Temperatures to rise 1.5 degrees Celsius by 2030-2052 without rapid steps - U.N. report

[Scott]

Troll post removed.

[kwilco]

21 hours ago, JimmyJ said:

 

Re: the above post:

 

"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."
(Stephen Hawking)

 

 

Stephan Hawking.  Famous denier?????

 

"Trump’s action [pulling out of the Paris agreement] could push the Earth over the brink, to become like Venus, with a temperature of 250C and raining sulphuric acid,” SH

Edited November 10, 2018 by kwilco

[JimmyJ]

5 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Stephan Hawking.  Famous denier?????

 

"Trump’s action [pulling out of the Paris agreement] could push the Earth over the brink, to become like Venus, with a temperature of 250C and raining sulphuric acid,” SH

 

Was referring to the author of that post (and those who take it and similar posts seriously).

Edited November 10, 2018 by JimmyJ

[Catoni]

1 hour ago, kwilco said:

Stephan Hawking.  Famous denier?????

 

"Trump’s action [pulling out of the Paris agreement] could push the Earth over the brink, to become like Venus, with a temperature of 250C and raining sulphuric acid,” SH

 Quote:    Trump’s action [pulling out of the Paris agreement] could push the Earth over the brink, to become like Venus, with a temperature of 250C and raining sulphuric acid,” SH

   

     That is an impossibility.  If Stephan Hawking actually said such a thing...  he was either losing his mental faculties towards the end... or he was a raving leftist/socialist using his name to help the politico-economic agenda of building undermining the relatively free western capitalist industial nations and building world socialism. 

  So sad for a man who was a genius about black holes.,...    Proof positive that you can be an amazing genius in one subject.... and totally ignorant in other subjects... 

   Anyone who thinks Trumps actions and/or inactions has the power to make the Earth like Venus with temperature of 250C and raining sulpheric acid is an idiot. Plain and simple.

  There's a better chance of pigs evolving wings over the next twenty years and taking to the skies in flight. 

         

Edited November 11, 2018 by Catoni
addition

[kwilco]

1 hour ago, Catoni said:

 Quote:    Trump’s action [pulling out of the Paris agreement] could push the Earth over the brink, to become like Venus, with a temperature of 250C and raining sulphuric acid,” SH

   

     That is an impossibility.  If Stephan Hawking actually said such a thing...  he was either losing his mental faculties towards the end... or he was a raving leftist/socialist using his name to help the politico-economic agenda of building undermining the relatively free western capitalist industial nations and building world socialism. 

  So sad for a man who was a genius about black holes.,...    Proof positive that you can be an amazing genius in one subject.... and totally ignorant in other subjects... 

   Anyone who thinks Trumps actions and/or inactions has the power to make the Earth like Venus with temperature of 250C and raining sulpheric acid is an idiot. Plain and simple.

  There's a better chance of pigs evolving wings over the next twenty years and taking to the skies in flight. 

         

What a sad indictment of deniers thinking, but it shows how mentally stunted they are.

Edited November 11, 2018 by kwilco

[RickBradford]

7 hours ago, kwilco said:

What a sad indictment of deniers thinking, but it shows how mentally stunted they are.

It's hard to imagine any thing more "mentally stunted" than lamely throwing a word like "deniers" around.

 

It means nothing (or rather, it can mean anything). It's one of those code words, like "fascist" that means "You disagree with me, so you must be stupid and evil." A pointless, fact-free, playground slur.

 

The word "deniers" is largely a creation of the Green/Left activists themselves. Activists always need to create enemies to oppose; otherwise it might occur even to them that they were simply pursuing their own narcissistic ego fulfilment.

[Hummin]

Unbelievable capetalists say thats the freedom, when you see the world suffer from exactly capetalism, and now going for protectism to save their ass! 

 

The more growt, the more mother earth suffer! More trees, and less people would do a change to this world, but I guess we have to finit the ride and go woth it as it is ment to bee. Humans is a selfdestructive specie, and a blind one to! Not to mention dumb, stupid and selfish!

Edited November 11, 2018 by Hummin

[canuckamuck]

7 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

It's hard to imagine any thing more "mentally stunted" than lamely throwing a word like "deniers" around.

 

It means nothing (or rather, it can mean anything). It's one of those code words, like "fascist" that means "You disagree with me, so you must be stupid and evil." A pointless, fact-free, playground slur.

 

The word "deniers" is largely a creation of the Green/Left activists themselves. Activists always need to create enemies to oppose; otherwise it might occur even to them that they were simply pursuing their own narcissistic ego fulfilment.

People are very afraid of wrong-think they attack it because it threatens the fragile construct of their hierarchy's. You have to trust the media, and the scientific organizations and the government. Lets not think about the fact that those are all things which belong to very rich men that have the right to control them. 

