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

[Danderman123]

22 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

We were talking about you falsely claiming CO2 is trapping water vapor in the atmosphere, and we were wondering when you were going to support it, or admit you were wrong. 

 

I will describe the trapping process for you by typing slowly so you can understand.

 

Increased CO2 warms the atmosphere and the seas by trapping heat in the Troposphere. This warmer air induces evaporation, which results in more water vapor entering the atmosphere.

 

Warmer air can retain more water vapor than cooler air.

 

Therefore, increased CO2 traps water vapor in the atmosphere (as opposed to cooler air which cannot retain water vapor as well).

 

 

[GammaGlobulin]

On 7/28/2023 at 5:08 PM, LukKrueng said:

I'm pretty sure I've read on other sources 120 years, not 120k years. Who has any records from 120k years ago?

You're not serious, are you?

Where did you go to school?

 

Why don't you pay some money and get internet access?

 

 

 

[Danderman123]

On 7/28/2023 at 2:34 PM, Sharp said:

The fact they relocated many monitors to ground level from the previous 2 meter minimum height tells u everything about this BS!!

You are suggesting that Global Warming is fake because some "monitors" somewhere were moved?

 

I hope you understand that temperature readings are taken all over the world, and consistently show warming. Satellites also measure temperature, in agreement with ground stations.

 

Moreover, ocean temperatures are rising.

 

Now, unless you are in the monitoring business, the only way you would hear about monitors being moved is that you read it on the Internet. I have a suggestion for you: ignore people who post misinformation.

[Yellowtail]

11 hours ago, placeholder said:

You're the one who likened gun manufacturers to oil companies. It's up to you to prove that it's valid.

As always, you have nothing. 

[Yellowtail]

On 9/7/2023 at 8:13 PM, Danderman123 said:

I will describe the trapping process for you by typing slowly so you can understand.

 

Increased CO2 warms the atmosphere and the seas by trapping heat in the Troposphere. This warmer air induces evaporation, which results in more water vapor entering the atmosphere.

 

Warmer air can retain more water vapor than cooler air.

 

Therefore, increased CO2 traps water vapor in the atmosphere (as opposed to cooler air which cannot retain water vapor as well).

 

 

Yes, warmer air (at the same pressure) holds more water that cooler air. 

 

Claiming CO2 is "trapping water vapor" is ridiculous,

[thaibeachlovers]

12 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

The planet is warming.

 

Do you disagree?

So what? The point of the MMCC scenario is apparently to monetise climate, so while temperatures are rising, it's not sufficient to just accept that and do something to prepare for change- no, it's time to invent a whole new passle of ways to get rich off of it. Conferences in exotic locations at taxpayer expense and carbon credits .

[thaibeachlovers]

12 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Except that the Greeks demonstrated via science that the Earth was round.

 

To this day, there are deadenders who think that Climate Change isn't real.

I will agree with you that climate is changing. Always has, always will.

 

Where we part ways is if we can change it by taxes, carbon credits ( 55555555555555555 ),windmills and EVs. IMO no we can't.

 

Suck it in and do something to prepare for it.

[Danderman123]

14 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Yes, warmer air (at the same pressure) holds more water that cooler air. 

 

Claiming CO2 is "trapping water vapor" is ridiculous, I would call you a liar but I'm sure you don't care. 

Okay, now you are trolling about semantics. 

 

You want a better word than "trap". How about "holds more"? Does that work for you?

 

Meanwhile, CO2 is causing more water vapor in the atmosphere, which, in turn, causes more heating. As a result, global temperatures are increasing.

[thaibeachlovers]

12 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Except that the Greeks demonstrated via science that the Earth was round.

LOL. Anyone standing on a hill and looking at the ocean horizon can see it's curved. No need for science to tell us that.

 

Pity they didn't work out that the earth revolves around the sun though, and not visa versa. I guess their science just wasn't that good then.

 

https://byjus.com/question-answer/which-scientist-proved-earth-rotating-around-sun/

There was a well-known debate in the history of Astronomy which was going on for a long time in the 15th, 16th and 17th century. Three centuries is what it took to be resolved, so you can imagine just how profound it was.

[Danderman123]

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I will agree with you that climate is changing. Always has, always will.

 

Where we part ways is if we can change it by taxes, carbon credits ( 55555555555555555 ),windmills and EVs. IMO no we can't.

 

Suck it in and do something to prepare for it.

The first step is acknowledgement that the current warming is manmade. Why?

 

Because if the current warming is merely a random natural fluctuation, then its possible the heating may reverse at any time.

 

Conversely, if the warming is from human pollutants, it can't be stopped unless we stop polluting.

[Danderman123]

14 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

So what? The point of the MMCC scenario is apparently to monetise climate, so while temperatures are rising, it's not sufficient to just accept that and do something to prepare for change- no, it's time to invent a whole new passle of ways to get rich off of it. Conferences in exotic locations at taxpayer expense and carbon credi

Nope.

 

Let's say you meet a grad student working on climate research. Would you really tell them that they are a fraud, the whole concept of manmade global warming is a fraud for money?

 

In Real Life, if a scientist wanted to commit fraud for money, they would go work for the Heartland Institute, or any one of the bogus fraud shops funded by the oil companies. Those are the sources for your talking points.

[thaibeachlovers]

5 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

The first step is acknowledgement that the current warming is manmade. Why?

 

Because if the current warming is merely a random natural fluctuation, then its possible the heating may reverse at any time.

 

Conversely, if the warming is from human pollutants, it can't be stopped unless we stop polluting.

If anyone believes that we can stop polluting while the human population is increasing so rapidly I have a bridge for sale.

Reduce the population and the pollution will decrease.

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

4 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Let's say you meet a grad student working on climate research. Would you really tell them that they are a fraud, the whole concept of manmade global warming is a fraud for money?

Yes.

[Danderman123]

16 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If anyone believes that we can stop polluting while the human population is increasing so rapidly I have a bridge for sale.

Reduce the population and the pollution will decrease.

 

 

The Thanos approach.

 

But why use the Infinity Gauntlet if you think climate change is natural?

 

[Danderman123]

18 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Yes.

There you are showing signs of being a conspiracy nut.

 

For Global Warming to be a fraud, millions of people would have to be involved.

 

Do you believe that reports of increased global temperatures are fraudulent? How far down the rabbit hole have you gone?

[thaibeachlovers]

2 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

The Thanos approach.

 

But why use the Infinity Gauntlet if you think climate change is natural?

 

What has a comic to do with what I said?

 

Doesn't matter whether climate change is natural or not. It is happening and we had better prepare for it or join the dinosaurs in history.

 

Personally, I think Gaia is using it to destroy humanity for abusing the planet, but I'll hopefully be long gone before the real destruction begins.

Whatever the truth, does humanity deserve to survive given how bad a species we are?

[thaibeachlovers]

6 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

There you are showing signs of being a conspiracy nut.

 

For Global Warming to be a fraud, millions of people would have to be involved.

 

Do you believe that reports of increased global temperatures are fraudulent? How far down the rabbit hole have you gone?

You obviously haven't actually read any of my posts as I never said that global temperatures are not increasing- you are making that up, again.

 

MMCC is IMO a fraud believed by millions. Humans are susceptible to frauds as proven by their lemming like behaviour. The global financial crisis was a fraud by the financial community, IMO, and affected many millions of us, but would not have happened if people had had any sense. If something is too good to be true it likely isn't.

Does Bernie Madoff ring any bells.

Countless such frauds throughout history.

[Danderman123]

14 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

What has a comic to do with what I said?

 

Doesn't matter whether climate change is natural or not. It is happening and we had better prepare for it or join the dinosaurs in history.

 

Personally, I think Gaia is using it to destroy humanity for abusing the planet, but I'll hopefully be long gone before the real destruction begins.

Whatever the truth, does humanity deserve to survive given how bad a species we are?

Again, if the warming is natural, it could reverse at any time.

 

But, what force do you think is warming the planet (assuming you agree the planet is warming).

