• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

New report on climate change released today

The only people who continue to bring up Al Gore in this context are deniers who are seeking to promote the fantasy that the idea of Climate Change originates with this US politician, and not with the climatological community.

Nobody (except deniers, and perhaps his family and friends) gives a flying fuck about Al Gore. I haven't seen his movie, and don't really care to - it is kinda nice to see at least one politician taking the issue seriously, but the facts are unchanged regardless of which politicians do or do not understand them.
 
Blue Tilapia are spawning in the river out back right now. They have spawned in each of the last 24 consecutive months. This is a tropical fish. I don't live in the tropics and the river is not spring fed.
 
where's the evidence that it's not a natural phenomena?

Backwards asking for to prove a negative.

Where is your evidence that it is?

Solar output has increased? Orbital mechanics that favor warming? There must be data that support your theory that the warming is part of a natural cycle. Why haven't you presented it.

Etc...

In fact your graph plainly shows the slowly rising temperature of an interglacial period between ice ages.

The last half century has note been slowly in geologic terms.
 
Charlatan Al Gore, out preaching the gospel;

Al Gore continued an environmental justice tour with a visit to poor areas of Alabama – and warned that already dire conditions are set to worsen because of climate change.

Teh Gruaniad

Al Gore admits US poverty 'shocking' – but warns climate crisis will make things worse

"Environmental justice tour" ?!! Yup, that's a religion.

Environmental justice isn't a religion. Poor people are usually the ones most fucked by pollution whether you believe in AGW or now. Rich people just move and make sure to dump negative externalities in the poor neighborhoods. Here in Florida the paper companies, phosphate mines, titanium sand mines, and such barf all over public waters but they have closely controlled clean and pristine retreats where they have neat and tidy managed fishing ponds and hunting reserves all behind nice big fences with armed security to keep out the riff raff. If AGW is real then the rich can afford to fortify or raise their flood prone beach houses and/or turn up the air conditioning. Meanwhile as the number of days above 90F increases year after year in the lower peninsula with a concomitant rise in dew points the poor people in un-airconditioned apartments in the urban southeast of the state are suffering a bit. Blame it on C02 or not. There is a difference in outcome related to the environmental change.
 
Charlatan Al Gore, out preaching the gospel;

Al Gore continued an environmental justice tour with a visit to poor areas of Alabama – and warned that already dire conditions are set to worsen because of climate change.

Teh Gruaniad

Al Gore admits US poverty 'shocking' – but warns climate crisis will make things worse

"Environmental justice tour" ?!! Yup, that's a religion.

Environmental justice isn't a religion.

Just because a county can't get it's shit together (pun intended) regarding sewage infrastructure out in the boonies is not "a sign from the climate gods" that this is all down to AGW and we need to sacrifice a couple of SUVs to appease them.
 
Yeah, anyone who says 'Temperature has always changed' seriously needs to take a look at this:

https://www.xkcd.com/1732/

Even if that graph is real/correct, where's the evidence that it's not a natural phenomena?

22,000 years of records aren't evidence???
You must be blind.

22.000 years is less than the blink of an eye in the history of planet Earth. Besides, what happened to the much more recent medieval warming period and or the vast rise in sea levels thousands of years before homo sapiens started using fossil fuels?
 
For what it's worth. Politicians, climate scientists and catastropharians of similar ilk all preface their statements about the need to embrace renewable energy and forsake fossil fuels which we rely on for at least 80% of our energy needs into the foreseeable future. Remember that fossil fuels are used to build solar panels and those huge ugly windmills. Fossil fuels are also used to generate power to charge electric cars as well as to build them, again into the foreseeable future.

The present level of carbon in the atmosphere is around 400 parts per million, if the this level is reduced to say, 200 parts per million, life on Earth ceases as plant life will die, and we will quickly follow. Carbon dioxide is actually the opposite of a pollutant and, in fact essential to life.

It is no accident that the planet is greening in recent years. The plants/crops are thriving because of CO2 increase, enabling us to feed an otherwise hungry world.

In short. The question that neither politicians or climate scientists can answer is, if 400 PPM of CO2 is too much, how much is just right? Remember that in the past, CO2 in the atmosphere was at times around 1200 parts per million.

Methinks that the activist/alarmists, and if the sheeple remain in their apathetic state, they will cook the hen that lays the golden egg.
 
22,000 years of records aren't evidence???
You must be blind.

22.000 years is less than the blink of an eye in the history of planet Earth. Besides, what happened to the much more recent medieval warming period and or the vast rise in sea levels thousands of years before homo sapiens started using fossil fuels?

Yes, but the current climate change we see happened in less than a blink of an eye in the history of planet Earth. That's the fucking problem. Our current in a blink of an eye situation is unprecedented in the history of planet Earth. That's the fucking problem!
 
Environmental justice isn't a religion.

Just because a county can't get it's shit together (pun intended) regarding sewage infrastructure out in the boonies is not "a sign from the climate gods" that this is all down to AGW and we need to sacrifice a couple of SUVs to appease them.
You mean stormwater infrastructure, right?
 
The present level of carbon in the atmosphere is around 400 parts per million, if the this level is reduced to say, 200 parts per million, life on Earth ceases as plant life will die, and we will quickly follow. Carbon dioxide is actually the opposite of a pollutant and, in fact essential to life.
With such an understanding of science, I think you could get hired by JJ Abrams.

It is no accident that the planet is greening in recent years. The plants/crops are thriving because of CO2 increase, enabling us to feed an otherwise hungry world.
What?!

In short. The question that neither politicians or climate scientists can answer is, if 400 PPM of CO2 is too much, how much is just right? Remember that in the past, CO2 in the atmosphere was at times around 1200 parts per million.
In the past, Earth was molten. Time to live in a volcano!
 
Teh Gruaniad again. A book review of a doomsday climate;

You already know it’s bad. You already know the weather has gone weird, the ice caps are melting, the insects are disappearing from the Earth. You already know that your children, and your children’s children, if they are reckless or brave enough to reproduce, face a vista of rising seas, vanishing coastal cities, storms, wildfires, biblical floods. As someone who reads the news and is sensitive to the general mood of the times, you have a general sense of what we’re looking at. But do you truly understand the scale of the tribulations we face? David Wallace-Wells, author of the distressingly titled The Uninhabitable Earth, is here to tell you that you do not. “It is,” as he puts it in the book’s first line, “worse, much worse, than you think.”

Teh Gruaniad

And so it goes on.

Truly a Rapture like cult.
 
if the this level is reduced to say, 200 parts per million, life on Earth ceases as plant life will die, and we will quickly follow.

That drop is remotely plausible?


Carbon dioxide is actually the opposite of a pollutant and, in fact essential to life.

It is dose dependent.

Anything is a pollutant in the wrong place or wrong quantity. Look at what excessive nitrogen and phosphorous are doing to aquatic resources. Those are essential plant food. They are also pollution.


It is no accident that the planet is greening in recent years. The plants/crops are thriving because of CO2 increase, enabling us to feed an otherwise hungry world.

Not universally true. Not all plants thrive on added CO2 and not all plants that thrive on added CO2 do so without additional inputs of nutrients.

We are seeing faster growth in some noxious weeds. That is a negative. We are seeing acidification of water. That is a net bad.

how much is just right?

Probably close to the amount present during the antrhopocene. Amounts at other times were probably ideal for things other than humans.

Remember that in the past, CO2 in the atmosphere was at times around 1200 parts per million.

What was life like back then? Lot of modern plants and mamals around were there?

Technical manual on indoor air quality says that humans experience drowsiness above 1000. Seems that might not be "just right".
 
Environmental justice isn't a religion.

Just because a county can't get it's shit together (pun intended) regarding sewage infrastructure out in the boonies is not "a sign from the climate gods" that this is all down to AGW and we need to sacrifice a couple of SUVs to appease them.
You mean stormwater infrastructure, right?

Yes, combined systems where heavy rain causes discharge of raw sewage. Richmond, VA, Baltimore, MD, Boston, MA... Pretty common and pretty nasty. Poor people have less resources to fix such things.

The frequency of occurrence of rain events with >2" falling in less than 24 hours has increased a lot in the last 20 or 30 years in the eastern US. Some folks call it climate change, some folks say it is just weather, I call it a Kaiser Blade. Whatever the cause, the data are incontrovertible that stormwater management is getting harder and it is really critical in combined systems that carry stormwater and sewer and retrofitting is really expensive.

It is kind of a good example. Poor folks get stuck down in the bottom land and whether it is the paper mill or the textile plant dumping stuff in the river or the whole town having a bad stormwater/sewer system they are the ones that get the shaft.
 
For what it's worth. Politicians, climate scientists and catastropharians of similar ilk all preface their statements about the need to embrace renewable energy and forsake fossil fuels which we rely on for at least 80% of our energy needs into the foreseeable future. Remember that fossil fuels are used to build solar panels and those huge ugly windmills. Fossil fuels are also used to generate power to charge electric cars as well as to build them, again into the foreseeable future.

Only if big carbon gets its way. We could go a long way towards cutting fossil fuel use with nuclear plants.

The present level of carbon in the atmosphere is around 400 parts per million, if the this level is reduced to say, 200 parts per million, life on Earth ceases as plant life will die, and we will quickly follow. Carbon dioxide is actually the opposite of a pollutant and, in fact essential to life.

While there is a point where it will be catastrophic (and that point will come in some hundreds of millions of years) 200 ppm won't do it.

It is no accident that the planet is greening in recent years. The plants/crops are thriving because of CO2 increase, enabling us to feed an otherwise hungry world.

Except for the most part this isn't the way it works--increasing CO2 only helps if CO2 is a limiting factor and generally it isn't.

In short. The question that neither politicians or climate scientists can answer is, if 400 PPM of CO2 is too much, how much is just right? Remember that in the past, CO2 in the atmosphere was at times around 1200 parts per million.

And remember that the sun has been getting slowly brighter over the eons--inevitable as helium builds up in the core. That 1200 ppm was when the sun wasn't as bright.

Methinks that the activist/alarmists, and if the sheeple remain in their apathetic state, they will cook the hen that lays the golden egg.

There are some green nuts that would but plenty of us don't want that.
 
In short. The question that neither politicians or climate scientists can answer is, if 400 PPM of CO2 is too much, how much is just right? Remember that in the past, CO2 in the atmosphere was at times around 1200 parts per million.
And remember that the sun has been getting slowly brighter over the eons--inevitable as helium builds up in the core. That 1200 ppm was when the sun wasn't as bright.

Address this, Angelo, or get out of the thread...
 
Teh Guardianistas are on board with AOC;

Guardianista1: The most destructive material on Earth is human flesh. The clue is in the anthropo part of anthropogenic climate change. If you really want to save the planet a radical cull is required.

Guardianista 2: We urgently need to start planning to decrease our population growth and our economies and world travel, and put a halt to flagrant spending on throwaway goods etc. Only then will our (far fewer) grandchildren have a better life.

Guardianista 3: We have to talk about population. Charities such as Population Matters, for whom Sir David Attenborough and several other scientists are patrons, show how entirely non-coercive and proven ways are available for the reduction and reversal of population growth urgently required.

Teh Gruaniad

Let the purge begin !!!


AGW, a death cult.
 
The present level of carbon in the atmosphere is around 400 parts per million, if the this level is reduced to say, 200 parts per million, life on Earth ceases as plant life will die, and we will quickly follow. Carbon dioxide is actually the opposite of a pollutant and, in fact essential to life.

It is no accident that the planet is greening in recent years. The plants/crops are thriving because of CO2 increase, enabling us to feed an otherwise hungry world.

Water is essential for life. Without water, a human being would be dead within three days. Introducing water to the desert allows it to bloom, and grow crops and plants that previously could not survive there.

Therefore it is impossible for a person to drown.

Drowning is clearly just a scam perpetrated by 'big lifeguard'.
 
Teh Gruaniad again. A book review of a doomsday climate;

You already know it’s bad. You already know the weather has gone weird, the ice caps are melting, the insects are disappearing from the Earth. You already know that your children, and your children’s children, if they are reckless or brave enough to reproduce, face a vista of rising seas, vanishing coastal cities, storms, wildfires, biblical floods. As someone who reads the news and is sensitive to the general mood of the times, you have a general sense of what we’re looking at. But do you truly understand the scale of the tribulations we face? David Wallace-Wells, author of the distressingly titled The Uninhabitable Earth, is here to tell you that you do not. “It is,” as he puts it in the book’s first line, “worse, much worse, than you think.”

Teh Gruaniad

And so it goes on.

Truly a Rapture like cult.
You call it a cult (fishing in British tabloids), but there looks to possibly be a drop in insects globally. We know bees are having serious problems right now (though that may not be climate related). We know methane rich permafrost is thawing. Deserts are growing.

The air is hard to breath on some parts of the globe, and the rivers only stopped burning 50 years ago in the US. The dust bowl was caused in good part via poor farming.

Some people seem to have a hard time understanding that people have had a bad impact on the planet. Whether this is the end times is certainly far from known. The issue at hand is that the mechanisms in charge of warming could hit a breaking point.
 
Back
Top Bottom