Climate change: July set to be world's warmest month on record

[novacova]

2 minutes ago, James105 said:

I remain befuddled why so many people are convinced by the narrative that this is some kind of emergency considering the timescales at play here. 

Because it’s a religious movement. Let’s say a group of jahova witnesses or LDS Church members came to your door to preach their message, do you think for one moment that you can persuade them that they have been brainwashed into believing their leaders? Was anyone able to convince the followers of Jim Jones of the false prophet? No, instead they drank the coolaid. It’s just a bunch of woke smoke, all of it, alphabet nazis, green woke nazis BLM, it’s a religious movement. So hallelujah brothers and sisters!!! Get out there impose your beliefs on others!!

[ozimoron]

15 minutes ago, James105 said:

I suspect the point was that we have millions of years before that happens again.   I also suspect that considering the technological progress we have made in the last 50 years, and on the basis that progress does not cease for the next several hundred thousand years, science may well have a solution to deal with this that was not available 485 million years ago.   Not something to lose any sleep over today, that is for sure.   Cleaner air is a good thing and it looks like we are heading that way regardless, but let's not pretend that humans can control climate change just yet, no more than we can control a virus.   

 

I remain befuddled why so many people are convinced by the narrative that this is some kind of emergency considering the timescales at play here.   

Befuddlement is why you don't comprehend the narrative., Oh, and rejection of science.

[Yellowtail]

16 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

The problem is your tagline:

 

"Stay the course! "

 

It seems you are okay with dumping mass amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.

The "Stay the course" was meant to be facetious. And you quoted me out of context such that you can pretend like I have said something I have not. 

 

Again, you attacked me for saying: "And with all the silly alternative energy and social engineering, we are continuing it generate more CO2 each year."

 

And again, you can attack me, and call me a fool, you can claim that I am a shill for the oil industry, you can call me a troll, and you can get my posts deleted, but what you can't do is show that the statement I made is false. 

[Bkk Brian]

1 hour ago, James105 said:

I suspect the point was that we have millions of years before that happens again.   I also suspect that considering the technological progress we have made in the last 50 years, and on the basis that progress does not cease for the next several hundred thousand years, science may well have a solution to deal with this that was not available 485 million years ago.   Not something to lose any sleep over today, that is for sure.   Cleaner air is a good thing and it looks like we are heading that way regardless, but let's not pretend that humans can control climate change just yet, no more than we can control a virus.   

 

I remain befuddled why so many people are convinced by the narrative that this is some kind of emergency considering the timescales at play here.   

Well I'm not sure that was his point at all, so I'll wait for him to articulate it.

 

Unlike you I don't have a crystal ball so can't predict whether it would take millions of years to get to that stage again, we do know that only around  some 3 million years ago, sea levels were around 30 feet higher (but possibly much more). The Pliocene was a significantly warmer world, likely at some 5 degrees Fahrenheit (around 3 degrees Celsius) warmer than pre-Industrial temperatures of the late 1800s. Much of the Arctic, which today is largely clad in ice, had melted. Heat-trapping carbon dioxide levels, a major temperature lever, hovered around 400 parts per million, or ppm. Today, these levels are similar but relentlessly rising, at some 418 ppm.

 

We also know that the IPCC wants to target a 1.5% increase only and that can only be achieved with rigorous intervention by policy makers. The IPCC also spells out what the world would be like if it warmed by 4 degrees Celsius, which is what scientists are nearly unanimously predicting will happen by the end of the century if no significant policy changes are undertaken.

 

The current warming trend is much more rapid than any natural climate change that has occurred in the past.

 

https://www.wri.org/insights/ipcc-climate-report

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, owl sees all said:

Nonsense!

In other words, you can't refute it.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, novacova said:

Because it’s a religious movement. Let’s say a group of jahova witnesses or LDS Church members came to your door to preach their message, do you think for one moment that you can persuade them that they have been brainwashed into believing their leaders? Was anyone able to convince the followers of Jim Jones of the false prophet? No, instead they drank the coolaid. It’s just a bunch of woke smoke, all of it, alphabet nazis, green woke nazis BLM, it’s a religious movement. So hallelujah brothers and sisters!!! Get out there impose your beliefs on others!!

Believing scientists is a religion?

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, heybruce said:

Believing scientists is a religion?

I took that as pure projection from his part. Total nonsense

[novacova]

16 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Believing scientists is a religion?

The climate religion is not science. The religiosity of it is, as it is overtly displayed on this thread. But one in the thick of it wouldn’t be able to recognize their condition unless they’ve been deprogrammed 

[Hummin]

2 minutes ago, novacova said:

The climate religion is not science. The religiosity of it is, as it is overtly displayed on this thread. But one in the thick of it wouldn’t be able to recognize their condition unless they’ve been deprogrammed 

Religion is not science, 

 

If you was interested in science, you would study science, and not just read headlines.