[Danderman123]

11 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You obviously haven't actually read any of my posts as I never said that global temperatures are not increasing- you are making that up, again.

 

MMCC is IMO a fraud believed by millions. Humans are susceptible to frauds as proven by their lemming like behaviour. The global financial crisis was a fraud by the financial community, IMO, and affected many millions of us, but would not have happened if people had had any sense. If something is too good to be true it likely isn't.

Does Bernie Madoff ring any bells.

Countless such frauds throughout history.

Okay, so you believe that manmade Climate Change is a fraud.

 

So, who is in on the conspiracy?

 

When did the conspiracy begin?

 

If it began in the 1980s when the first predictions were made about warming, why have global temperatures risen as predicted? Are you suggesting that oil companies are in on the conspiracy by producing fossil fuels that release CO2 that increases global warming?

 

So many questions....

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

As always, you have nothing. 

The difference between your use of that phrase and mine is that I always give a justification for using it. You just use it as an empty taunt. You have still offered no evidence to back up the validity of comparing gun manufacturers to oil companies. That's because you truly have nothing. 

[Danderman123]

Q: Why is the planet warming?

 

A: Because "natural forces".

 

Q: Which natural forces? What are they?

 

A: You're a poopyhead.

 

I could do this all day.

[novacova]

On 9/7/2023 at 10:58 AM, Tippaporn said:

Still haven't read what I linked to.  Typical.  Isn't it fraudulent to demand evidence for opposing claims only to then ignore that evidence entirely out of hand?  Are you pulling my leg here? 

Here we have a clear disparity between those who choose to uniform themselves with an ideology in order to maintain self preservation and acceptance by picking and choosing through a narrow prism field, and those who choose to explore the real world data through observation without prejudice. No doubt it’s overwhelmingly obvious that those who are fixed on the “idea” that humans are solely responsible for climate change (which in of itself, climate, is a broad variable) have absolutely no interest in reading study(s) of any substantial data that shows there really is no support for human caused climate change. Anyone who states rhetoric such as deniers, you must believe a vast conspiracy are indicative of resisting further knowledge and a complete cop out. There’s a lot of good information out there to be ignored by the uniformity mental disorders of the cult of climate. So please do not educate yourselves and please continue on with the gullible act. Though for those who are interested in a good read…

 

https://patricktbrown.org/

 

And if you have access…

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06444-3

 

…incidentally most of you here are out of view,  simply because you just have nothing new or insightful to offer, just the continuation of recycling surface junk and graphs. I’ll check back in after a few weeks to see if there’s anything new that’s been offered. 

[novacova]

On 9/7/2023 at 10:29 AM, Tippaporn said:

You couldn't have had time to read all of the linked materials before reacting with a laugh.  Typical. 

…and don’t ever expect them to take an objective view of any of the material if they did choose to skirt over it. The mindset of a cult/religious fundamentalist is under that very influence which is to resist any outside understanding…just a case of Stockholm syndrome sorta thing 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

U.N. report warns nations have ‘rapidly narrowing window’ to cut emissions

“We know much of what can and needs to be done,” one policy expert says. The question is: Will governments make good on their promises?

 

The landmark 2015 Paris agreement, embraced by nearly every nation on Earth, “has driven near-universal climate action,” according to a detailed United Nation assessment released Friday, and yet the world remains woefully off track in its efforts to halt the warming of the planet.

 

The findings published by the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change note that “there is a rapidly narrowing window” for the world to more quickly cut emissions caused by the burning of fossil fuels and avoid an ever worsening set of disasters that are likely as the atmosphere grows hotter.

 

Friday’s report comes ahead of this year’s global climate summit, known as COP28, scheduled to kick off in late November in the United Arab Emirates.

 

(more)

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/09/08/un-climate-report-cut-emissions/

 

[placeholder]

6 hours ago, novacova said:

Here we have a clear disparity between those who choose to uniform themselves with an ideology in order to maintain self preservation and acceptance by picking and choosing through a narrow prism field, and those who choose to explore the real world data through observation without prejudice. No doubt it’s overwhelmingly obvious that those who are fixed on the “idea” that humans are solely responsible for climate change (which in of itself, climate, is a broad variable) have absolutely no interest in reading study(s) of any substantial data that shows there really is no support for human caused climate change. Anyone who states rhetoric such as deniers, you must believe a vast conspiracy are indicative of resisting further knowledge and a complete cop out. There’s a lot of good information out there to be ignored by the uniformity mental disorders of the cult of climate. So please do not educate yourselves and please continue on with the gullible act. Though for those who are interested in a good read…

 

https://patricktbrown.org/

 

And if you have access…

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06444-3

 

…incidentally most of you here are out of view,  simply because you just have nothing new or insightful to offer, just the continuation of recycling surface junk and graphs. I’ll check back in after a few weeks to see if there’s anything new that’s been offered. 

I gather you think you've set a cunning trap. Good luck with that. Basically, the lead author of this research, Patrick Brown, said he censored himself to confine his research to looking for the role that climate change caused in increasing the likelihood of wildfires. He didn't look for any other causes  He did that, he claimed, because if he hadn't done do, his piece wouldn't have gotten published. In fact, as the article I'm going to link to below to show that just in Nature, the journal he published in, 3 articles published in the last month all explicitly discuss causes other than climate change for various extreme weather incidents and disasters. In addition, editors at Nature pushed Brown to include other possible causes but he pushed back. In other words, he's lying.

https://archive.ph/Pa236

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/09/08/no-climate-scientists-aren-t-being-forced-to-exaggerate/452dfb72-4e36-11ee-bfca-04e0ac43f9e4_story.html

[thaibeachlovers]

21 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Again, if the warming is natural, it could reverse at any time.

 

But, what force do you think is warming the planet (assuming you agree the planet is warming).

Obviously the sun is warming the planet.

[thaibeachlovers]

21 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Okay, so you believe that manmade Climate Change is a fraud.

 

So, who is in on the conspiracy?

 

When did the conspiracy begin?

 

If it began in the 1980s when the first predictions were made about warming, why have global temperatures risen as predicted? Are you suggesting that oil companies are in on the conspiracy by producing fossil fuels that release CO2 that increases global warming?

 

So many questions....

Back in the 80s, as I remember it, they were saying the planet was going to get colder, not hotter.

 

As for MMCC, a very interesting movie came out some years ago ( The great global warming swindle ) and I prefer to believe it's viewpoint over the MMCC theory.

 

How do you see the word "fraud" and come up with "conspiracy"?

IMO it's not a conspiracy, but rather rich people using a naturally occurring climate change to get even richer. It's almost always about money when things are going wrong, as IMO they relish disasters, which make them more wealthy.

 

BTW, oil companies do whatever makes a profit, which does not necessarily involve conspiracies.

[thaibeachlovers]

8 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

The landmark 2015 Paris agreement, embraced by nearly every nation on Earth, “has driven near-universal climate action,”

IMO that is 100% BS.

I haven't seen much activity by governments at all. I don't count the IMO fraudulant carbon credit get rich scheme as "activity".

They could have used the covid lockdowns to build railways to replace domestic flights and did nothing. In fact they have welcomed the return of flights.

They could be building nuclear power plants and have not done so. More like getting rid of the few that exist ( I'm not including France in that as they have a large nuclear power infrastructure, but have had it for many years ).

All smoke and mirrors, IMO.

[thaibeachlovers]

8 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Friday’s report comes ahead of this year’s global climate summit, known as COP28, scheduled to kick off in late November in the United Arab Emirates.

I laughed like a drain when I saw that. Yet another talk talk fest in an exotic location to which hundreds of officials will FLY, when they could do it by VDO conferencing- hypocrites all.

Then to hold it in Dubai which exists as it is today because of oil is taking the mickey.

Anyone reckon the UAE will be announcing that they will be stopping pumping oil this year? 

[Danderman123]

58 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Obviously the sun is warming the planet.

Since the topic is about warming, do you think the Sun is making the Earth warmer than before? Do you really believe that increased Solar output is responsible for the last 40 years of warming?