AirPoh
Veteran Member
Name one.
-
Features
New report on climate change released today
- Thread starter southernhybrid
- Start date
Name one.
TSwizzle
Contributor
There is zero proof any of the claimed "climate catastrophes" or "extreme weather events" can be attributed to AGW "climate change". Further, all the coming "climate catastrophes" are predicted for the future. And when they don't happen, well the prediction just gets changed further into the future. We shall see in 11 years and four months.
angelo
Deleted
No one in the climate industry dares mention that long, long before Homo Sapiens started using fossil fuels, around 15.000 years ago, there was a land bridge between Siberia and Alaska when the seas were anything up to 100 meters below the current levels which allowed sapiens to colonise and subdue the Americas and drive to extinction much of the natural flora and fauna of those continents, in a relatively short time.
Elixir
Made in America
I see that angelo has offered up his usual crickets on this. Instead, we get a complaint that nobody here discussing the current climate catastrophe, is talking about an ancient land bridge that existed when the human population was around 1/10th of its current level.
Yeah angelo, and not one mention of the Toba explosion 75,000 years ago either.
Looks like AirPoh stumped you again.
angelo
Deleted
I see that angelo has offered up his usual crickets on this. Instead, we get a complaint that nobody here discussing the current climate catastrophe, is talking about an ancient land bridge that existed when the human population was around 1/10th of its current level.
Yeah angelo, and not one mention of the Toba explosion 75,000 years ago either.
Looks like AirPoh stumped you again.
Skirting around the facts is not an answer. Is the fact that the population was 1/10th of the present level still means that Homo Sapiens must take the whole blame for the Earth's changing climate, even though blaming the use of fossil fuels for the current situation? Which is it? You can't have it both ways.
angelo
Deleted
This debate is going nowhere. Climate relates to prevailing conditions in a region over time, not the extremes of weather whose unpredictability will always be with us.
There is no question that climate changes. It has changed over millions of years, long before the presence of Hono Sapien Sapiens on Earth, sometimes radically, [interglacial ice-ages] but for as long as this planet exists, ongoing, even if humanity ceased to use all fossil fuels tomorrow,
it wouldn't make one iota of difference, except to bring to a shuddering halt all development to the third world's economies.
There is no question that climate changes. It has changed over millions of years, long before the presence of Hono Sapien Sapiens on Earth, sometimes radically, [interglacial ice-ages] but for as long as this planet exists, ongoing, even if humanity ceased to use all fossil fuels tomorrow,
it wouldn't make one iota of difference, except to bring to a shuddering halt all development to the third world's economies.
AirPoh
Veteran Member
Bullshit. I've posted posted examples which were ignored.
AirPoh
Veteran Member
A. Bullshit. B. What has that got to do with the issue being discussed?
barbos
Contributor
Where do even get this bullshit? Everybody in the climate industry mention it all the time because it's established and accepted fact.
AirPoh
Veteran Member
Not providing facts is an answer. The denier premise is total bullshit.
I see that angelo has offered up his usual crickets on this. Instead, we get a complaint that nobody here discussing the current climate catastrophe, is talking about an ancient land bridge that existed when the human population was around 1/10th of its current level.
Yeah angelo, and not one mention of the Toba explosion 75,000 years ago either.
Looks like AirPoh stumped you again.
Skirting around the facts is not an answer. Is the fact that the population was 1/10th of the present level still means that Homo Sapiens must take the whole blame for the Earth's changing climate, even though blaming the use of fossil fuels for the current situation? Which is it? You can't have it both ways.
Last edited:
TSwizzle
Contributor
No you didn’t.
AirPoh
Veteran Member
Glad to see deniers getting half a clue. It took decades for the problem to show it's face, it will decades for it to go away. At this point the difference we need to make is not for us. It's for our children's children.
AirPoh
Veteran Member
Sure I did, Barbuda. Totally wiped out by a hurricane. How about North Carolina, two 500 year flood events in the past three years.
TSwizzle
Contributor
This is not evidence, just bold claims. These are natural and recurring weather events.
It really is a rapture like religion.
AirPoh
Veteran Member
Not at all. Climate change prediction, natural disaster will become more frequent and intense(paraphrase.) Fact, Hurricane Maria wiped out Barbuda. Fact, North Carolina suffered two 500 year flood events in the past 3 years. Things predicted by climate change. That's called evidence.
TSwizzle
Contributor
Grandiose claims with "fact" at the end is not evidence. Hurricanes are a natural and recurring weather event.
Don2 (Don1 Revised)
Contributor
I thought you guys were arguing that climate change is real, just not man made. Now you're arguing that there is no climate change and so no change in hurricanes in the aggregate?? That's unexpectedly irrational. Global warming, human caused or not, increases ocean energy, which causes more frequent and stronger hurricanes. Of course, it's difficult to point at 1 hurricane and say "ahah!" but if you make out a list of weirdness, those things would be very unlikely without the ocean energy change.
Here is an article:
https://www.theguardian.com/weather.../atlantic-hurricanes-are-storms-getting-worse
Here is an article:
https://www.theguardian.com/weather.../atlantic-hurricanes-are-storms-getting-worse
AirPoh
Veteran Member
Sure it is. Claiming it's not is just denial. A defensive coping mechanism for folks that are under stress.
Elixir
Made in America
"Unexpectedly irrational" reflects that you might not have been paying attention to the feeble crap our climate change deniers have been regurgitating. It's standard fare, believe me.
See above where swizzle's only counter to FACTS is that the word "fact" is used to refer to FACTS. Talk about irrational!
TSwizzle
Contributor
Your faith based assertions and predictions of doom are not evidence.