Global warming latest news

Zach Smith said:
While we're at it, we also had world-renown scientists, who I'm sure are all in for those climate change computer models, tell us Covid-19 would kill 5,000,000 Americans. That model was only off by 99.8%. If that doesn't make you trust them, what will?
Click to expand...

Damn!.. that IS good!
 
just.wing.it said:
Correct, which is why I say those who deny that the climate changes naturally are the true climate change deniers.
Click to expand...
A couple thoughts about this. I've worked at three university laboratories recently and I believe it is important to understand the... 'scientific' process.

First and foremost, the scientific community is as biased and politically fueled as any major corporation or politician in America.

You know what dictates which studies get funded? Well, funders with an agenda to prove. This is why our medical community has stagnated in terms of new drug therapies. They are controlled by big pharma, who has the money to support the jobs and laboratories associated with medical breakthrough advances. Id love a career extracting and utilizing botanical secondary metabolites for medicinal and industrial purposes- but where does one begin when all medical research is big pharma funded looking for a dime? Are they going to make the most money from a botanical derived therapy, or one of the biologics?

There is so much opportunity for corruption in science in addition to innocent human error. Numbers are easily recorded incorrectly, purposely or not, unknown variables influence results, and statistics are often skewed in favor of one idea or another. Experimental design is also a factor- whst variables are included, which aren't, etc. Sample sites are purposely selected for abnormal qualities to enhance whatever viewpoint the scientists have.

Add to this the current climate of the scientific community. In order for publication, papers must go through the peer review process. This means like minded individuals must approve your work, and if it is counter to their opinion why would they approve it? This perpetuates any existing ideals, whether correct or not. Contrary opinions are laughed out of office.

Yes, scientists do occasionally get busted for falsifying publications. But what percent really gets caught, especially when it is in favor of the majorities opinion?

Green energy is a hoax. The amount of materials, labor, transportation cost (yup those windmills are made in factories and transpored on semis) and industrial waste produced by green energy sources is absurd. Efficiency for solar panels plummets after a few years, and what to do with all the old panels who've lost efficiency? Toxic Electric car batteries? What about the ecological impact of windmills and solar panels? How much heat is produced on a solar panel farm, that was previously a forest clear-cut to a black, heat absorbing farm? The noise disturbance of windmills?

There is no simple solution. Nuclear energy is the best we have, but fear mongering agendas have ruined the nuclear name.

In any case, we are observing change in the planet. Earths climate has always, and always will, change.
The question is, how much change have we driven?

Take coral for example. There have been 6 mass extinctions for the animals in recorded history, and we are supposedly in the 7th. If this doesn't demonstrate the volatility of earths past climate I dont know what would convince you.

Ocean acidification, caused by increased CO2, is another leading concern for reefs. An acidified ocean affects calcification rates in organisms like coral, crabs, etc. But how much does the pH need to drop to influence this? Is this the reason for the 7th extinction? Dramatically more acidic conditions are needed than we are experiencing to cause real issues . Will we reach the point where we face a major problem for this? Maybe in the future. But I don't envision any degree of change in terms of energy consumption, so what is the solution?

Increased CO2 also increases plant vegetative growth. Why is it that our trees are not buffering this increase in atmospheric CO2? Supposedly other limiting factors. I remain unconvinced by the limited and biased studies.

I'm not sure the difference gaseous CO2 had made in terms of temperature change. But you know what i know for a fact has made a change on the earth?

Single use plastics. The millions of plastic bottles. The chemical detergents we wash out the drain, the medicines we piss out every day that bioaccumulate in mussel communities on the coast, which we then consume. We haven't even begun to understand the irreversible impact of these things.


I've lost the energy to type any further. But hopefully this is some food for thought. I am neither a climate change believer or denier. I just know that we are doing things much worse for the immediate future than releasing CO2.
 
leatherback said:
The problem is, your world view is not the world view others have.
Click to expand...

Right.
Some that are so sure of their view of the world solve this problem very easily : they eliminate the others. From the religious wars in Europe to the present day, religious people eliminate the others. It can be through terrorism, or more insiduous, by "helping" people in dire straits as long as they conform to their religion (typical of evangelists and islamists) and forget their culture.

That's not my view of the world, or rather of "mankind".

leatherback said:
People unwilling to understand where other people come from, to understand WHY other people refute your basic principles are unable to understand why you do not seem to reach a mutual understanding. Other people can see the world so fundamentally different that it is a shock to the system when you finally get where they come from.
Click to expand...

This is a very confused statement.

