4 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

The graph is current.

 

You simply cannot read it.

 

I'll give you another one.

 

Those graphs show cooler in the last 6 years. 

2 hours ago, bignok said:

Yet temperatures fell since 2016. "Could" is a forecast ie guess not reality.

Only in your mind.

 

In the Real World, temperatures are rising.

 

Here's a graph from Dr. Roy Spencer, a Global Warming skeptic, showing warming since 1979. He's one of the people who calibrated the instruments on the weather satellites.

 

As long as your argument is based on inability to read a graph, nobody will take you seriously. Instead, you could acknowledge that the world is warming but argue that it's no big deal.

 

 

Unattributed and edited out of context graph removed along with reply. Stop with the misinformation or you will be warned

On 4/19/2023 at 7:43 AM, BE88 said:

In the last few months there have been large explosions of magma on the sun and evidently the earth has received more solar heat which is what has increased the temperatures on earth I am not an expert to state it but it is reasonably possible to think so.

There is no doubt that the earth has undergone several changes due to the sun and the only solution would be to put a thermostat on the sun to be able to regulate the temperature and not make us these continuous mood swings.

So true BE88, the sun has been causing climate change for millions of years and will continue to do so no matter how many EVs the lemmings will buy.

2 minutes ago, Keep Right said:

So true BE88, the sun has been causing climate change for millions of years and will continue to do so no matter how many EVs the lemmings will buy.

You link to this misinformation? I guess ya'll don't like to do any research because that would involve using a search engine and they are all controlled by big business or the deep state?

 

The Sun can influence Earth's climate, but it isn't responsible for the warming trend we've seen over recent decades

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjAxIO74Lj-AhWKxjgGHdejAnMQFnoECA8QAw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fclimate.nasa.gov%2Ffaq%2F14%2Fis-the-sun-causing-global-warming%2F&usg=AOvVaw2Hgf_fBv1TOTG0OVStySvV

 

But the warming we’ve seen over the last few decades is too rapid to be linked to changes in Earth’s orbit, and too large to be caused by solar activity.

 

https://climate.nasa.gov/explore/ask-nasa-climate/2910/what-is-the-suns-role-in-climate-change/

2 hours ago, bignok said:

Topic is about Thai temperatures. The world temps are given as one average too.

Yep, why they're a wee bit insignificant to me.   Besides being irrelevant.   

 

People should stop using fossil fuel & drive EVs for the local air pollution.   Screw the temp or trying to 'save the planet', as you simply can't, or are even trying to.

 

Save my / our lungs ????

And stop cutting trees down, it's not a renewable source, unless you can grow 'em faster than you're cutting down, and you're not.

14 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

If all climate change is due to human activity, how die the climate change before there were humans? 

Humans have been around for 200,000 - 300,000 years. They only began to influence the Earth's climate with the Industrial Revolution, about 200 years ago.

 

Your post is a good example of a red herring argument.

6 hours ago, BritManToo said:

I figured out how to generate 80% of my household electricity. 

 

What's your contribution to your cause? I'm betting nothing. 

I think you'll find there are a lot of Trump supporters who do not donate to his campaign, or buy his NFT cards.

 

I drive a 2006 Vios. Assuming I was willing to spend money on an EV, my contribution would be insignificant. When an EV is fuelled by electricity generated by Mae Moh power station, the carbon dioxide emissions are simply transferred elsewhere.

If every ICE in Australia was converted to EV's overnight, it would reduce the CO2 emissions of that country by a mere 8%

You are generating 80% of your electricity to save money. It has nothing to do with your beliefs. Your returns from that investment will probably increase with time.

 

The validity of my position on global warming/climate change is not changed by the fact I am not financially invested in reducing it now, although I was one of the first people in Australia to install solar panels on my house. IIRC, about 25 years ago.

 

4 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Yep, why they're a wee bit insignificant to me.   Besides being irrelevant.   

 

People should stop using fossil fuel & drive EVs for the local air pollution.   Screw the temp or trying to 'save the planet', as you simply can't, or are even trying to.

 

Save my / our lungs ????

And stop cutting trees down, it's not a renewable source, unless you can grow 'em faster than you're cutting down, and you're not.

Actually the earth is greener now.

 

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth/

 

Mainstream media won't take about it.

It's not the 0.8 degC I am fretting over, it's the bigger electric bill. Got one yesterday that I think must be for  small hotel!

10 hours ago, Keep Right said:

So true BE88, the sun has been causing climate change for millions of years and will continue to do so no matter how many EVs the lemmings will buy.

Au contraire, the Sun's solar cycles do not correspond to the current warming.

 

https://astronomy.com/news/2015/08/corrected-sunspot-history-suggests-climate-change-since-the-industrial-revolution-not-due-to-natural-solar-trends

 

Corrected sunspot history suggests climate change since the Industrial Revolution not due to natural solar trends

After uncovering a major calibration error, scientists show that the newly corrected sunspot numbers now provide a homogenous record of solar activity dating back some 400 years.

22 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

If all climate change is due to human activity, how die the climate change before there were humans? 

I guess you slept during your science classes.

 

There are natural forces that force climate change. The strongest natural forces provide the climate changes that cause Ice Ages. We emerged from the last Ice Age some 12,000 years ago, and reached the warmest interglacial point some 8,000 years ago. Since then, natural forces have been cooling the planet, with occasional dips.

 

But recent human pollution is forcing warming, and these artificial forces are overwhelming natural forces, particularly since the 1970's.

3 hours ago, bignok said:

Actually the earth is greener now.