[novacova]

https://fabiusmaximus.com/2015/07/29/new-study-undercuts-ipcc-keynote-finding-87796/
 

There’s much more out there. Much of this information gets scrubbed off the internet. Articles I read 20 years ago in Nature Journal and Science Journal magazines are no longer available, much has been deleted because of the wave of influence and hysterics propagated by policymakers and media. I can give a rats rear end what other believe.

[novacova]

3 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Religion is not science, 

 

If you was interested in science, you would study science, and not just read headlines.

I’ve studied and practiced science my entire adult life. What makes many of the posters here different from where I am, I have absolutely no emotion investment in such debate. 

[Tippaporn]

19 hours ago, placeholder said:

Lots of assertions. No evidence provided. Typical of denialists.

Where's your evidence?  Al Gore claimed back on December 14, 2009, at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, Denmark that scientist predicted a 75% chance that the north pole would be completely ice-free during some of the summer months by 2016.  That hasn't happened and it still hasn't happened.

The problem with climate change believers is none of their predictions come true.  And as to their efforts to connect a single hurricane or any other major weather event to climate change has never been done with absolute conclusive scientific evidence which every scientist would be able to agree with.

The point being that neither do you have any real evidence.  Keep in mind, interpretations of data is not real evidence, especially when it data that is not shared.

[ozimoron]

12 minutes ago, novacova said:

I’ve studied and practiced science my entire adult life. What makes many of the posters here different from where I am, I have absolutely no emotion investment in such debate. 

Yet you believe climate science is a religion? seriously?

[Bkk Brian]

2 hours ago, novacova said:

Because it’s a religious movement. Let’s say a group of jahova witnesses or LDS Church members came to your door to preach their message, do you think for one moment that you can persuade them that they have been brainwashed into believing their leaders? Was anyone able to convince the followers of Jim Jones of the false prophet? No, instead they drank the coolaid. It’s just a bunch of woke smoke, all of it, alphabet nazis, green woke nazis BLM, it’s a religious movement. So hallelujah brothers and sisters!!! Get out there impose your beliefs on others!!

 

22 minutes ago, novacova said:

I’ve studied and practiced science my entire adult life. What makes many of the posters here different from where I am, I have absolutely no emotion investment in such debate. 

I detect B.S.

[Tippaporn]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

Yet you believe climate science is a religion? seriously?

While I agree with novacova on much I disagree with his use of the term "climate religion."  It's most definitely a "climate cult."  I'm not trolling here by saying that.  Anyone who understands the psychological aspects that are responsible for the formation of cultish behaviour can readily recognise these same aspects at play amongst climate change believers.  The behaviours are near identical.

 

33 minutes ago, novacova said:

The climate religion is not science. The religiosity of it is, as it is overtly displayed on this thread. But one in the thick of it wouldn’t be able to recognize their condition unless they’ve been deprogrammed 

I absolutely agree with the last statement.  It is a well known fact that once a belief about reality is mistaken for a condition of reality - in other words a belief that is presumed to be true but is not - then the belief not only causes blindness to any information which doesn't conform to the belief but the belief becomes almost unshakable.

[novacova]

12 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Yet you believe climate science is a religion? seriously?

Evidently the above poster probably has difficulty following directions preparing noodle cup????…

36 minutes ago, novacova said:

The climate religion is not science. The religiosity of it is,

 

[Bkk Brian]

13 minutes ago, novacova said:

https://fabiusmaximus.com/2015/07/29/new-study-undercuts-ipcc-keynote-finding-87796/
 

There’s much more out there. Much of this information gets scrubbed off the internet. Articles I read 20 years ago in Nature Journal and Science Journal magazines are no longer available, much has been deleted because of the wave of influence and hysterics propagated by policymakers and media. I can give a rats rear end what other believe.

A blog link that references a debunked claim from https://joannenova.com.au/ who  self-published[8] the book The Skeptics Handbook, which rejects the scientific consensus on climate change and promotes various falsehoods about climate change.[11] The book argues that temperatures have not increased, and that greenhouse gases do not contribute to climate change.[11][5] The book promotes the myth that there is already so much CO2 in the atmosphere that adding more will not have an impact on temperatures

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joanne_Nova

 

[Danderman123]

2 hours ago, James105 said:

I suspect the point was that we have millions of years before that happens again.   I also suspect that considering the technological progress we have made in the last 50 years, and on the basis that progress does not cease for the next several hundred thousand years, science may well have a solution to deal with this that was not available 485 million years ago.   Not something to lose any sleep over today, that is for sure.   Cleaner air is a good thing and it looks like we are heading that way regardless, but let's not pretend that humans can control climate change just yet, no more than we can control a virus.   