Let me put it very bluntly :

Shall I accept someone as part of "my community" anyone who promotes any kind of superiority to the ones of other religions, colours, cultures ? Apartheid, segregation, religion(s) that place any other "miscreant" on the road to hell ?

No, definitely not.

But that's not about "global warming", that's more about "global bainwhasing"" (religion)
 
See? For the most part.. THIS is great discussion material... conversations that prompt Even considering one’s own “lines in the sand”...

I don’t agree with any sort of personal attack/slight though....

We should be able to discuss WITHOUT letting emotions and tension GUIDE the conversation...

We’re.... almost there.

🤣🤣🤣
 
JoeR said:
A couple thoughts about this. I've worked at three university laboratories recently and I believe it is important to understand the... 'scientific' process.

First and foremost, the scientific community is as biased and politically fueled as any major corporation or politician in America.

You know what dictates which studies get funded? Well, funders with an agenda to prove. This is why our medical community has stagnated in terms of new drug therapies. They are controlled by big pharma, who has the money to support the jobs and laboratories associated with medical breakthrough advances. Id love a career extracting and utilizing botanical secondary metabolites for medicinal and industrial purposes- but where does one begin when all medical research is big pharma funded looking for a dime? Are they going to make the most money from a botanical derived therapy, or one of the biologics?

There is so much opportunity for corruption in science in addition to innocent human error. Numbers are easily recorded incorrectly, purposely or not, unknown variables influence results, and statistics are often skewed in favor of one idea or another. Experimental design is also a factor- whst variables are included, which aren't, etc. Sample sites are purposely selected for abnormal qualities to enhance whatever viewpoint the scientists have.

Add to this the current climate of the scientific community. In order for publication, papers must go through the peer review process. This means like minded individuals must approve your work, and if it is counter to their opinion why would they approve it? This perpetuates any existing ideals, whether correct or not. Contrary opinions are laughed out of office.

Yes, scientists do occasionally get busted for falsifying publications. But what percent really gets caught, especially when it is in favor of the majorities opinion?

Green energy is a hoax. The amount of materials, labor, transportation cost (yup those windmills are made in factories and transpored on semis) and industrial waste produced by green energy sources is absurd. Efficiency for solar panels plummets after a few years, and what to do with all the old panels who've lost efficiency? Toxic Electric car batteries? What about the ecological impact of windmills and solar panels? How much heat is produced on a solar panel farm, that was previously a forest clear-cut to a black, heat absorbing farm? The noise disturbance of windmills?

There is no simple solution. Nuclear energy is the best we have, but fear mongering agendas have ruined the nuclear name.

In any case, we are observing change in the planet. Earths climate has always, and always will, change.
The question is, how much change have we driven?

Take coral for example. There have been 6 mass extinctions for the animals in recorded history, and we are supposedly in the 7th. If this doesn't demonstrate the volatility of earths past climate I dont know what would convince you.

Ocean acidification, caused by increased CO2, is another leading concern for reefs. An acidified ocean affects calcification rates in organisms like coral, crabs, etc. But how much does the pH need to drop to influence this? Is this the reason for the 7th extinction? Dramatically more acidic conditions are needed than we are experiencing to cause real issues . Will we reach the point where we face a major problem for this? Maybe in the future. But I don't envision any degree of change in terms of energy consumption, so what is the solution?

Increased CO2 also increases plant vegetative growth. Why is it that our trees are not buffering this increase in atmospheric CO2? Supposedly other limiting factors. I remain unconvinced by the limited and biased studies.

I'm not sure the difference gaseous CO2 had made in terms of temperature change. But you know what i know for a fact has made a change on the earth?

Single use plastics. The millions of plastic bottles. The chemical detergents we wash out the drain, the medicines we piss out every day that bioaccumulate in mussel communities on the coast, which we then consume. We haven't even begun to understand the irreversible impact of these things.


I've lost the energy to type any further. But hopefully this is some food for thought. I am neither a climate change believer or denier. I just know that we are doing things much worse for the immediate future than releasing CO2.
Click to expand...
great post. i read it all. fair minded for sure. as i said, im indifferent to whether we did it, but im absolutely sure the government or celebs have no right or track record to
use the working class' hard earned money to try to solve it. social security set to drain empty by 2032...big gov always fails = theyre not the solution to this issue. the free markets are, and unless the entire BRIC (brazil russia india china) get on board, the timing for investment isnt there for a long time, or ever.
 
It is a useless discussion. People do not change their opion based on a discussion in some online thread.
The arguments are always the same regurgitation of policially fuelled agenda's. Neither side willing to move an inch to allow the possibility that the other side might have a point.
 
