Climate Change Report

[DynaLo]

The planet...it’s a living cyclical entity with ebbs and flows and she’s going through a normal major cycle of change..think menopause on a really really large scale. Mankind’s contribution of crap is minor in the larger picture, except freaking micro plastics. All the focus should be on not killing our oceans instead of moaning about cyclical planetary temperature variations that aren’t changeable by man.

As go the oceans, so goes the planet and thus mankind.

 

[AM64]

The planet...it’s a living cyclical entity with ebbs and flows and she’s going through a normal major cycle of change..think menopause on a really really large scale. Mankind’s contribution of crap is minor in the larger picture, except freaking micro plastics. All the focus should be on not killing our oceans instead of moaning about cyclical planetary temperature variations that aren’t changeable by man.

As go the oceans, so goes the planet and thus mankind.

We could be far kinder to the vegetation that scrubs our air. We could probably manage forests better to protect against fires, but lesser developed countries could definitely do more to control slash and burn farming. I'm still amazed how most of our neighbors cut down all the trees in their yards.

 

[C-south]

Some people come to this thread in good faith looking to exchange ideas and maybe learn a thing or two. But ^most people^ are clearly just trolling. WS gave you a very reasonable explanation as to why this is incorrect just a few pages back, but here you go repeating these false talking points again. It’s the same as BOT and others coming in here telling everyone “it’s the sun” again, even though he’s been shown several times why this is not possible. “They changed the name”, “ice age predicted in 70s” etc. etc. All of you regulars know better by now and repeating these PRATTs is just trolling at this point.

The climate myth whack-a-mole on this board is absurd. The goalposts are endlessly moving. It’s impossible to ever nail down a complete, coherent, counterargument. The skeptics can’t even agree whether global warming is occurring at all, whether it’s caused by humans, whether it’s bad, etc. They can’t agree amongst themselves and they can’t even be consistent within themselves. They regularly jump from one position to the next, depending on what’s convenient. It’s just one thoughtless meme after another. Before you know it, all your facts, data, and logic have been ignored, and you’re back at square one explaining why it’s not the sun…

Obviously some people have too much invested to be wrong.

 

[BartW]

The planet...it’s a living cyclical entity with ebbs and flows and she’s going through a normal major cycle of change..think menopause on a really really large scale. Mankind’s contribution of crap is minor in the larger picture, except freaking micro plastics. All the focus should be on not killing our oceans instead of moaning about cyclical planetary temperature variations that aren’t changeable by man.

As go the oceans, so goes the planet and thus mankind.

The scientific community disagrees with your gut(?) feeling... (see references on previous page)

I really find this mindset odd. Why is it hard for y'all to fathom that human emissions cause environmental change/harm but easy for you to see with micro plastics? Globally we emit nearly 40 billion tons of CO2 each year and have emitted a total of around 2 trillion tons of CO2. The heat added to our climate system by CO2’s added greenhouse effect is currently equal to 4 times of that released by the Hiroshima atomic bomb, per second -- a total of nearly 3 billion Hiroshima bombs over the past 20 years.

If you want to focus on not killing the ocean, stop global warming. 90% of the heat from global warming goes into the ocean. Together with its ugly cousin ocean acidification, they’ve caused the death of about half the world’s coral reefs over the past few decades. Coral reefs support 25% of the ocean’s biodiversity, not to mention billions of dollars in fisheries, tourism, medicine, and more. Another related effect is ocean deoxygenation and the growing ocean dead zones. That's just scratching the surface. It’s not just about things feeling a degree or two hotter; carbon pollution has direct ecological consequences.

We can solve both plastic and co2 pollution problems at once. Keep it in the ground!

 

[Wafflestomper]

Well, let’s use more aerosols.

I suspect the effects from aerosols are not going to outlast the effects of stable carbon isotopes in the CO2 which are released from burning fossil fuels.

 

[Roustabout]

I suspect the effects from aerosols are not going to outlast the effects of stable carbon isotopes in the CO2 which are released from burning fossil fuels.

Since China and India aren’t going to comply perhaps its time to ramp up Carbon removing technology. It’s already proven.