 

I remain befuddled why so many people are convinced by the narrative that this is some kind of emergency considering the timescales at play here.   

You are confused.

 

Global warming is happening now.

 

As an example, my million dollar table grape farm is now worthless, because the winters are so warm that grapes aren't sweet anymore.

 

There are warming effects everywhere, but your internet friends aren't telling you about them.

[Danderman123]

5 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

While I agree with novacova on much I disagree with his use of the term "climate religion."  It's most definitely a "climate cult."  I'm not trolling here by saying that.  Anyone who understands the psychological aspects that are responsible for the formation of cultish behaviour can readily recognise these same aspects at play amongst climate change believers.  The behaviours are near identical.

 

I absolutely agree with the last statement.  It is a well known fact that once a belief about reality is mistaken for a condition of reality - in other words a belief that is presumed to be true but is not - then the belief not only causes blindness to any information which doesn't conform to the belief but the belief becomes almost unshakable.

You have deluded yourself with psychobabble.

 

The cult is those people who reject science because it doesn't fit in their mental paradym.

[novacova]

6 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

 

I detect B.S.

Of course you do, wouldn’t expect anything more than name calling, shout down or any other form of reactive display from many adverse reactive individuals on the forum. 

[Danderman123]

25 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Where's your evidence?  Al Gore claimed back on December 14, 2009, at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, Denmark that scientist predicted a 75% chance that the north pole would be completely ice-free during some of the summer months by 2016.  That hasn't happened and it still hasn't happened.

The problem with climate change believers is none of their predictions come true.  And as to their efforts to connect a single hurricane or any other major weather event to climate change has never been done with absolute conclusive scientific evidence which every scientist would be able to agree with.

The point being that neither do you have any real evidence.  Keep in mind, interpretations of data is not real evidence, especially when it data that is not shared.

You are deluded.

 

In the 1980s, scientists predicted an increase in global temperatures, which did happen:

 

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature

 

You are so deep in Denialism that you have lost touch with reality.

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, novacova said:

Of course you do, wouldn’t expect anything more than name calling, shout down or any other form of reactive display from many adverse reactive individuals on the forum. 

It's still B.S no matter how you wrap up your hypocrisy.

[Danderman123]

1 minute ago, novacova said:

Of course you do, wouldn’t expect anything more than name calling, shout down or any other form of reactive display from many adverse reactive individuals on the forum. 

Can you explain why the Stratosphere is cooling? None of your fellow Deniers can.

[novacova]

I’ll exit the clown show here and leave you folks to it. Good luck debunkers????!!

[Danderman123]

51 minutes ago, novacova said:

I’ve studied and practiced science my entire adult life. What makes many of the posters here different from where I am, I have absolutely no emotion investment in such debate. 

Do you believe that atmospheric CO2 is increasing?

 

A simple yes or no answer will suffice.

 

If you answer with a few paragraphs of psychobabble, then everyone will understand your psychological state.

[ozimoron]

14 minutes ago, novacova said:

Evidently the above poster probably has difficulty following directions preparing noodle cup????…

 

53 minutes ago, novacova said:

The climate religion is not science. The religiosity of it is

This comment was utterly devoid of any cogent content. There is no way to glean meaning from that sentence.

[novacova]

22 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

It's still B.S no matter how you wrap up your hypocrisy.

What is wrapping is the blatant hypocrisy as the above poster ranting in the climate wave then going out for a drive burning fossil fuel, swimming and breathing it in and using virtually every day necessities  that rely on fossil fuels. 

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, novacova said:

What is wrapping is the blatant hypocrisy as the above poster ranting in the climate wave then going out for a drive burning fossil fuel, swimming and breathing it in and using virtually every day necessities the rely on fossil fuels. 

translation: If anybody actually uses any fossil fuels they should be fossil fuel lovers and buy the paid for misinformation of the various vested interests? I like horses. Should I... oh, never mind.

[Danderman123]

There is a Category 4 hurricane bearing down on Los Angeles. You Global Warming Deniers are not keeping up on current events.

[novacova]

17 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Do you believe that atmospheric CO2 is increasing?

 

A simple yes or no answer will suffice.

 

If you answer with a few paragraphs of psychobabble, then everyone will understand your psycgological state.

Totally irrelevant to the broad scope of the subject. The entire platitude of the individuals on this thread is that humans are mostly responsible for the ever changing climate, are solely in it for their pleasure of arguing and contempt. No rational or reasoning, because it’s a cherished religion of followers, or cult as another put it. If one cannot educate themselves at this point in their lives or at the very least have civil calm discussion, then it’s just a useless waste. Anyways…later