Zach Smith said:
We're at least a hundred years along our journey to the eradication of human freedom on earth by the Marxists
Click to expand...

Ho ho, ho, he he, hee, huh huh... There are no "marxists" any longer.

That's a good laugh.

It's like people believing in ghosts (BRRRR....), a good way for mobsters to scare people into voting for them crooks that count on the imbeciles. Well, mankind hasn't changed a lot since Neanderthal man.

In 1970, I was 15, I grew up since.

 
leatherback said:
It is a useless discussion. People do not change their opion based on a discussion in some online thread.
The arguments are always the same regurgitation of policially fuelled agenda's. Neither side willing to move an inch to allow the possibility that the other side might have a point.
Click to expand...
Yep. This is the absolute truth above all and shows why society is effed. People are locked into their viewpoints which are reinforced by their choice of media and neither side is willing to budge or compromise. I used to think something like a global pandemic might be required to break the logjam but even that became completely politicized. I've come to the conclusion it is hopeless.
 
coh said:
Yep. This is the absolute truth above all and shows why society is effed. People are locked into their viewpoints which are reinforced by their choice of media and neither side is willing to budge or compromise. I used to think something like a global pandemic might be required to break the logjam but even that became completely politicized. I've come to the conclusion it is hopeless.
Click to expand...
Yup. And people consider you insane if you express in interest in the way of thinking of al people, of all walks of life. Straight away jumping to "The other side has no point";"they are crazy";"they are a threat".

People have generally stopped thinking, and completely lost the concept of open conversation, exchange of ideas and growing.
 
Whether or not we caused it dosen't matter, we can all pick up after ourselves, clean up beaches, make this world a tad nicer to live in...in the end though this planet will be here long after we've all killed each other off and were not going to stop this planets existence with a bit of smog, it will shake us off like a flea...

oh and just to add fuel to the fire RED Vs. Blue? They both don't care about you 😉 2 heads of the same serpent
 
AlainK said:
Ho ho, ho, he he, hee, huh huh... There are no "marxists" any longer.

That's a good laugh.

It's like people believing in ghosts (BRRRR....), a good way for mobsters to scare people into voting for them crooks that count on the imbeciles. Well, mankind hasn't changed a lot since Neanderthal man.

In 1970, I was 15, I grew up since.

Click to expand...
all subjective, except your age
 
coh said:
Yep. This is the absolute truth above all and shows why society is effed. People are locked into their viewpoints which are reinforced by their choice of media and neither side is willing to budge or compromise. I used to think something like a global pandemic might be required to break the logjam but even that became completely politicized. I've come to the conclusion it is hopeless.
Click to expand...
I always find statements like "society has gone down hill" or "society is only getting worse" interesting. Or even, its the end times!!

Feels like shit is really hitting the fan now, doesn't it?

but for some perspective. Less than 100 years ago, millions of jews and others were being executed with no real treason other than one groups superiority complex and evil will. Unfathomable, yet there are people still alive who experienced something that I could not ever see happening today. But it did. Before that, Egyptians enslaved thousands of people. In India the caste system still to this day prevents the "untouchables" from achieving any greater of a life than toilet cleaner. They are born as less and die less, with no ability to realise their potential.

Society is no better or worse today than before. We simply have more awareness of global atrocities.
 
Potsofgreen said:
Whether or not we caused it dosen't matter, we can all pick up after ourselves, clean up beaches, make this world a tad nicer to live in...in the end though this planet will be here long after we've all killed each other off and were not going to stop this planets existence with a bit of smog, it will shake us off like a flea...

oh and just to add fuel to the fire RED Vs. Blue? They both don't care about you 😉 2 heads of the same serpent
Click to expand...
exactly, which is why a priv sector businessperson or someone like a doctor (people who competed in a free market)
are who we want and need to drain the swamp. the swamp is politicians, left and right
 
JoeR said:
I always find statements like "society has gone down hill" or "society is only getting worse" interesting. Or even, its the end times!!

Feels like shit is really hitting the fan now, doesn't it?

but for some perspective. Less than 100 years ago, millions of jews and others were being executed with no real treason other than one groups superiority complex and evil will. Unfathomable, yet there are people still alive who experienced something that I could not ever see happening today. But it did. Before that, Egyptians enslaved thousands of people. In India the caste system still to this day prevents the "untouchables" from achieving any greater of a life than toilet cleaner. They are born as less and die less, with no ability to realise their potential.

Society is no better or worse today than before. We simply have more awareness of global atrocities.
Click to expand...
good points. which is why this amazing setup in America needs to be protected and promoted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom