General Climate Change

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up
Hauler

Hauler

Been fallin so long it's like gravitys gone
Feb 3, 2016
47,607
59,510
kaladin stormblessed said:
you think that 99.9% of scientists are all in on the fear porn agenda?

that honestly makes sense to you?
Click to expand...
No.

At it's core, the science is accurate. Carbon emissions from combustible engines cause a greenhouse effect that acts as an insulator, trapping heat. We know that to be true. The question is to what degree. And I don't mean "degree" be temp, I mean is it scalable and how much of an effect does it have on earthly temps?

That's where the speculation comes in. Are the measurable temp increases a natural, cyclical occurrence or is it because of human activity? I believe it's both, but with the cyclical part of the equation being the driving force.

So while it's a good thing to have cleaner engines and better power sources (nuclear being the best option), I roll my eyes at media mouth-foamers and statements from AOC that insinuate the death of Mother Earth is quickly approaching.

We don't have a control group in this little science experiment we are living on, so the entire argument - for or against - is largely speculation. I don't know it's bullshit any more than you know it's 100% factual. But most agree polluting is bad - so we have that going for us...which is nice. ?
 
ShatsBassoon

ShatsBassoon

Throwing bombs & banging moms
First 100
Jan 14, 2015
18,607
33,615
kaladin stormblessed said:
Man-made climate* change questionaire: (for self-use only)

the earth is warming and carbon dioxide levels are rising

(1) do you agree that the earth is warming and CO2 levels are rising?

97% of scientists believe that the cause is human activity, primarily the burning of fossil fuels

(2) if yes to #1, what is the cause of the change?

* the term "climate" is different than the term "weather"
Click to expand...
Can we change the term from man-made to corporate-made?
 
ShatsBassoon

ShatsBassoon

Throwing bombs & banging moms
First 100
Jan 14, 2015
18,607
33,615
Hauler @Hauler doing some super sleuthing I have discovered the identity of cute girl in the gif. Her name is Becky Dole key account manager at gify. Get the fuck out, I know right.

Google reverse image search is pretty fucking freaky if you think about it. Stalkers everywhere are all like...

 
Kingtony87

Kingtony87

Batman
Feb 2, 2016
6,524
8,905
Speaker to Animals said:
Uncomfortably, recklessly close:
"If the world temperature rises by two degrees, mountain glaciers and rivers will start to disappear and mountainous regions will see more landslides, as the permafrost that held them together melts away. By 2100, sea levels could rise by a metre, displacing 10% of the world's population."
Click to expand...
What you’re quoting is not what the 99.9 consensus is. It’s worst case scenario projection. Basically here’s doomsday that could happen. A lot more than 10 percent of the worlds population would be in literal fucksville right now if we transitioned away from fossil fuels today. We don’t have other forms of energy that can do the same job yet and they aren’t even close.
 
Shinkicker

Shinkicker

For what it's worth
Jan 30, 2016
10,417
13,881
What if this earth warming cycle is natural and the ozone holes are a way to allow this excess heat out ?
 
Shinkicker

Shinkicker

For what it's worth
Jan 30, 2016
10,417
13,881
Kingtony87 said:
so no more planes or cows for food or any myriad of things in the green new deal. Also who; paying to update all of the houses and buildings that need updated to energy standards in the green new deal. As far as transferring away from fossil fuels to green energy how do you address the grid failures we see in places like texas when it got cold or california in the summer with their rolling black outs? Quote on quote renewable energy is no way strong or reliable enough to keep people warm in the winter and cool in the summer. What do you do with developing nations like africa and india. Fuck you we got our energy and can afford to cut back now but you guys cant use fuel to prosper and grow?

Perhaps you missed my initial post. But i don't disagree with manmade climate change or the effect we are having. Or with the general projections for the next 100 years. However i've yet to see a solution that does not cause more issues than it pretends to fix. but yess don't address any of the specific policy debates just hurl ad-homenim attacks.
Click to expand...
Electric cars charging take about the same electricity as 25 refrigerators running. What’s that going to do to the grid?

I’m investing in gas powered generators.
 
K

kaladin stormblessed

Nala fanboy
Apr 24, 2017
17,652
20,029
Shinkicker said:
What if this earth warming cycle is natural and the ozone holes are a way to allow this excess heat out ?
Click to expand...
It was 97% until recently. Now it's virtually 100%

Climate change is not natural. It'd man made due primarily to fossil fules

With all due respect, we are past the "is it man made" debate.