 

[Mick]

The scientific community disagrees with your gut(?) feeling... (see references on previous page)

I really find this mindset odd. Why is it hard for y'all to fathom that human emissions cause environmental change/harm but easy for you to see with micro plastics? Globally we emit nearly 40 billion tons of CO2 each year and have emitted a total of around 2 trillion tons of CO2. The heat added to our climate system by CO2’s added greenhouse effect is currently equal to 4 times of that released by the Hiroshima atomic bomb, per second -- a total of nearly 3 billion Hiroshima bombs over the past 20 years.

If you want to focus on not killing the ocean, stop global warming. 90% of the heat from global warming goes into the ocean. Together with its ugly cousin ocean acidification, they’ve caused the death of about half the world’s coral reefs over the past few decades. Coral reefs support 25% of the ocean’s biodiversity, not to mention billions of dollars in fisheries, tourism, medicine, and more. Another related effect is ocean deoxygenation and the growing ocean dead zones. That's just scratching the surface. It’s not just about things feeling a degree or two hotter; carbon pollution has direct ecological consequences.

We can solve both plastic and co2 pollution problems at once. Keep it in the ground!

I was reading up on micro plastics yesterday to talk to orangeslice about the effects on humans before he pulled out a race card and injected his religion into it. Micro plastics are found in human waste with a median of 20 microplastic pieces per 10 grams of stool. The microplastic pieces ranged from 50 to 500 micrometers in size. There is currently no research on how it effects the human body.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Some people come to this thread in good faith looking to exchange ideas and maybe learn a thing or two. But ^most people^ are clearly just trolling. WS gave you a very reasonable explanation as to why this is incorrect just a few pages back, but here you go repeating these false talking points again. It’s the same as BOT and others coming in here telling everyone “it’s the sun” again, even though he’s been shown several times why this is not possible. “They changed the name”, “ice age predicted in 70s” etc. etc. All of you regulars know better by now and repeating these PRATTs is just trolling at this point.

The climate myth whack-a-mole on this board is absurd. The goalposts are endlessly moving. It’s impossible to ever nail down a complete, coherent, counterargument. The skeptics can’t even agree whether global warming is occurring at all, whether it’s caused by humans, whether it’s bad, etc. They can’t agree amongst themselves and they can’t even be consistent within themselves. They regularly jump from one position to the next, depending on what’s convenient. It’s just one thoughtless meme after another. Before you know it, all your facts, data, and logic have been ignored, and you’re back at square one explaining why it’s not the sun…

I award you no points for your incoherent rambling, and may god have mercy on your soul. So what is incorrect about 12 years of no hurricanes in Florida? I lived in Florida for 20 years, every year we were told by scientists that it was just going to get worse and worse and worse..then it didnt in 2006, then again in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010..etc, etc. Every year it was going to be "the big one". It was that kind of science and fear mongering that made me realize these dudes were the chiropractors of the scientific world.

And change the name? No. They didn't change the name. Climate change has been around long before global warming became a fad in the 1980's. When that fell out of favor, and it absolutely did, climate change became the go to phrase because its a catch all and it enables climatologists to pretty much say anything they want. Anyone who was at least old enough to wipe their own ass in the 1980's heard a few things on blast constantly. Russia was coming, WW3 was imminent, and global warming and the hole in the ozone layer is going to kill us all. None happened. Now we can just say climate change for everything. Clear cutting around power lines and a faulty transformer starts a fire? Climate Change. Unseasonably warm day in the winter? Climate change. Dry summer? Climate change. Dam bursts and floods a valley? Climate change. War in the Sudan? Climate change. Asteroid hits Mecca? Climate change. Solar flare takes out GPS satellites? Climate change. April showers dont bring May flowers? Climate change! El Nino now identifies as El Nin-X and destroys the worlds supply of Chilean Seabass? Climate change!

 

[FLVOL_79]

I was reading up on micro plastics yesterday to talk to orangeslice about the effects on humans before he pulled out a race card and injected his religion into it. Micro plastics are found in human waste with a median of 20 microplastic pieces per 10 grams of stool. The microplastic pieces ranged from 50 to 500 micrometers in size. There is currently no research on how it effects the human body.

Science gave us plastic bro, its 100% safe like everything science has provided to the human race. If you think otherwise you are a science denier.

