Sparktrader Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 1 minute ago, ozimoron said: And the action is the world's largest investor in green tech. Yes to sell to western nations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozimoron Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 Just now, Sparktrader said: Yes to sell to western nations. They won't use it themselves? It doesn't matter who they sell it to, we all live on the same planet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparktrader Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 https://www.scmp.com/business/article/3167293/chinas-solar-exports-rose-60-cent-us28-billion-last-year-made-light-covid Making solar panels for exports. They know the west loves em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparktrader Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 1 minute ago, ozimoron said: They won't use it themselves? It doesn't matter who they sell it to, we all live on the same planet. Yep use coal themselves. Sell solar overseas to farangs. Chinese are smart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 If you are going to cite evidence, then post a link. Posts removed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Samedi Posted May 31, 2022 Author Share Posted May 31, 2022 (edited) Sparktrader, you are a very naughty boy ???? Tweaking what I wrote when quoting me to make me say something that I didn't. I wouldn't be too proud of that, mister "I study the map of Mianus for 20 years"! I'm done with you ???? Edited May 31, 2022 by Baron Samedi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozimoron Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 1 minute ago, Baron Samedi said: Sparktrader, you are a very naughty boy ???? Tweaking what I wrote when quoting me to make me say something that I didn't. I wouldn't be too proud of that, mister "I study the map of Mianus for 20 years"! I'm done with you ???? I think the sun is over the yard arm. ???? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparktrader Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 1 minute ago, Baron Samedi said: Sparktrader, you are a very naughty boy ???? Tweaking what I wrote when quoting me to make me say something that I didn't. I wouldn't be too proud of that, mister "I study the map of Mianus for 20 years"! I'm done with you ???? I quoted you direct. I posted the Chinese data. I posted the models analysis. I posted the south pole data. Science is about facts. If you dont like the facts so be it. If worried about co2 dont use cars, motorbikes or planes. Simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparktrader Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 23 minutes ago, ozimoron said: You're intent on not providing links to evidence for your misinformation. High CO2 levels cause plants to thicken their leaves, which could worsen climate change effects, researchers say https://www.washington.edu/news/2018/10/01/thick-leaves-high-co2/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ask-the-experts-does-rising-co2-benefit-plants1/ The carbon dioxide level that Kovenock and Swann simulated with thickened leaves was just 710 ppm. Current levels 410ppm. Way below that level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Samedi Posted May 31, 2022 Author Share Posted May 31, 2022 2 minutes ago, Sparktrader said: I quoted you direct. I posted the Chinese data. I posted the models analysis. I posted the south pole data. Science is about facts. If you dont like the facts so be it. If worried about co2 dont use cars, motorbikes or planes. Simple. Right now I'm worrying about your ability to be coherent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparktrader Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 Just now, Baron Samedi said: Right now I'm worrying about your ability to be coherent. Just now, Baron Samedi said: Right now I'm worrying about your ability to be coherent. Go to bed. The world wont end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozimoron Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 10 minutes ago, Sparktrader said: The carbon dioxide level that Kovenock and Swann simulated with thickened leaves was just 710 ppm. Current levels 410ppm. Way below that level. Yes, nothing to worry about. The last time the CO2 levels were this high was 5 million years ago https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/7/graphic-carbon-dioxide-hits-new-high/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparktrader Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 3 minutes ago, ozimoron said: Yes, nothing to worry about. The last time the CO2 levels were this high was 5 million years ago https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/7/graphic-carbon-dioxide-hits-new-high/ May 9, 2013, CO2 levels in the air reached the level of 400 parts per million (ppm). This is the first time in human history that this milestone has been passed. CO2 is the most important man-made greenhouse gas, which means (in a simple sense) that it acts like a blanket trapping heat near the surface of the Earth. It comes from the burning of fossil fuels such as coal, oil and natural gas, as well as deforestation. The level of CO2 in the atmosphere has risen from around 317 ppm in 1958 (when Charles David Keeling began making his historical measurements at Mauna Loa) to 400 ppm today. It’s projected to reach 450 ppm by the year 2040. (According to your own link a mere 450ppm by 2040. Way below 710ppm) So yes nothing to worry about for me. If u worried stop using cars, planes etc. No doubt you will do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparktrader Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 https://nypost.com/2021/11/12/50-years-of-predictions-that-the-climate-apocalypse-is-nigh/ People on the 1970s were told the end was close too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozimoron Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Sparktrader said: https://nypost.com/2021/11/12/50-years-of-predictions-that-the-climate-apocalypse-is-nigh/ People on the 1970s were told the end was close too Every one of those predictions was accurate. It's not like the Earth's climate isn't reaching a tipping point as a result of climate inaction. The world wide disasters and record breaking temperatures, glacial melting and ocean acidity