The questions left are:
- will we address it?
- if so, how?

SPOILER WARNING

We wont since US politicians are bought out by the oil companies
 
Shinkicker

Shinkicker

For what it's worth
Jan 30, 2016
10,417
13,881
kaladin stormblessed said:
It was 97% until recently. Now it's virtually 100%

Climate change is not natural. It'd man made due primarily to fossil fules

With all due respect, we are past the "is it man made" debate.

The questions left are:
- will we address it?
- if so, how?

SPOILER WARNING

We wont since US politicians are bought out by the oil companies
Click to expand...
Didn’t the government just pass a bill to go all electric cars by the year 2039?
 
Shinkicker

Shinkicker

For what it's worth
Jan 30, 2016
10,417
13,881
kaladin stormblessed said:
It was 97% until recently. Now it's virtually 100%

Climate change is not natural. It'd man made due primarily to fossil fules

With all due respect, we are past the "is it man made" debate.

The questions left are:
- will we address it?
- if so, how?

SPOILER WARNING

We wont since US politicians are bought out by the oil companies
Click to expand...
Can you tell me about the Eocene period?
 
Shinkicker

Shinkicker

For what it's worth
Jan 30, 2016
10,417
13,881
The early Eocene was a period of atmospheric CO2 concentrations higher than the current 390 parts per million (ppm )- reaching at least 600ppm and possibly far higher.

Global temperatures were on the order of 5C higher, and there was no sharp divide in temperature between the poles and the equator.

Drilling research carried out in recent years showed that the Arctic must have had a subtropical climate.

www.bbc.com

Palm trees 'grew on Antarctica'

A massive scientific drilling mission off Antarctica's eastern coast turns up evidence of palm trees during a warm period 53 million years ago.
www.bbc.com
 
Shinkicker

Shinkicker

For what it's worth
Jan 30, 2016
10,417
13,881
Speaker to Animals said:
Anything but blame us for our lack of foresight.
Anything but us!
Click to expand...
We know for a fact that the earth goes through climate changes, cycles if you will. Ice age, etc.

I’m not denying that we are contributing to increased CO2 emissions. But what if the earth is moving to a warming cycle anyway? And that is not saying that if we cut emissions we might slow it down. But what if it is going to happen regardless of what we do? Like it has before, right? 53 million years ago carbon in the atmosphere was twice the amount it is now, maybe even more.

So......

I’m not against trying to improve on anything for Mother Earth. But I think some energy should be spent on how humans will survive when CO2 hits those numbers in the atmosphere again.

Caves? Underground? I don’t know.
 
K

kaladin stormblessed

Nala fanboy
Apr 24, 2017
17,652
20,029
Shinkicker said:
We know for a fact that the earth goes through climate changes, cycles if you will. Ice age, etc.

I’m not denying that we are contributing to increased CO2 emissions. But what if the earth is moving to a warming cycle anyway? And that is not saying that if we cut emissions we might slow it down. But what if it is going to happen regardless of what we do? Like it has before, right? 53 million years ago carbon in the atmosphere was twice the amount it is now, maybe even more.

So......

I’m not against trying to improve on anything for Mother Earth. But I think some energy should be spent on how humans will survive when CO2 hits those numbers in the atmosphere again.

Caves? Underground? I don’t know.
Click to expand...
The level of CO2 is just one factor

Look at how quickly it changed beginning with the industrial revolution

That is one of the reason scientists have universally l concluded that the climate change that we are seeing is due to fossil fuels
 
Kingtony87

Kingtony87

Batman
Feb 2, 2016
6,524
8,905
kaladin stormblessed said:
The level of CO2 is just one factor

Look at how quickly it changed beginning with the industrial revolution

That is one of the reason scientists have universally l concluded that the climate change that we are seeing is due to fossil fuels
Click to expand...
we can absolutely agree on this and come to completely different policy prescriptions. Prevention vs adaption etc. Almost all of our prevention plans that have been presented have a negligible effect on the rise and thats even if we get the world to cooperate which we absolutely won't. Nor do we have the right to tell/force them to. But those same prescriptions will also have very real and very detrimental side effects for people in the immediate.

We can absolutely agree on the projections for the next 100 years and that it is our fault. However doing something now that causes pain and suffering to have almost no effect on the climate in next 100 years is just posturing and does nothing to truly solve the problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom