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

[Middleground]

That's not exactly how I would word it. I'm simply saying that it is flat out stupid to blame our actions for something that is possibly just natural.

To call what is happening today 'natural' is being obtuse and naive. You can't have that much CO2 in the atmosphere and not expect repercussions. Case closed.

 

[watsup]

That's not exactly how I would word it. I'm simply saying that it is flat out stupid to blame our actions for something that is possibly just natural.

es, we are damaging the planet. I focus on land use changes and actually pollution. For the agenda to be only focusing on greenhouse gasses, is a joke.

Standard denier talking points.

 

[longview]

What??? What they concluded in the early 80s -- people who worked for Exxon -- is EXACTLY what is happening today. Nothing to counter, LOL -- we have all the evidence we need. And, without a shred of doubt, the excess of CO2 in our atmosphere is what is causing the climate change we are experiencing today.

For the sake of discussion, let's look at what Exxon concluded in the 1970's and 1980's
Exxon Knew about Climate Change almost 40 years ago

They found that the company’s knowledge of climate change dates back to July 1977, when its senior scientist James Black delivered a sobering message on the topic. “In the first place, there is general scientific agreement that the most likely manner in which mankind is influencing the global climate is through carbon dioxide release from the burning of fossil fuels," Black told Exxon’s management committee. A year later he warned Exxon that doubling CO2 gases in the atmosphere would increase average global temperatures by two or three degrees—a number that is consistent with the scientific consensus today.

What Exxon's James Black was doing was calculating how much warming a doubling of the CO2 level would cause.
It is a common exercise, going back to the late 1800's, The problem is when one doubles the CO2 level on paper,
or in a simulation, the abrupt increase in the level does not resemble how Humans actually emit CO2.
I think Scientific America is wrong here, If someone came out with research saying a doubling of the CO2
level would cause warming of 2 degrees C, they would be thrown out of the club.

 

[Middleground]

For the sake of discussion, let's look at what Exxon concluded in the 1970's and 1980's
Exxon Knew about Climate Change almost 40 years ago

What Exxon's James Black was doing was calculating how much warming a doubling of the CO2 level would cause.
It is a common exercise, going back to the late 1800's, The problem is when one doubles the CO2 level on paper,
or in a simulation, the abrupt increase in the level does not resemble how Humans actually emit CO2.
I think Scientific America is wrong here, If someone came out with research saying a doubling of the CO2
level would cause warming of 2 degrees C, they would be thrown out of the club.

We have the highest amount of CO2 in history in our atmosphere today. The trend since the beginning of the industrial era has been a continual and steady uptick in temperature. It's not a coincidence. You can go on and cast doubt by cherry picking, moving goalposts and distorting facts. But it's still not going to stop the weather patterns and climate change we are feeling today. And it's only going to get worse. So get with the program -- it's about time.

 

[longview]

We have the highest amount of CO2 in history in our atmosphere today. The trend since the beginning of the industrial era has been a continual and steady uptick in temperature. It's not a coincidence. You can go on and cast doubt by cherry picking, moving goalposts and distorting facts. But it's still not going to stop the weather patterns and climate change we are feeling today. And it's only going to get worse. So get with the program -- it's about time.

We have the highest CO2 level in recent history, it was higher in the past.
The temperature trend since the beginning of the industrial era has not been a steady uptick,
there have been at least two cooling cycles even in the instrument period.
NASA GISS

I am not cherry picking, I am pointing out that the IPCC's own findings for TCRE are for a much lower 2XCO2 climate
sensitivity.
As for the "program" it is unlikely to create the desired outcome, because it starts by identifying the wrong problem!
We do not emit CO2 because we desire to, but because it is an effect of our energy demand!
Solving our energy problem, will solve the side effect of CO2 emissions, but attempting to solve the symptom,
has a much lower chance of success.

 

[Middleground]

We have the highest CO2 level in recent history, it was higher in the past.
The temperature trend since the beginning of the industrial era has not been a steady uptick,
there have been at least two cooling cycles even in the instrument period.
NASA GISS
View attachment 67408153
I am not cherry picking, I am pointing out that the IPCC's own findings for TCRE are for a much lower 2XCO2 climate
sensitivity.
As for the "program" it is unlikely to create the desired outcome, because it starts by identifying the wrong problem!
We do not emit CO2 because we desire to, but because it is an effect of our energy demand!
Solving our energy problem, will solve the side effect of CO2 emissions, but attempting to solve the symptom,
has a much lower chance of success.

The level of CO2 we have now are the largest in human history. When they were higher, humans did not exist. The line is pretty much straight up. We need to change our ways now.

We do not emit CO2 because we desire to, but because it is an effect of our energy demand!

Are you unaware that we can sustain our energy demands without emitting all that CO2? The sun is free of 2 things -- pollution and money. Back in 1977, Jimmy Carter installed solar panels on the WH. Can you image how much more advanced the US would be had he not lost to Reagan? One of the first things Reagan did was taken them down. Our technology is playing catch-up thanks to the denier spin machine but things are changing. People are feeling the outcome of our polluting ways and things are finally happening. Stay tuned.

 

[longview]

The level of CO2 we have now are the largest in human history. When they were higher, humans did not exist. The line is pretty much straight up. We need to change our ways now.


Are you unaware that we can sustain our energy demands without emitting all that CO2? The sun is free of 2 things -- pollution and money. Back in 1977, Jimmy Carter installed solar panels on the WH. Can you image how much more advanced the US would be had he not lost to Reagan? One of the first things Reagan did was taken them down. Our technology is playing catch-up thanks to the denier spin machine but things are changing. People are feeling the outcome of our polluting ways and things are finally happening. Stay tuned.

Yes the CO2 level is the highest in Human History, and it very likely if from burning fossil hydrocarbon fuels.
That said, alone it does not mean that our climate is very sensitive to added CO2.
The Whitehouse was never going to power itself with solar panels, to provide all the power needed for the electricity and hot water
for the full 24 hour cycle.
White House Solar Panel

Carter had 32 solar panels installed on the White House West Wing roof in the summer of 1979. These panels were used to heat water in the household for seven years until President Ronald Reagan had them removed in 1986.

Technological advances did not stop because of Regan taking taking the solar hot water heaters off of the Whitehouse.
Also we will need massive energy storage, for solar and wind to provide a sustainable energy future.

 

[Lord of Planar]

The level of CO2 we have now are the largest in human history. When they were higher, humans did not exist. The line is pretty much straight up. We need to change our ways now.


Are you unaware that we can sustain our energy demands without emitting all that CO2? The sun is free of 2 things -- pollution and money. Back in 1977, Jimmy Carter installed solar panels on the WH. Can you image how much more advanced the US would be had he not lost to Reagan? One of the first things Reagan did was taken them down. Our technology is playing catch-up thanks to the denier spin machine but things are changing. People are feeling the outcome of our polluting ways and things are finally happening. Stay tuned.

Why do people still keep bringing this up year after year? The reason is known why they were removed. These solar panels were removed because they were effectively only symbolic. They were too costly to maintain for the small quantity of warm water they made. They were not PV panels, but used to preheat water before it went to a water heater. They saved a little bit of heating energy, but again, were too costly to maintain.

Like most things, it was a costly political stunt.