Heatwave and Climate Change Puts Pressure on Thailand

[sidneybear]

Just now, placeholder said:

I should also point out to you that the criticism of Powell's method which you claim Cook levelled at Powell (he didn't) was exactly the same criticism that denialists level at Cook.

So there you go, scientists disagree with each other. Fact is that the only publications included in the 97% were those that mentioned the terms global warming or global climate change. 

 

What's your solution to the problem anyway? Energy poverty and immobility? The climate change alarmist are lefties who want to rule over and inflict misery on the rest of us.

[Bobthegimp]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

No, it's the science that can be read in scientific journals.

Climate Scientists Virtually Unanimous: Anthropogenic Global Warming Is True

The extent of the consensus among scientists on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) has the potential to influence public opinion and the attitude of political leaders and thus matters greatly to society. The history of science demonstrates that if we wish to judge the level of a scientific consensus and whether the consensus position is likely to be correct, the only reliable source is the peer-reviewed literature. During 2013 and 2014, only 4 of 69,406 authors of peer-reviewed articles on global warming, 0.0058% or 1 in 17,352, rejected AGW. Thus, the consensus on AGW among publishing scientists is above 99.99%, verging on unanimity. 

https://philpapers.org/rec/POWCSV

 

In direct correlation to who is funding those studies. Shocking, isn't it?  The only ones who buck the system are those that are no longer at the teat. 

[sidneybear]

5 minutes ago, placeholder said:

criticism that denialists level at

Ahh, "denialists"... now there's a politically charged woke label of denunciation if ever there was one. Why use labels? Why not just say "those who disagree with this hypothesis?"

[sidneybear]

5 minutes ago, Bobthegimp said:

 

In direct correlation to who is funding those studies. Shocking, isn't it?  The only ones who buck the system are those that are no longer at the teat. 

Absolutely. As I also mentioned, scientists have families to support, and once they're labelled "denialists" by people like @placeholder, they get fired. Science has been usurped by politics, and politicians are owned by businesses.

Edited May 3 by sidneybear

[placeholder]

10 minutes ago, Bobthegimp said:

 

This refers to air pollution, not the nebulous "climate change" the article was written about. 

 

Nice deflection and strawman!

Vincent RJ was referring to the fact that currently cold weather accounts for more deaths than hot weather. Maybe you think it's irrelevant that the same stuff that is mostly fueling the rise in CO2 and other greenhouse gasses is irrelevant. I don't.

[placeholder]

6 minutes ago, sidneybear said:

Ahh, "denialists"... now there's a politically charged woke label of denunciation if ever there was one. Why use labels? Why not just say "those who disagree with this hypothesis?"

At this point in time, it's no longer an hypothesis. It's a full-blown theory with massive confirmation to back it.

[placeholder]

10 minutes ago, Bobthegimp said:

 

In direct correlation to who is funding those studies. Shocking, isn't it?  The only ones who buck the system are those that are no longer at the teat. 

Actually, in the 1970's some scientists working for exxon predicted the effect of increased CO2 levels on global warming. Oddly enough, Exxon suppressed that research.

[GammaGlobulin]

5 hours ago, Peterphuket said:

47.1 to be exactly, above is the temperature insdfe, aircon switched of.

 

I ordered the same cheap instrument from Lazada, produced in China.

Seems to work well.

But, the sensor is very slow at registering the actual ambient temps.

 

Good purchase because of its very LOW cost.

I might buy another one, in fact.

 

 

[GammaGlobulin]

3 hours ago, newbee2022 said:

It might all happen, but not in my life🙏

 

What?

Are you, then, intending to pass away and leave us tomorrow?

 

I, for one, will miss you.

 

 

[sidneybear]

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

At this point in time, it's no longer an hypothesis. It's a full-blown theory with massive confirmation to back it.

Nahh ... more like massive funding and political interference to back it.

 

Will you join the peasants living their impoverished, immobile lives? You fly, right?

[placeholder]

12 minutes ago, sidneybear said:

So there you go, scientists disagree with each other. Fact is that the only publications included in the 97% were those that mentioned the terms global warming or global climate change. 

 

What's your solution to the problem anyway? Energy poverty and immobility? The climate change alarmist are lefties who want to rule over and inflict misery on the rest of us.

As I noted, the reason that only those studies were included was because far from all climatological research addresses climate change. Why would anyone include in their inventory a research paper that doesn't address this issue? As I pointed out, apparently to no avail, most papers in the field of biology don't address the issue of evolution. Does this mean that only a small percentage of biologists accept the theory of evolution?

[newbee2022]

1 minute ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

What?

Are you, then, intending to pass away and leave us tomorrow?

 

I, for one, will miss you.

 

 

Thanks, I will try to protect you from heaven 🙏

[placeholder]

Just now, sidneybear said:

Nahh ... more like massive funding and political interference to back it.

 

Will you join the peasants living their impoverished, immobile lives? You fly, right?

Can you share with us the evidence of this global conspiracy? How thousands of climatologists are engaging in a massive fraud. You've got nothing.