testify that we have already missed our chances when action would have been most beneficial. The NY Post is a hack rag and that article quotes Lomberg who was effectively booted out of Australia after a revolt by academia follow the Abbott government's effort to paint him as an expert. "The difficulty is he is neither a scientist or an economist, he's a political scientist." https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-08/bjorn-lomborg-uwa-consensus-centre-contract-cancelled/6456708 Edited May 31, 2022 by ozimoron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparktrader Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 1 minute ago, ozimoron said: Every one of those predictions was accurate. It's not like the Earth's climate isn't reaching a tipping point as a result of climate inaction. The world wide disasters and record breaking temperatures, glacial melting and ocean acidity testify that we have already missed our chances when action would have been most beneficial. The NY Post is a hack rag and that article quotes Lomberg who was booted out of Australia after a revolt by academia follow the Abbott government's effort to paint him as an expert. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-08/bjorn-lomborg-uwa-consensus-centre-contract-cancelled/6456708 The piece quotes Mostafa K. Tolba, executive director of the United Nations environmental program, as saying that if things aren’t fixed by the turn of the century — the year 2000 — the world would face “an environmental catastrophe which will witness devastation as complete, as irreversible, as any nuclear holocaust.’’ In 1989, a senior UN environmental official shaved a year off that dire prediction, saying that if we didn’t fix climate change by 1999, we would have “Global disaster, nations wiped off the face of the earth, crop failures”: Accurate? Couldnt be more wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozimoron Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Sparktrader said: The piece quotes Mostafa K. Tolba, executive director of the United Nations environmental program, as saying that if things aren’t fixed by the turn of the century — the year 2000 — the world would face “an environmental catastrophe which will witness devastation as complete, as irreversible, as any nuclear holocaust.’’ In 1989, a senior UN environmental official shaved a year off that dire prediction, saying that if we didn’t fix climate change by 1999, we would have “Global disaster, nations wiped off the face of the earth, crop failures”: Accurate? Couldnt be more wrong. what was the timeline stated for this to happen? It's happening now. The article is trying to imply that if the deadlines were missed then apocalypse would follow the next day. KIndergarden kids could see through that trash. The climate change denier ship has sailed and only the extremists are claiming it's a hoax. The rest of the world are ringing the alarm bells. Edited May 31, 2022 by ozimoron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparktrader Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 https://ourworldindata.org/crop-yields Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparktrader Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/climate-change/planet-greening-negated-global-warming-show-nasa-maps-75878 Greener planet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozimoron Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Sparktrader said: https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/climate-change/planet-greening-negated-global-warming-show-nasa-maps-75878 Greener planet You might want to read to the end next time Chi Chen, one of the authors of the study, said: “In the fight against climate change, plants are the lonely-only defenders. Stopping deforestation and ecologically sensible large-scale tree-planting could be one simple, but not sufficient, defense against climate change.” The authors noted, however, that the cooling effect from extra vegetation was large from an energy dissipation perspective, but wa quite small compared to the pace and intensity of global warming. Edited May 31, 2022 by ozimoron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozimoron Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 1 minute ago, Sparktrader said: No warming for 6 years now. Global warming isn’t a straight line. There will be record warm moments and not-so-warm moments, but overall the trend is upward. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2018/04/26/global-temperatures-have-cooled-since-2016-heres-why-thats-normal/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparktrader Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 https://hakaimagazine.com/news/the-ever-shifting-not-necessarily-shrinking-pacific-island-nations/ Plenty of islands expanding Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozimoron Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 Just now, Sparktrader said: https://hakaimagazine.com/news/the-ever-shifting-not-necessarily-shrinking-pacific-island-nations/ Plenty of islands expanding did you actually read the article? It doesn't imply good news. Here's the byline. Analyses of satellite imagery show many Pacific Islands are actually growing, but that doesn’t mean all is well for the people who live there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozimoron Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 2 minutes ago, Sparktrader said: Yes half true. Warming and cooling. 6 years of cooling. 