 

[Orangeslice13]

I was reading up on micro plastics yesterday to talk to orangeslice about the effects on humans before he pulled out a race card and injected his religion into it. Micro plastics are found in human waste with a median of 20 microplastic pieces per 10 grams of stool. The microplastic pieces ranged from 50 to 500 micrometers in size. There is currently no research on how it effects the human body.

It was a joke dufuss.
Nobody thinks you’re a racist. Unlike Rex who actually is. But I digress. I just don’t take you seriously.

 

[Wafflestomper]

I award you no points for your incoherent rambling, and may god have mercy on your soul. So what is incorrect about 12 years of no hurricanes in Florida? I lived in Florida for 20 years, every year we were told by scientists that it was just going to get worse and worse and worse..then it didnt in 2006, then again in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010..etc, etc. Every year it was going to be "the big one". It was that kind of science and fear mongering that made me realize these dudes were the chiropractors of the scientific world. And change the name? No. They didn't change the name. Climate change has been around long before global warming became a fad in the 1980's. When that fell out of favor, and it absolutely did, climate change became the go to phrase because its a catch all and it enables climatologists to pretty much say anything they want. Anyone who was at least old enough to wipe their own ass in the 1980's heard a few things on blast constantly. Russia was coming, WW3 was imminent, and global warming and the hole in the ozone layer is going to kill us all. None happened. Now we can just say climate change for everything. Clear cutting around power lines and a faulty transformer starts a fire? Climate Change. Unseasonably warm day in the winter? Climate change. Dry summer? Climate change. Dam bursts and floods a valley? Climate change. War in the Sudan? Climate change. Asteroid hits Mecca? Climate change. Solar flare takes out GPS satellites? Climate change. April showers dont bring May flowers? Climate change! El Nino now identifies as El Nin-X and destroys the worlds supply of Chilean Seabass? Climate change!

I seem to recall a category 5 hurricane causing a lot of ass clenching in Florida last year. Edit: a category 5 hurricane hit in 2018. A category 4 hurricane hit in 2017. What are you talking about?

Every failed prediction that anyone makes regarding climate change is attributed by like minded conservatives to scientists. I keep telling you that you're not listening to scientists; you're instead listening to media reports and politicians. Too many of you are more likely to listen to someone who believes that Super Bowl halftime shows are "elaborate Illuminati rituals hidden in plain sight" (Mark Dice, whose video was linked earlier ITT) about climate change than individuals with PhDs in relevant subjects. Wow. And someone said that democrats are easily duped...

I have invited you to show me where in the scientific literature all these failed predictions are. All I get is hand waving and ridiculous claims about the lack of hurricanes in Florida for several years. Come on. Show us the peer reviewed literature.

 

[FLVOL_79]

I seem to recall a category 5 hurricane causing a lot of ass clenching in Florida last year. Edit: a category 5 hurricane hit in 2018. A category 4 hurricane hit in 2017. What are you talking about?

Every failed prediction that anyone makes regarding climate change is attributed by like minded conservatives to scientists. I keep telling you that you're not listening to scientists; you're instead listening to media reports and politicians. Too many of you are more likely to listen to someone who believes that Super Bowl halftime shows are "elaborate Illuminati rituals hidden in plain sight" (Mark Dice, whose video was linked earlier ITT) about climate change than individuals with PhDs in relevant subjects. Wow. And someone said that democrats are easily duped...

I have invited you to show me where in the scientific literature all these failed predictions are. All I get is hand waving and ridiculous claims about the lack of hurricanes in Florida for several years. Come on. Show us the peer reviewed literature.

Sure thing!

Here is some peer reviewed literature that attempts to come to terms with global warming not being the catastrophe that "everyone" predicted:

Medhaug, I., Stolpe, M.B., Fischer, E.M. & Knutti, R. 2017, "Reconciling controversies about the 'global warming hiatus'", Nature, vol. 545, no. 7652, pp. 41-47.
TL/DR? Didn't understand? It attempts to say disaster didnt strike because people have different definitions of words, and that might be confusing.