 

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth/

 

Mainstream media won't take about it.

That's the problem with skimming headlines.

 

Increased CO2 does green the planet, but the result are crops that are less nutritious.

10 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

That's the problem with skimming headlines.

 

Increased CO2 does green the planet, but the result are crops that are less nutritious.

Poor soil reduces nutrients. That's the problem with you climate guys. You ignore most things that don't match the scare. 1 trick ponies.

 

"Soils supply the essential nutrients, water, oxygen and root support that our food-producing plants need to grow and flourish."

 

https://www.fao.org/soils-2015/news/news-detail/en/c/277682/#:~:text=Soils supply the essential nutrients,from drastic fluctuations in temperature.

6 minutes ago, bignok said:

Poor soil reduces nutrients. That's the problem with you climate guys. You ignore most things that don't match the scare. 1 trick ponies.

 

"Soils supply the essential nutrients, water, oxygen and root support that our food-producing plants need to grow and flourish."

 

https://www.fao.org/soils-2015/news/news-detail/en/c/277682/#:~:text=Soils supply the essential nutrients,from drastic fluctuations in temperature.

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/as-carbon-dioxide-goes-up-plants-nutrient-content-declines-70720

 

As Carbon Dioxide Goes Up, Plants’ Nutrient Content Declines

 

 

Abundant environmental CO2 can increase plant biomass and photosynthesis, but it has downsides for agriculture and ecosystems, a growing body of research finds.

3 hours ago, bignok said:

Actually the earth is greener now.

 

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth/

 

Mainstream media won't take about it.

Yea, saw that, pretty impressive, BUT, crops for food, not trees.   Trees do not grow back near a rate that they are cut down elsewhere.  Just an impossibility of math, years vs tonnage.

3 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/as-carbon-dioxide-goes-up-plants-nutrient-content-declines-70720

 

As Carbon Dioxide Goes Up, Plants’ Nutrient Content Declines

 

 

Abundant environmental CO2 can increase plant biomass and photosynthesis, but it has downsides for agriculture and ecosystems, a growing body of research finds.

Yes so minor thing. Another exaggeration. Soil is the no 1 factor.

1 minute ago, KhunLA said:

Yea, saw that, pretty impressive, BUT, crops for food, not trees.   Trees do not grow back near a rate that they are cut down elsewhere.  Just an impossibility of math, years vs tonnage.

Too many people. 8bn is too much. 5bn about right.

30 minutes ago, bignok said:

Yes so minor thing. Another exaggeration. Soil is the no 1 factor.

Right.

 

I got it. The botanists are wrong, you know more than they.

 

As well as the atmospheric physicists, you know more than they.

 

https://www.co2.earth/22-co2-now?start=12

 

Here is some recent CO2 data for your viewing pleasure. Nothing to worry about.

34 minutes ago, bignok said:

Too many people. 8bn is too much. 5bn about right.

Are you Thanos?

 

Could I interest you in some interesting colored stones?

10 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Right.

 

I got it. The botanists are wrong, you know more than they.

 

As well as the atmospheric physicists, you know more than they.

 

https://www.co2.earth/22-co2-now?start=12

 

Here is some recent CO2 data for your viewing pleasure. Nothing to worry about.

No you are wrong. Read where the nutrients come from.

8 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Are you Thanos?

 

Could I interest you in some interesting colored stones?

I think it depends on how old you are. When I was a high school kid in the 60's it was said that 4 billion would be the tipping point. ????

9 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Are you Thanos?

 

Could I interest you in some interesting colored stones?

No idea what that means.

Just now, ozimoron said:

I think it depends on how old you are. When I was a high school kid in the 60's it was said that 4 billion would be the tipping point. ????

2010 was the climate tipping point.

Crop yields have gone up the last 50 years.

https://ourworldindata.org/crop-yields

6 minutes ago, bignok said:

Crop yields have gone up the last 50 years.

https://ourworldindata.org/crop-yields

Nothing to do with climate change or more CO2 in the air. You'll notice the greatest gains are in developed countries. Mostly due to more broad acre farming and mechanization.

A post has been removed for making a shameful suggestion along with unsubstantiated claims.

Planet earth has been changing for billions of years . We should not be too surprised with the small changes we are seeing in our short time on earth . 

5 hours ago, bignok said:

Actually the earth is greener now.

 

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth/

 

Mainstream media won't take about it.

From that report

While rising carbon dioxide concentrations in the air can be beneficial for plants, it is also the chief culprit of climate change. The gas, which traps heat in Earth’s atmosphere, has been increasing since the industrial age due to the burning of oil, gas, coal and wood for energy and is continuing to reach concentrations not seen in at least 500,000 years. The impacts of climate change include global warming, rising sea levels, melting glaciers and sea ice as well as more severe weather events.

 

The beneficial impacts of carbon dioxide on plants may also be limited, said co-author Dr. Philippe Ciais, associate director of the Laboratory of Climate and Environmental Sciences, Gif-suv-Yvette, France. “Studies have shown that plants acclimatize, or adjust, to rising carbon dioxide concentration and the fertilization effect diminishes over time.”

 

“While the detection of greening is based on data, the attribution to various drivers is based on models,” said co-author Josep Canadell of the Oceans and Atmosphere Division in the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation in Canberra, Australia. Canadell added that while the models represent the best possible simulation of Earth system components, they are continually being improved.

16 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

No, I am saying that oil company employees make more money than scientists in universities. 

Can you provide a link that supports your statement? I do not believe it is true.