6 years of warming before that. Despite 21% increase in Chinese co2 as posted before temps in 2021/22 are down 0.3 vs 2016. Which models predicted a fall in temps and a large rise in co2? Answer none. all of them said it would not be a straight line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 4 hours ago, Sparktrader said: China is 33% of global mm co2 output. Up 4.8% in 1 year. Lecturing farangs or Thais wont do a thing. The theory might even turn out to be weak. Nobody knows. Oceans full of plastic in Thailand. Flood mitigation is poor. Deforestation is a problem. Those are real issues Thais can control. Thais cant control the climate. Fact check: Is global warming merely a natural cycle? ... "A more recent study conducted by a group of international authors confirmed that over 90% of climate scientists share the consensus that climate change is human-caused. And a 2019 analysis of 11,602 peer-reviewed articles on climate change published in the first seven months of 2019 found scientists have reached 100% agreement on anthropogenic global warming. That research was carried out by a James Lawrence Powell, an American geologist and author of 11 books on climate change and Earth science. "If an alternative theory of what is driving climate change rather than greenhouse gases would be supported by research and evidence, such work would be groundbreaking," said Benjamin Cook. "It would be Nobel Prize-level study. But we do not see this research." https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-is-global-warming-merely-a-natural-cycle/a-57831350 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparktrader Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 1 minute ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said: Fact check: Is global warming merely a natural cycle? ... "A more recent study conducted by a group of international authors confirmed that over 90% of climate scientists share the consensus that climate change is human-caused. And a 2019 analysis of 11,602 peer-reviewed articles on climate change published in the first seven months of 2019 found scientists have reached 100% agreement on anthropogenic global warming. That research was carried out by a James Lawrence Powell, an American geologist and author of 11 books on climate change and Earth science. "If an alternative theory of what is driving climate change rather than greenhouse gases would be supported by research and evidence, such work would be groundbreaking," said Benjamin Cook. "It would be Nobel Prize-level study. But we do not see this research." https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-is-global-warming-merely-a-natural-cycle/a-57831350 So the guy is writing books and geologists are not climate scientists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post TallGuyJohninBKK Posted May 31, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted May 31, 2022 Heat trapped by greenhouse gases reached highest level yet in 2021, scientists say May 25, 2022 Greenhouse gases emitted by human activities trapped much more heat in 2021 than they did three decades ago, according to scientists. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration released an update to its Annual Greenhouse Gas Index on Monday. The index is used to provide a measurement of the amount of heating greenhouse gases are causing. In 2021, the index reached a value of 1.49, which is 49% more than 1 value that is assigned to 1990 – the year of the Kyoto Protocol, one of the earliest binding climate change agreements signed by 192 countries. The value of 0 is assigned to the beginning of the industrial revolution in 1750. (more) https://nypost.com/2022/05/25/heat-trapped-by-greenhouse-gases-reached-highest-level-yet-in-2021-scientists-say/ 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozimoron Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 3 minutes ago, Sparktrader said: So the guy is writing books and geologists are not climate scientists. What Geology Has to Say About Global Warming https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2014/07/11/what-geology-has-to-say-about-global-warming/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 5 minutes ago, Sparktrader said: So the guy is writing books and geologists are not climate scientists. As opposed to your guy? A closer examination of the fantastical numbers in Bjorn Lomborg’s new book "Bjorn Lomborg’s new book False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet attempts to convince readers that the impacts of climate change have been exaggerated, particularly by the media, and that much of the current effort to tackle rising greenhouse gas emissions represents an over-reaction. He has been characteristically energetic in persuading right-wing newspapers, particularly those owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp, such as The Wall Street Journal, the New York Post and The Australian, to advertise his book for free in their opinion columns. But, like his previous contributions to this issue, Dr Lomborg’s arguments are based on fantastical numbers that have little or no credibility. Overall, the numbers presented by Dr Lomborg, who has a PhD in political science, understate the potential economic impacts of climate change and exaggerate the costs of cutting greenhouse gases. (more) Author Bob Ward, Policy and Communications Director, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment London School of Economics and Political Science https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/news/a-closer-examination-of-the-fantastical-numbers-in-bjorn-lomborgs-new-book/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparktrader Posted May 31, 2022 Share Posted May 31, 2022 2 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said: As opposed to your guy? A closer examination of the fantastical numbers in Bjorn Lomborg’s new book "Bjorn Lomborg’s new book False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet attempts to convince readers that the impacts of climate change have been exaggerated, particularly by the media, and that much of the current effort to tackle rising greenhouse gas emissions represents an over-reaction. He has been characteristically energetic in persuading right-wing newspapers, particularly those owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp, such as The Wall Street Journal, the New York Post and The Australian, to advertise his book for free in their opinion columns. But, like his previous contributions to this issue, Dr Lomborg’s arguments are based on fantastical numbers that have little or no credibility. Overall, the numbers presented by Dr Lomborg, who has a PhD in political science, understate the potential economic impacts of climate change and exaggerate the costs of cutting greenhouse gases. (more) Author Bob Ward, Policy and Communications Director, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment London School of Economics and Political Science https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/news/a-closer-examination-of-the-fantastical-numbers-in-bjorn-lomborgs-new-book/ He isnt a scientist. He simply looks at the costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now