by lostand confused ➕follow (3) 💰tip ignore
« First « Previous Comments 38 - 77 of 108 Next » Last » Search these comments
Right ?
So “climate change” means changing the history of weather? How would you do that
Things such as local weather will change and maybe dramatically causing many long living species not enough time to adap
fat cat bureaucrats while they dine on caviar in 5 star hotels on the public dime while lecturing us middle class about the evil 1%.
global warming, climate change, ozone hole
lostand confused is apropos for sure.
WookieMan saysglobal warming, climate change, ozone hole
is not true.
The question is what to do? And answer probably does not lie in hybrid cars, bioethanol, new taxes, Al Gore's 1000000 sq ft house, another Rio summit about climate change to which bureaucrats fly in their jets from all over the world, and so on. If we want to have a decent life standard and pull people out of poverty, we need cheap and plentiful energy that is accessible to everyone, not only Hollywood millionaires. Which means nuclear assuming that we do not want to produce CO2. Sadly, no one wants to consider it.
The only argument about all this should be how can we restrict population growth, yet still increase economic output. That's the million dollar question that needs an answer.
bob2356 saysthere might a place on the planet that are getting a month that is the warmest in 130 years
Where?
2018 might be the 7th or 8th warmest year on record following 2017 the second or third warmest year on record.
Climate change is real but it might not be getting warmer.
The five warmest years in the global record have all come in the 2010s
The 10 warmest years on record have all come since 1998
The 20 warmest years on record have all come since 1995
bob2356 says
The five warmest years in the global record have all come in the 2010s
The 10 warmest years on record have all come since 1998
The 20 warmest years on record have all come since 1995
But 2017 was cooler and 2018 will be cooler still. If global warming were caused by co2 shouldn't the temperature be hockey sticking instead of leveling off and falling?
I posted it twice already. Do you dare check it out. http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php It shows every year in the arctic.
"The average amount of heat absorbed and trapped in the upper ocean last year was also higher than ever seen before"
The arctic temperature was spiking up in the 70s the same way it is today.
2017 was either the second warmest or third warmest on record, depending on who you ask. I guess it's better than every single year being a new all time hottest on record.
not much
I get so confused why people always debate/argue over this topic.
bob2356 says
The magic word is trend line.
Hockey stick
If there are people out there that don't know the difference then there is very little that can be done to help them
If there are people out there that don't know the difference then there is very little that can be done to help them.
What are these billions in taxes being spent on climate change ?
Of course the goal is protecting the interests of big oil and big coal.
You mean like all the stupid scientists that come out of schools like, MIT, Harvard, Stanford, Cal Tech, Oxford, Cambridge etc. ? Yes, the evil democrats have really pulled on over on those dumb ass "book larnin" folks.
There were a couple years with spiked fluctuations, but not with it staying so much above the averages like it does every year the past five years..
WookieMan saysI get so confused why people always debate/argue over this topic.
People do that because of a billion dollars invested in the same advertisers that created the tobacco health debate.
The only thing that really matters, regardless of what/who we want to blame, is that humans are trashing the planet. We need less of them. This is the only solution for climate change deniers or climate change believers. The ONLY. And this is why I don't get these arguments.
Theories are meant to be questioned and tested and improved. The PC culture (which marcus displays w hus "book larnin" comment) combined w $$billions = propaganda for the purpose of power. Any reasonable adult should be able to admit this much.
I believe we're trashing the planet,
But denier scientists directly in the pay of energy companies are of course totally objective??
These arctic spikes in temperature are not unprecedented. They happened in the 70's as you can see in the charts you linked. I recall reading somewhere that there where similiar spikes in the 30's. The spikes in temp are still well below freezing.
There is a short summer season where the ice actually is melting.
Predictions on when the arctic will be ice free?
I have no clue.
Neither do the alarmist scientist with their failed models of doom.
Link to said scientists please. The energy companies don't hire "denier scientists"
How many do you want?
« First « Previous Comments 38 - 77 of 108 Next » Last » Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,199,426 comments by 14,172 users - askmeaboutthesaltporkcure, HeadSet, NuttBoxer, RC2006 online now