And you like to throw around the term peer reviewed and I don't think you know what that means exactly. Lets just say as long as your research/hypothesis is backed up by other research, you give the proper credit where due, do not plagiarize, and do not go against current thinking too much you too can get peer reviewed and have your work published. Thats why my peer reviewed thesis wasn't titled "How to manipulate your employees to do your bidding no matter what" or "Psychological warfare your way to controlling your employees". Instead I went with something sappy about how to motivate employees.

Plenty of peer reviewed work out there trying to figure out why the oceans haven't swallowed NYC though. The one thing you will find in a lot of the climate change work is the word policy. Plenty of papers discussing the what ifs on climate change and how it can/could change government policy. Zero agenda there I tell ya.

While I could endlessly throw up scholarly work after another you gotta be able to stand on your own two feet at some point and do your own research. Good luck kid.

 

[Wafflestomper]

Sure thing!

Here is some peer reviewed literature that attempts to come to terms with global warming not being the catastrophe that "everyone" predicted:

Medhaug, I., Stolpe, M.B., Fischer, E.M. & Knutti, R. 2017, "Reconciling controversies about the 'global warming hiatus'", Nature, vol. 545, no. 7652, pp. 41-47.
TL/DR? Didn't understand? It attempts to say disaster didnt strike because people have different definitions of words, and that might be confusing.

And you like to throw around the term peer reviewed and I don't think you know what that means exactly. Lets just say as long as your research/hypothesis is backed up by other research, you give the proper credit where due, do not plagiarize, and do not go against current thinking too much you too can get peer reviewed and have your work published. Thats why my peer reviewed thesis wasn't titled "How to manipulate your employees to do your bidding no matter what" or "Psychological warfare your way to controlling your employees". Instead I went with something sappy about how to motivate employees.

Plenty of peer reviewed work out there trying to figure out why the oceans haven't swallowed NYC though. The one thing you will find in a lot of the climate change work is the word policy. Plenty of papers discussing the what ifs on climate change and how it can/could change government policy. Zero agenda there I tell ya.

While I could endlessly throw up scholarly work after another you gotta be able to stand on your own two feet at some point and do your own research. Good luck kid.

What in god's name are you on about here? Did you actually read this article? I did read it since I have access to this journal. What you said is a gross mischaracterization of it which should be readily apparent from simply reading the entire abstract. Was it actually too long for you to read? It was a single paragraph!

The definition it's referring to is that of "hiatus." They're talking about this due to the seemingly contradictory information available in the scientific literature and media. This is due to how this same term is used differently, which is due in part to the different data sets used for trends during this period. Some used this term to mean that the global mean surface temp (GMST) trend was negative, flat, or only slightly positive. Others used it to to mean that the trend is lower than what was predicted in models. Regardless, you're wrong once again. Give up.

 

[BartW]

I was reading up on micro plastics yesterday to talk to orangeslice about the effects on humans before he pulled out a race card and injected his religion into it. Micro plastics are found in human waste with a median of 20 microplastic pieces per 10 grams of stool. The microplastic pieces ranged from 50 to 500 micrometers in size. There is currently no research on how it effects the human body.

Yeah don’t sweat it, most of them couldn’t care less about plastic pollution micro or macro. It’s just lame posturing to act like they give two craps about the environment. It’s about as sincere as Trump planting trees and touting “clean, clean coal”

We’re posting in a troll thread

 

[Orangeslice13]

Yeah don’t sweat it, most of them couldn’t care less about plastic pollution micro or macro. It’s just lame posturing to act like they give two craps about the environment. It’s about as sincere as Trump planting trees and touting “clean, clean coal”

We’re posting in a troll thread

I wouldn’t piss on the fake concern of people like you if it was on fire.
You can generalize “most of them don’t care.... “ all you want to explain your failures and failing ideas while you feel some sort of pride because you think you’re a smart guy. Meanwhile not actually doing a damn thing to affect change. And In most cases your spokespeople are the worst polluters.
I’ll let you know next time I’m heading to the gulf for the cleanup effort. You’re welcome to come. Or you could come with me to Long Island in August for the cleanup efforts there.

You may lot like it though. We actually get dirty doing something about what we believe.

 

[Franklin Pierce]

Prince Harry reveals his agony about Megxit in phone call with FAKE Greta Thunberg as he tells Russian Hoaxers 'we are completely separate from the majority of my family' and slams 'sick' world leaders over climate change

Prince Harry has been allegedly pranked by a group of Russian YouTube stars who claimed to be Swedish climate change activist Greta Thunberg during two telephone conversations.