[Hummin]

2 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

People are very afraid of wrong-think they attack it because it threatens the fragile construct of their hierarchy's. You have to trust the media, and the scientific organizations and the government. Lets not think about the fact that those are all things which belong to very rich men that have the right to control them. 

The more information we have, the more stupid we get! Huh

[canuckamuck]

17 minutes ago, Hummin said:

The more information we have, the more stupid we get! Huh

It certainly seems to be the case these days. Most of what we gained in the age of enlightenment which catapulted western society and then the rest of the world into the modern age is being ridiculed and cast off in favor of ideologies.

[Hummin]

8 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

It certainly seems to be the case these days. Most of what we gained in the age of enlightenment which catapulted western society and then the rest of the world into the modern age is being ridiculed and cast off in favor of ideologies.

Well, when it comes to clima, there is not hard to believe the more forrest we get rid off, and the more humans populate the world, the more we polute fresh water, the sea and the air, the more we risk our little bubble in our galaxy, even there is more than we know influence the whole system.

 

it is not smart to exploit mother nature balance, our mother we live off. If everybody could respect our mother a bit more, and take better care of her, I guess we could make our future a bit better. But that ideology have not to many folowers yet, and Im surprised, since most people have kids and grandchildren. 

[RickBradford]

5 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

It certainly seems to be the case these days. Most of what we gained in the age of enlightenment which catapulted western society and then the rest of the world into the modern age is being ridiculed and cast off in favor of ideologies.

The information's there; large swathes of society, and especially academia, have decided that information is of no value, or is actively evil, and the only thing we should pay attention to is our feelings, or in Leftist-speak "lived experience."

 

Take the example of Professor John D Caputo of Syracuse University, who recently made the case that rationality equates to racism (yes, it really is that bad).

 

"I think that what modern philosophers call 'pure' reason ... is a white male Euro-Christian construction," he said in an interview with the NYT. "'Pure' reason is lily white, as if white is not a color or is closest to the purity of the sun, and everything else is 'colored.'"

 

The same abject silliness lies behind the "denier" word. The mere feeling that somebody disagrees with your worldview, quite independent of their actual views on anything, is enough to start the name-calling.

 

It's a very attractive proposition. Call someone a "denier", and you instantly get to feel morally superior, while not needing to know anything about the subject matter under discussion.

[BritManToo]

10 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Well, when it comes to clima, there is not hard to believe the more forrest we get rid off, and the more humans populate the world, the more we polute fresh water, the sea and the air, the more we risk our little bubble in our galaxy,

I don't do any of that, you need to talk to the Indians, Chinese and Americans.

(By the way, are you drunk, your recent posts are a bit strange)

Edited November 11, 2018 by BritManToo

[Hummin]

5 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

I don't do any of that, you need to talk to the Indians, Chinese and Americans.

(By the way, are you drunk, your recent posts are a bit strange)

Drunk? What is odd with my posts? 

[canuckamuck]

13 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Well, when it comes to clima, there is not hard to believe the more forrest we get rid off, and the more humans populate the world, the more we polute fresh water, the sea and the air, the more we risk our little bubble in our galaxy, even there is more than we know influence the whole system.

 

it is not smart to exploit mother nature balance, our mother we live off. If everybody could respect our mother a bit more, and take better care of her, I guess we could make our future a bit better. But that ideology have not to many folowers yet, and Im surprised, since most people have kids and grandchildren. 

I have nothing against better use of our resources and better conservation. I would prefer that we address the known toxins and trash we produce before we take a beneficial gas and make it the scapegoat for pollution. Extra CO2 might be the only beneficial byproduct of industrialization

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, canuckamuck said:

People are very afraid of wrong-think they attack it because it threatens the fragile construct of their hierarchy's. You have to trust the media, and the scientific organizations and the government. Lets not think about the fact that those are all things which belong to very rich men that have the right to control them. 

Can’t have peole trusting published science, that simply would not do.

 

[mauGR1]

22 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Well, when it comes to clima, there is not hard to believe the more forrest we get rid off, and the more humans populate the world, the more we polute fresh water, the sea and the air, the more we risk our little bubble in our galaxy, even there is more than we know influence the whole system.

 

it is not smart to exploit mother nature balance, our mother we live off. If everybody could respect our mother a bit more, and take better care of her, I guess we could make our future a bit better. But that ideology have not to many folowers yet, and Im surprised, since most people have kids and grandchildren. 

True what you say, but in my opinion there is no way back, young people want a car, air-con, a comfy job in the office, and don't forget all those millions living on farming in the 3rd world, they want a "good life" too.

Only a catastrophe can save humankind, it's a paradox, but that's it.

[Hummin]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Can’t have peole trusting published science, that simply would not do.

 

If we cant put the trust in science, we have to step back and put our trust in god! ????