[Roo Island]

20 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

Sad to say, the changes that the world leaders struggle, but fail, to achieve are simply too little too late. I guess nature will have it's way. 

 

For the average older Brit/American, etc, who doesn't have to be here, the best advice would be go home. Doubly quick if you are not very healthy, or not backed by truly substantial assets.

 

If you can't go home, don't just get fit- get very very fit. 

Being fit is perhaps the best recommendation of all!

[sidneybear]

Just now, placeholder said:

Can you share with us the evidence of this global conspiracy? How thousands of climatologists are engaging in a massive fraud. You've got nothing.

And you're a hypocrite because you aren't part of the solution to your imaginary problem. But you still throw labels around to smear those who question the narrative as "deniers".

[Roo Island]

18 minutes ago, Bobthegimp said:

 

In direct correlation to who is funding those studies. Shocking, isn't it?  The only ones who buck the system are those that are no longer at the teat. 

Not true at all.

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, sidneybear said:

Nahh ... more like massive funding and political interference to back it.

 

Will you join the peasants living their impoverished, immobile lives? You fly, right?

And your utter lack of knowledge of the huge advances that have already been made in renewable energy is telling. Renewable energy prices are plulnging. Already, renewable energy is cheaper than coal. And gas peaker plants - the ones that come online when power demand is high - are being displaced by batteries. 

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, sidneybear said:

And you're a hypocrite because you aren't part of the solution to your imaginary problem. But you still throw labels around to smear those who question the narrative as "deniers".

The surest tell of when someone has got nothing is when they make it personal. You've got nothing.

[placeholder]

20 minutes ago, Bobthegimp said:

 

In direct correlation to who is funding those studies. Shocking, isn't it?  The only ones who buck the system are those that are no longer at the teat. 

Got any evidence to support this?

[Roo Island]

2 minutes ago, sidneybear said:

And you're a hypocrite because you aren't part of the solution to your imaginary problem. But you still throw labels around to smear those who question the narrative as "deniers".

Answer his question. Don't deflect

[Roo Island]

Just now, placeholder said:

Got any evidence to support this?

Perhaps sidneybear is a member of this club? 😆

 

https://theflatearthsociety.org/home/

The Flat Earth Society

[sidneybear]

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

The surest tell of when someone has got nothing is when they make it personal. You've got nothing.

"Denier" is likewise a personal slur, which you stated using because you were caught out supporting the groupthink. 

[sidneybear]

2 minutes ago, Roo Island said:

Perhaps sidneybear is a member of this club? 😆

 

https://theflatearthsociety.org/home/

The Flat Earth Society

https://reclaimthenet.org/wikipedia-deletes-list-of-scientists-who-disagree-with-the-consensus-on-climate-change

 

Keep reading what the censors let you read

[sidneybear]

11 minutes ago, placeholder said:

And your utter lack of knowledge of the huge advances that have already been made in renewable energy is telling. Renewable energy prices are plulnging. Already, renewable energy is cheaper than coal. And gas peaker plants - the ones that come online when power demand is high - are being displaced by batteries. 

Links...

Edited May 3 by sidneybear

[GammaGlobulin]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Swift said:

You can't have educated conversations with clueless uneducated people who don't want to learn anything.

 

Referring to me, I suppose?

 

 

[sidneybear]

18 minutes ago, placeholder said:

And your utter lack of knowledge of the huge advances that have already been made in renewable energy is telling. Renewable energy prices are plulnging. Already, renewable energy is cheaper than coal. And gas peaker plants - the ones that come online when power demand is high - are being displaced by batteries. 

Got any evidence to support this?

[placeholder]

16 minutes ago, sidneybear said:

"Denier" is likewise a personal slur, which you stated using because you were caught out supporting the groupthink. 

Denier is not a personal slur. It's entirely based on the words you wrote here. But what did I write here that justified this comment directed at me:

"And you're a hypocrite because you aren't part of the solution to your imaginary problem."

[gamb00ler]

56 minutes ago, sidneybear said:

Please explain 

It's easy to explain to you.... impossible to make you understand.

[sidneybear]

11 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Denier is not a personal slur. It's entirely based on the words you wrote here. But what did I write here that justified this comment directed at me:

"And you're a hypocrite because you aren't part of the solution to your imaginary problem."

Denier is most definitely a personal slur, because it's common usage originated as an adjective to describe those evil folks who deny the holocaust. To call someone a denier of a conmonly held belief equates them with that same evil. Those who promote the belief of climate change are clearly hypocrites if they fly, because flying depends on fossil fuels and produces high CO2 emissions.

Edited May 3 by sidneybear

[Peterphuket]

29 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

I ordered the same cheap instrument from Lazada, produced in China.

Seems to work well.

But, the sensor is very slow at registering the actual ambient temps.

 

Good purchase because of its very LOW cost.

I might buy another one, in fact.

 

 

Previously, I had several weather stations, the most expensive being a 250 euro one.

In a short time, they all break down because of the high temperature or high humidity, or you name it.
Then I had had enough, and didn't really want to spend much money on them anymore, and with this one I am very satisfied.