immediately tell them that they are somehow wrong. That’s the standard modus operandi of trolls: try to get someone to answer a question for which you already have the denial ready. It’s very juvenile, actually.
 

watsup

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
25,287
Reaction score
8,297
Location
Springfield MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
How specific do you want me to be about nature?
Let’s see if you really want a discussion, or if you’re just here to troll.
Consider this: what could happen to the atmosphere given the addition of human-produced CO2 into it since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, over and above that which was created “naturally” up to that point?
 

Steve Case

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2013
Messages
1,908
Reaction score
1,330
Location
USA - Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Here’s the difference between an internet denier troll (you) and a climate scientists: instead of posting in a chat room, they spend their time actually looking into the conditions that cause drought, both past and present.
And to answer your last question, the excess (over otherwise) of human-produced CO2 is causing the atmosphere to heat up and this ADDITIONAL heat is EXACERBATING the droughts all across the world, not only in Europe but also in Siberia, the western United States, and elsewhere. Do you really not know this?
If you actually looked at the historical record, you would know that besides droughts:
Hurricanes, tornados floods, heat waves, cold snaps and any other types of weather
calamities have been happening all throughout history. There isn't any evidence that
extreme weather is exacerbated by carbon dioxide induced climate change. Saying so
doesn't make it so. Pointing out the 1540 drought in Europe DOES say that European
droughts have happened before.

How many legs does a dog have if you call his tail a leg?
Four. Saying that a tail is a leg doesn't make it a leg.
Abraham Lincoln
 

watsup

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
25,287
Reaction score
8,297
Location
Springfield MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
There isn't any evidence that
extreme weather is exacerbated by carbon dioxide induced climate change

What happens to thunderstorms if the atmosphere is warmer? What happens to hurricanes if they pass over warmer water? What happens to droughts is the atmosphere is warmer? You can continue to deny the obvious in an internet chat room while actual climate scientists continue their research. That is up to you. I know whose conclusions I will follow.
 

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
Here you go.


I urge you to watch this 3 part doc from PBS:


You rely on The Guardian and PBS as accurate news? I'm sorry, I have higher standards.

Please quote me something that explicitly claims disaster.
 

watsup

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
25,287
Reaction score
8,297
Location
Springfield MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
You rely on The Guardian and PBS as accurate news? I'm sorry, I have higher standards.

Please quote me something that explicitly claims disaster.
He always says that, Middleground. You probably shouldn't pay much attention to it. Everyone of any intelligence at all is aware of the manner in which Big Oil spent literally millions to try to convince the public that global warming was a hoax, and there were enough ignorant people out there that it worked quite well overall.
 

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
You rely on The Guardian and PBS as accurate news? I'm sorry, I have higher standards.

Please quote me something that explicitly claims disaster.
Sad and pathetic. This is an award-winning documentary -- watch it and educate yourself. There's no agenda -- just straight facts. Try it for once. Just watch and stop the moment you feel you're being hoodwinked. Let me know.

PS. Where do you go for info? Link me to those high-level bastions of Climate Change information.

From wiki:

As of July 2016, Frontline has won a total of 75 Emmy Awards[29] and 18 Peabody Awards.[30] In 2020, Frontline was also awarded an Institutional Peabody Award.[31]
 
Last edited:

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
He always says that, Middleground. You probably shouldn't pay much attention to it. Everyone of any intelligence at all is aware of the manner in which Big Oil spent literally millions to try to convince the public that global warming was a hoax, and there were enough ignorant people out there that it worked quite well overall.
It's sad and pathetic. No wonder LoP is so misinformed.
 

tacomancer

Christian Capitalist Social Democrat
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
61,960
Reaction score
43,393
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Climate change is a bitch
 

watsup

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
25,287
Reaction score
8,297
Location
Springfield MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
You rely on The Guardian and PBS as accurate news? I'm sorry, I have higher standards.

Please quote me something that explicitly claims disaster.

This says nothing. It's just generalized whining. Did you even read or watch the items? If there is an error or error in them, then tell us the error or errors so that they can be further discussed. Simply dismissing them out-of-hand has not merit whatsoever as regards honest and serious discussion.
 

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
He always says that, Middleground. You probably shouldn't pay much attention to it. Everyone of any intelligence at all is aware of the manner in which Big Oil spent literally millions to try to convince the public that global warming was a hoax, and there were enough ignorant people out there that it worked quite well overall.
That simply isn't true. Besides, millions is a drop in the bucket compared to the billions that the AGW agenda gets.
 

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
Sad and pathetic. This is an award-winning documentary -- watch it and educate yourself. There's no agenda -- just straight facts. Try it for once. Just watch and stop the moment you feel you're being hoodwinked. Let me know.

PS. Where do you go for info? Link me to those high-level bastions of Climate Change information.

From wiki:

As of July 2016, Frontline has won a total of 75 Emmy Awards[29] and 18 Peabody Awards.[30] In 2020, Frontline was also awarded an Institutional Peabody Award.[31]
Granted, PBS is a little better than The Guardian, but for you to start with The Guardian... I have to question that from the start.

I went ahead and loaded the PBS video. Just started it. I will give it (and you) a chance. Watsup however, is a tool of the AGW dogma.
 

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
Oh...

Al Gore...

What a tool, and you claim this is credible?
 

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
OMG. Just past 25 minutes into the video, a guy claims to take documents home from work and archive them. I have never worked in a corporation that allowewd such practices, as it is considered proprietary information.
 

watsup

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
25,287
Reaction score
8,297
Location
Springfield MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Granted, PBS is a little better than The Guardian, but for you to start with The Guardian... I have to question that from the start.

I went ahead and loaded the PBS video. Just started it. I will give it (and you) a chance. Watsup however, is a tool of the AGW dogma.

Last phrase = psychological projection = tool of the anti-AGW agenda.
 

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 nothing damning about what is said here, except that the narrative is not unbiased. The narrative is only pushing the position that skepticism is bad.
 

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
Sad and pathetic. This is an award-winning documentary -- watch it and educate yourself. There's no agenda -- just straight facts. Try it for once. Just watch and stop the moment you feel you're being hoodwinked. Let me know.
It still uses cherry picked information, and clearly sides with the agenda. They do present the skeptical viewpoint, but the overwhelming narrative is with the cultist like belief that AGW will be a disaster for us.

I've been busy and had to stop it several times, but I would like to point out a perfect example of the media lies. Starting at about 51:40 in the program, they talk about the summary that says:

The balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate.

Nobody disagrees with this. But after the point this agreed upon statement out, they show media clips lying about what was just said. Start at 51:40, and then listen to the media response.
PS. Where do you go for info? Link me to those high-level bastions of Climate Change information.
My goto references are Nature, Nature Climate Change, Nature Geoscience, and Science, peer reviewed journals. I use other actual peer reviewed material also. I read what the scientists actually say, instead of the lies put out by the media and bloggers.
From wiki:

As of July 2016, Frontline has won a total of 75 Emmy Awards[29] and 18 Peabody Awards.[30] In 2020, Frontline was also awarded an Institutional Peabody Award.[31]
That doesn't matter. Awards are also agenda drive, Just look at the recent year awards for the Nobel Prize.

Your Front lines is biased, in their presentation.

I miss Walter Cronkite.
 
Top Bottom