The pranksters, Alexei Stolyarov and Vladimir Kuznetsov, have previously targeted the likes of Elton John and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

During the two telephone conversations, Harry spoke about his feelings over the Megxit issue and condemned both Donald Trump and Boris Johnson.

The two Russians claimed to be Greta and her father Svante.
https://www.volnation.com/forum/javascript:void(0)
According to The Sun, the pranksters contacted Prince Harry twice.

From March 31, the monarch's grandson and American former actress Meghan will no longer use their HRH styles as they pursue a new life of personal and financial freedom, mostly in North America.

According to the tapes, which reportedly feature Prince Harry, he comments on his decision to step down from the royal family.

He tells the Russians: 'And this decision certainly wasn’t the easy one but it was the right decision for our family, the right decision to be able to protect my son.

Harry, believing he was talking to Greta and her father said: 'The world is a troubled place and it can be very easy to give up and I think what you guys are doing is absolutely remarkable.

'Unfortunately the world is being led by some very sick people so the people like yourselves and younger generation are the ones that are going to make all the difference.

'The usual way things have been done over the last how many years has not had the effect that it needs to.

'I think people need to be woken up and the only way to wake people up from what effectively is a consciousness crisis is, I think, you need to be doing extreme things.

'And small steps or giving out prizes doesn’t make any difference these days.

'I think what you need to do is make real big changes that actually shock people, and it’s that shock factor that wakes people up.

He also condemned US President Donald Trump over his fossil fuel policy.

Prince Harry 'falls victim to hoaxers and reveals his thoughts about Megxit | Daily Mail Online

 

[Roustabout]

I wouldn’t piss on the fake concern of people like you if it was on fire.
You can generalize “most of them don’t care.... “ all you want to explain your failures and failing ideas while you feel some sort of pride because you think you’re a smart guy. Meanwhile not actually doing a damn thing to affect change. And In most cases your spokespeople are the worst polluters.
I’ll let you know next time I’m heading to the gulf for the cleanup effort. You’re welcome to come. Or you could come with me to Long Island in August for the cleanup efforts there.

You may lot like it though. We actually get dirty doing something about what we believe.

Well said. My cousin and I have picked up tons of trash out of the little river over the years on our floats. We’ve replaced every bulb with LED not only on our house but in our loved ones. We’re both strong conservatives and it’s insulting to hear some ass wipe say we don’t care about the environment because we refuse to submit to a global government that won’t hold the worst polluters to account. Want to know the worst polluters? Poor people. Deal with that ****.

 

[BartW]

I wouldn’t piss on the fake concern of people like you if it was on fire.

You can generalize “most of them don’t care.... “ all you want to explain your failures and failing ideas while you feel some sort of pride because you think you’re a smart guy. Meanwhile not actually doing a damn thing to affect change. And In most cases your spokespeople are the worst polluters.
I’ll let you know next time I’m heading to the gulf for the cleanup effort. You’re welcome to come. Or you could come with me to Long Island in August for the cleanup efforts there.

You may lot like it though. We actually get dirty doing something about what we believe.

Thank you for your service.

Ok, I’ll drop the snark for you. I partake in trash cleanup too (hiking trails) and we do our best to reduce single-use plastics, buy bulk, recycle properly, compost, etc. We’re far from perfect but we act with an environmental conscience and work to improve. We hope to stick around another 50 years and don’t want to see things turn to ****. Global warming is bad for everyone but it's an existential threat to my home country (among several).

I’m sorry I hit your nerve. The qualifier was there for a reason. But this IS a troll thread. Nonsense like 79 above and much worse has been going on here for years. I am jaded.

But I may take you up on the invitation for Long Island. My sister is in NYC and we did the family vacation there last summer, have some close family friends in Long Island as well. Keep us posted. Maybe more of VN will answer the call

 

[Orangeslice13]

Thank you for your service.