[canuckamuck]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Can’t have peole trusting published science, that simply would not do.

 

In the middle ages people said the same things about the church. The church could never lie. Now we have entered a similar era of unmerited faith in some consensus that says give us more money it's your moral obligation

 

[Hummin]

1 minute ago, mauGR1 said:

True what you say, but in my opinion there is no way back, young people want a car, air-con, a comfy job in the office, and don't forget all those millions living on farming in the 3rd world, they want a "good life" too.

Only a catastrophe can save humankind, it's a paradox, but that's it.

Catastroph for the better, sad as it is said, but the nature is recycable, we are not. However humankind have survived for a million years and each catastrophe have made them stronger until the modern human got the grip on earth. Im not worried, I just feel sad for the next generations. I and you have lived the  best life ever possible, and I guess many of the members here at tv, have experienced a freedom very few in this world had chance to experience ever at this planet. We had choices to do what we wanted, and resources to do so as well. 

 

Still some complain about peanuts, 

[Hummin]

4 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

In the middle ages people said the same things about the church. The church could never lie. Now we have entered a similar era of unmerited faith in some consensus that says give us more money it's your moral obligation

 

Compare fairytales with science? 

[Chomper Higgot]

26 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

In the middle ages people said the same things about the church. The church could never lie. Now we have entered a similar era of unmerited faith in some consensus that says give us more money it's your moral obligation

 

Utter hogwash.

 

Away with you and your false equivalence between religious faith and science.

 

[RickBradford]

27 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Compare fairytales with science? 

No, being unable to have a sensible debate, covering multiple viewpoints, without people being denounced as 'heretics' for their views.

 

Four years ago, Robert F Kennedy Jr. equated climate skepticism with treason, and also likened climate skeptics to war criminals.

 

That is a clear parallel with the medieval church inquisiting people for not following the "one true faith".

Edited November 11, 2018 by RickBradford
clarified name

[BritManToo]

14 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

No, being unable to have a sensible debate, covering multiple viewpoints, without people being denounced as 'heretics' for their views.

 

Four years ago, Robert F Kennedy Jr. equated climate skepticism with treason, and also likened climate skeptics to war criminals.

 

That is a clear parallel with the medieval church inquisiting people for not following the "one true faith".

Not to mention 'deniers' and 'heretics' are pursued with equal vigour by 'believers'.

[RickBradford]

Just now, BritManToo said:

Not to mention 'deniers' and 'heretics' are pursued with equal vigour by 'believers'.

It's a notable characteristic of religions and cults that they are unable to stand even the smallest deviation from their groupthink orthodoxy.

 

The more rabidly that climate zealots pursue the trial, incarceration and even branding and eventual execution of those who dare to challenge the orthodox view, the more the climate movement resembles a toxic cult, and less a scientific enterprise.

[Hummin]

31 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Did I insult your god?

edit: Chomper's too I see.

Where did I feel insulted? Chomper? 

How is it to debate with poeple who compare religion and science, that is my problem! Human being have achieved great things by pulling in same directions, now it an another area again, and maybe thats why great civilations dissapear by time. The same things happens over time for a new beginning. It is nature. 

 

We know earths cycles, we also know we can influence the en iroment locally, and therefor it is easy to understand we can influence the earth globally? What proof you need to accept humans have an impact at all?

 

Edited November 11, 2018 by Hummin

[canuckamuck]

2 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Where did I feel insulted? Chomper? 

How is it to debate with poeple who compare religion and science, that is my problem! Human being have achievedngreT things by pulling in same directions, now it an another area again, and maybe thats why great civilations dissapear by time. The same things happens over time for a new beginning. It is nature. 

 

We know earths cycles, we also know we can influence the en iroment locally, and therefor it is easy to understand we can influence the earth globally? What proof you need to accept humans have an impact at all?

 

But you have a applied a false equivalency to my statement. I did not make a comparison between science and religion, but a comparison of faith in the ministers of those fields, and in particular the consensus in a field of staggeringly complex science.

[observer90210]

Oh DEar !...terrible news....now there will be even more shirtless farangs all over

[Hummin]

6 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

But you have a applied a false equivalency to my statement. I did not make a comparison between science and religion, but a comparison of faith in the ministers of those fields, and in particular the consensus in a field of staggeringly complex science.

Only future will tell who was right and wrong, and we aint going to be here! We will maybe se some short term signs, but still not enough proof for those who will not believe.

 

What do you believe the future generations will say about our last 100 year? 

 

 

[RickBradford]

11 minutes ago, Hummin said:

What do you believe the future generations will say about our last 100 year?

One thing they'll probably ask, is why we p**sed away trillions of dollars on silly feel-good Green fantasies about climate catastrophe.

 

They'll complain about how we were so certain we knew what to do, impoverishing them with our spendthrift arrogance regarding "climate activities".