Ok, I’ll drop the snark for you. I partake in trash cleanup too (hiking trails) and we do our best to reduce single-use plastics, buy bulk, recycle properly, compost, etc. We’re far from perfect but we act with an environmental conscience and work to improve. We hope to stick around another 50 years and don’t want to see things turn to ****. Global warming is bad for everyone but it's an existential threat to my home country (among several).

I’m sorry I hit your nerve. The qualifier was there for a reason. But this IS a troll thread. Nonsense like 79 above and much worse has been going on here for years. I am jaded.

But I may take you up on the invitation for Long Island. My sister is in NYC and we did the family vacation there last summer, have some close family friends in Long Island as well. Keep us posted. Maybe more of VN will answer the call

You would not believe the plastic in the water off oyster bay. It’s shredded and it’s everywhere. Was there last August and that’s the target date again this year. If you’re serious I’ll keep you in the loop.

 

[Wafflestomper]

Well said. My cousin and I have picked up tons of trash out of the little river over the years on our floats. We’ve replaced every bulb with LED not only on our house but in our loved ones. We’re both strong conservatives and it’s insulting to hear some ass wipe say we don’t care about the environment because we refuse to submit to a global government that won’t hold the worst polluters to account. Want to know the worst polluters? Poor people. Deal with that ****.

Perhaps western countries ought to facilitate poorer countries adopting greener technologies rather than bitching about how much they pollute in comparison.

 

[Orangeslice13]

Perhaps western countries ought to facilitate poorer countries adopting greener technologies rather than bitching about how much they pollute in comparison.

Maybe they should stop dumping **** in the ocean an start with a basic landfill.
Rampant burning of garbage is better than the way they handle things now.
Green tech isn’t going to scratch the surface of the problem over there. They need a complete mental reset.

 

[0nelilreb]

Perhaps western countries ought to facilitate poorer countries adopting greener technologies rather than bitching about how much they pollute in comparison.

That’s like saying we should help build you a solar panel for your roof and not complain about you literally dumping dump trucks full of garbage into your rivers . How about they take a “solid foundation up “ approach to pollution . Culture is the hardest thing to change , not technology.

 

[Roustabout]

Perhaps western countries ought to facilitate poorer countries adopting greener technologies rather than bitching about how much they pollute in comparison.

perhaps they should, but that has nothing to do with personal response or the sweeping allegation that was made. Maybe all these global initiatives should be focusing on that?? As it stands, we like our cheap **** from these countries. I’d like to see all the climate changers protest by giving up their phones, tablets and laptops made in these polluting countries. Will you stand with me?

 

[FLVOL_79]

What in god's name are you on about here? Did you actually read this article? I did read it since I have access to this journal. What you said is a gross mischaracterization of it which should be readily apparent from simply reading the entire abstract. Was it actually too long for you to read? It was a single paragraph!

The definition it's referring to is that of "hiatus." They're talking about this due to the seemingly contradictory information available in the scientific literature and media. This is due to how this same term is used differently, which is due in part to the different data sets used for trends during this period. Some used this term to mean that the global mean surface temp (GMST) trend was negative, flat, or only slightly positive. Others used it to to mean that the trend is lower than what was predicted in models. Regardless, you're wrong once again. Give up.

Lets see. You asked for peer reviewed literature. You got peer reviewed literature. Then you prove my point by providing your own summation of said journal. Did you even read what you wrote? You have to be careful coming here and trying to blow your intellectual wad. You'll walk away defeated every time.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Perhaps western countries ought to facilitate poorer countries adopting greener technologies rather than bitching about how much they pollute in comparison.

We still have people volunteering to go to some of these countries to teach their people how to dig wells and farm. Dig wells. Farm. Basic things humans have been doing for 12,000 years, often on the same continent. But I'm sure green technologies will take hold. While we are at it maybe we can get the biggest polluters like China and India to stop using child and slave labor, pay people in their largest industries more than the $2 or less an hour average, and create safety oversight?

In the world of international business there is a general understanding that these developing countries won't stop polluting, using child labor, or have any real workplace safeguards in place until they are able to achieve first world status. The problem is that most of these countries cannot achieve developed status and maintain it without sticking to what got them there. China and India are perfect examples. If those countries had the reform that the USA has had over the past 100 years or so their economies would collapse. Then of course there are the myriad of cultural barriers that will prevent green technologies taking hold anytime soon.