7 hours ago, Lacessit said:

I guess that's why insurance premiums for natural disasters such as bushfires and hurricanes are so stable.

I do agree on one aspect, the billions spent on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is thermodynamic nonsense. There is not a single CCS plant on the planet operating as designed.

What's your idea of an optimal temperature?

another +5 to 10c

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

Ideally, the temperature should reach the optimal levels for plant life, which is 25 °C (77 °F).

if they worked as designed, it would be even worse

20 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Like they go on about how much of Norway's electricity is "renewable", but never mention the renewable is it is almost all 100-year-old hydro technology.

And what about wind power? Apparently, Britman doesn't believe that it functions in winter. Maybe he'll believe youthat the wind does actually blow in winter if you tell him?

11 minutes ago, mordothailand said:

another +5 to 10c

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

Ideally, the temperature should reach the optimal levels for plant life, which is 25 °C (77 °F).

if they worked as designed, it would be even worse

Except that this superhabitable world that was posited was expressly not designed to accommodate human life. It was designed to be optimal for abundance of life.

6 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Those hackers in climategate were climate change denialists. And yes, there were hackers during the time when climategate occurred. It wasn't even 20 years ago.

You seem a little confused about the timeliness of climate change..

And yet we continue to behave as if there's no sense of urgency and we have seven or eight alternative planets that we can shift to, once we foul this one beyond the point where it will support any sort of quality of life.

Human beings and our contemporary civilization is not advanced, we prove that on a daily basis.

30 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Except that this superhabitable world that was posited was expressly not designed to accommodate human life. It was designed to be optimal for abundance of life.

...then why do you chose to live in tropical climate ?

3 minutes ago, kwilco said:

You seem a little confused about the timeliness of climate change..

I just want to check to see if we're on the same page. Do you understand that Climategate refers to the release of emails between climatologists by hackers in 2009? Emails which allegedly exposed the lies that climatologists were using to push a narrative of human caused climate change?

Just now, mordothailand said:

...then why do you chose to live in tropical climate ?

What has that got to do with the express fact that the 75 degree figure you cited is based on speculation on what environment would be most propitious for promoting life? The authors of this expressly stated that it was not about conditions that most favored human life.

7 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

And yet we continue to behave as if there's no sense of urgency and we have seven or eight alternative planets that we can shift to, once we foul this one beyond the point where it will support any sort of quality of life.

Human beings and our contemporary civilization is not advanced, we prove that on a daily basis.

Are you ready to give up your car, air conditioning and air travel?

2 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

I just want to check to see if we're on the same page. Do you understand that Climategate refers to the release of emails between climatologists by hackers in 2009? Emails which allegedly exposed the lies that climatologists were using to push a narrative of human caused climate change?

You dare now fixating on one collection of emails when the study of climate change is over 120 years old.

Climategate" was a 2009 controversy involving the hacking of emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU). Skeptics alleged the emails showed scientists manipulating data to exaggerate global warming. Multiple independent inquiries later cleared the scientists of fraud, concluding the emails were taken out of context.

Wikipedia

Wikipedia

+3

Key details regarding the 2009 event:

The Hack: Thousands of emails and documents were stolen from the CRU just before the UN climate summit in Copenhagen.

The Allegations: Critics claimed emails, particularly from Phil Jones, showed attempts to suppress dissenting research and conceal data inconsistencies.

"Hide the Decline": A widely cited email phrase, "Mike's Nature trick," referred to a technique to plot recent instrumental data with proxy data, not a deliberate falsification, the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research says.

The Outcome: Investigations confirmed the scientific consensus on climate change was not undermined by the content of the emails, although the scientists were criticized for a lack of openness with data.

But you dint know that, do you?

34 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

What has that got to do with the express fact that the 75 degree figure you cited is based on speculation on what environment would be most propitious for promoting life? The authors of this expressly stated that it was not about conditions that most favored human life.

despite most of all the worlds energy production goes into heating to stay alive,

cold still claims 9 times more lives than warmth, and even in the hottest regions of the world.

beside living in a more pleasant world with more biomass and biodiversity in a warmer world, we would cut energy need in half and subsequently get a lower electric bill. its a win in every measurable way if only we could exit this deep ice age, the worst since before complex life even evolved.

it boggles the mind that anyone wants even colder climate and daydream of a return to little ice age climate 1300-1850, when, as the saying went, even the pigs were starving

4 minutes ago, kwilco said:

You dare now fixating on one collection of emails when the study of climate change is over 120 years old.

Climategate" was a 2009 controversy involving the hacking of emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU). Skeptics alleged the emails showed scientists manipulating data to exaggerate global warming. Multiple independent inquiries later cleared the scientists of fraud, concluding the emails were taken out of context.

Wikipedia

Wikipedia

+3

Key details regarding the 2009 event:

The Hack: Thousands of emails and documents were stolen from the CRU just before the UN climate summit in Copenhagen.

The Allegations: Critics claimed emails, particularly from Phil Jones, showed attempts to suppress dissenting research and conceal data inconsistencies.

"Hide the Decline": A widely cited email phrase, "Mike's Nature trick," referred to a technique to plot recent instrumental data with proxy data, not a deliberate falsification, the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research says.

The Outcome: Investigations confirmed the scientific consensus on climate change was not undermined by the content of the emails, although the scientists were criticized for a lack of openness with data.

But you dint know that, do you?

I'm fixating on a video that was offered as evidence. A video that supported climategate allegations. I even offered a snippet from a news article to show how these allegations are false. Apparently, you don't understand that we agree.

4 minutes ago, mordothailand said:

despite most of all the worlds energy production goes into heating to stay alive,

cold still claims 9 times more lives than warmth, and even in the hottest regions of the world.

31 minutes ago, mordothailand said:

despite most of all the worlds energy production goes into heating to stay alive,

False:

https://www.iea.org/world/energy-mix

And you think that maybe a sizeable chunk of that residential energy consumption is actually used for air conditioning?

Heat accounts for approximately 50% of the world’s total final energy consumption. This makes heating the largest single end-use of energy, significantly more than electricity (20%) or transportation (30%).

The World Economic Forum +1

https://www.weforum.org/stories/2023/03/heat-heres-why-its-the-elephant-in-the-room-for-decarbonization/

https://www.iea.org/reports/renewables-2020/renewable-heat

4 minutes ago, mordothailand said:

despite most of all the worlds energy production goes into heating to stay alive,

cold still claims 9 times more lives than warmth, and even in the hottest regions of the world.

The claim that cold causes more deaths than heat is highly suspect. Heat deaths are in fact greatly underreported. For example here's a study from South Korea in which it was determined that heat deaths were 16 to 21 times higher than reported:

Estimation of heat-related deaths during heat wave episodes in South Korea

Methods: We linked mortality and meteorological data in 16 regions in South Korea and estimated relative risk at or above threshold of maximum temperature during summer using generalized linear regression models after controlling for confounders. We computed overall, age-, sex-, and cause-specific attributable death in 2006-2018.

Results: With 1.6% (95% Confidence intervals [CI], 0.8%, 2.4%) increase in all-cause mortality per 1°C increase in concurrent day’s maximum temperature during summer, this study estimates 349 (95% CI, 176, 520) and 790 (95% CI, 400, 1,171) all-cause deaths associated with heat waves in 2016 and 2018, respectively, in South Korea. The estimation was about 16~21 times more than the reported number by the KCDC. If we consider cumulative effects of heat wave, the estimations were greater.

https://journals.lww.com/environepidem/fulltext/2019/10001/estimation_of_heat_related_deaths_during_heat_wave.735.aspx?utm_source=chatgpt.com

And the issue with kidney disease is even worse. Cause of death is routinely listed as kidney disease.

Rising Global Temperatures and Kidney Health: A Comprehensive Review of Current Evidence

"As temperatures are anticipated to rise in the coming years, problems linked to heat and its harmful effects on kidney health are expected to become more frequent and severe with time. Heat stress significantly affects kidney health, causing acute and chronic kidney injury. The physiological strain caused by extreme heat exposure, through mechanisms such as dehydration, volume depletion, and increased glomerular permeability, contributes to a spectrum of kidney conditions, including AKI, nephrolithiasis, CKD, proteinuria, and hematuria. Heat waves are causing increased hospitalizations for kidney disease worldwide, with vulnerable groups, particularly outdoor workers and older adults, being at higher risk."

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12734593/

Hot weather as a risk factor for kidney disease outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiological evidence

Of 2739 studies identified, 91 were reviewed and 82 of these studies met the criteria for inclusion in a meta-analysis. Findings showed that with a 1 °C increase in temperature, the risk of kidney-related morbidity increased by 1% (RR 1.010; 95% CI: 1.009–1.011), with the greatest risk for urolithiasis. Heatwaves were also associated with increased morbidity with a trend observed with heatwave intensity. During low-intensity heatwaves, there was an increase of 5.9% in morbidity, while during high-intensity heatwaves there was a 7.7% increase. There were greater RRs for males, people aged ≤64 years, and those living in temperate climate zones. Similarly, for every 1 °C temperature increase, there was a 3% (RR 1.031; 95% CI: 1.018–1.045) increase in the risk of kidney-related mortality, which also increased during heatwaves.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969721048816?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Chronic kidney disease progresses faster in patients living in hot countries

Chronic kidney disease patients living in the hottest countries experienced an additional 8% drop in kidney function each year compared to those living in temperate climates, finds a new study from researchers at UCL and the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM).

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2024/apr/chronic-kidney-disease-progresses-faster-patients-living-hot-countries

Association between heatwave exposure and rapid kidney function decline: a longitudinal cohort study from CHARLS

The results showed that the rise in middle to high-intensity heat wave events was connected with a significant risk of rapid kidney function decline. Moreover, we confirmed that the connections between heat wave and rapid kidney function decline were robust after further adjustment of age, gender, medical history, drinking status, smoking status, and biochemical.We observed that males, urban residents, and smoked or drank alcohol were identified as vulnerable populations.

Conclusion: This study found that increased heatwave exposure was associated with a higher risk of rapid kidney function decline in older adults.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40307802/

https://holoceneclimate.com/temperature-versus-co2-the-big-picture.html

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

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

we are still stuck in the deepest ice age since before complex life evolved, (Quaternary ice age) and almost all lives lost are due to cold, not warmth

https://ourworldindata.org/part-one-how-many-people-die-from-extreme-temperatures-and-how-could-this-change-in-the-future

Globally, cold deaths are 9 times higher than heat-related ones. In no region is this ratio less than 3, and in many, it’s over 10 times higher. Cold is more deadly than heat, even in the hottest parts of the world.

The myth is that climate was lovely during little ice age 1300-1850.

Reality is that crops would routinely freeze over before they had time to ripen, and famine was the norm, and europeans migrated to americas in a last attempt to stave off starvation

1 minute ago, mordothailand said:

Heat accounts for approximately 50% of the world’s total final energy consumption. This makes heating the largest single end-use of energy, significantly more than electricity (20%) or transportation (30%).

The World Economic Forum +1

https://www.weforum.org/stories/2023/03/heat-heres-why-its-the-elephant-in-the-room-for-decarbonization/

https://www.iea.org/reports/renewables-2020/renewable-heat

Heat is hugely important in industrial processes. But this was your claim:

"despite most of all the worlds energy production goes into heating to stay alive,"

Not even half of the energy devoted to creating "goes into heating to stay alive"

"But the biggest user is industry, which uses 50% of all heat, where it is an essential component of manufacturing, including refining raw materials, smelting metals and producing chemicals."

https://www.weforum.org/stories/2023/03/heat-heres-why-its-the-elephant-in-the-room-for-decarbonization/

2 hours ago, mordothailand said:

another +5 to 10c

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

Ideally, the temperature should reach the optimal levels for plant life, which is 25 °C (77 °F).

if they worked as designed, it would be even worse

Australia would become uninhabitable, even at the coastal fringes. It's having record heat levels now in inland regions.

At 7.5 C increase in global temperature, over a couple of centuries the sea level rise would be between 35 and 60 meters.

Obviously, you are not accustomed to thinking things through. Are you a misanthrope?

Troll post removed

@kwilco rule 9. You will not post disruptive or inflammatory messages. You will respect other members and post in a civil manner. Personal attacks, insults or hate speech posted on the forum or sent by private message are not allowed.

2 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Except that this superhabitable world that was posited was expressly not designed to accommodate human life. It was designed to be optimal for abundance of life.

Not even that. Vast swathes of the tropical and subtropical plant world would die.

Photo synthesis relies on an enzyme called RuBisCO. Above 30-35 C, said enzyme stops working efficiently, and plants revert to photorespiration - the process of using oxygen instead of CO2. Effectively, plants starve to death in the sun.

The point is fairly moot when said plants are under an extra 50 meters of seawater.

The average temperature in parts of Thailand is 27 degrees. In NZ it is 13.5 degrees. So NZ could totally handle an increase of 13.5. It would just be like Thailand is now with different kinds of plant life. Thailand also has coral and marine life.

3 hours ago, JBChiangRai said:

Actually, it’s AI who is full of it.

So stop using it.

40 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Australia would become uninhabitable, even at the coastal fringes. It's having record heat levels now in inland regions.

At 7.5 C increase in global temperature, over a couple of centuries the sea level rise would be between 35 and 60 meters.

Obviously, you are not accustomed to thinking things through. Are you a misanthrope?

What difference does it make? Once humans are eradicated, the plants take over, consume the CO2 produce more oxygen, the Earth cools and the cycle starts over. What's the big deal?

On 2/15/2026 at 10:17 PM, blaze master said:

Like the decades of factual prediction ?

A prediction is just that. It's not like switching anything on or off. It will get worse though.

And saying we won't suffer for it doesn't take into account our nephews and nieces.

Phuket annual average temperature is around 2 degrees hotter than Chiang Mai. So a 2 degree increase which could take a 100 years could turn Chiang Mai into Phuket. Phuket would then be cooler than Mali.

The rich guys promoting climate change are not telling you guys the truth.

7 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

What difference does it make? Once humans are eradicated, the plants take over, consume the CO2 produce more oxygen, the Earth cools and the cycle starts over. What's the big deal?

On 2/22/2026 at 4:16 PM, Lacessit said:

The average warming rate over decades is about 0.2 C. That is more than one-tenth of a degree.

The only reason it is not much higher is the moderating effect of melting ice in Greenland and Antarctica. Greenland alone has lost an average of 270 billion tonnes of ice every year over the past decade. The result is a sea level rise of about 6 inches on the eastern seaboard of America.

There is no such thing as a free lunch, although the fossil fuel industry clings to the fiction there is.

Sometimes a broader focus is necessary.

No links from you but here's on from me.

https://science.nasa.gov/earth/earth-observatory/americas-sinking-east-coast-152452/

Sea-level variations can often be attributed to several factors.

Most world cities have an average annual temperature of between 10 and 23 degrees. Chiang Mai is 25 to 25.5. So the vast majority of world cities could warm by 2 degrees and still be colder than Chiang Mai.

Makes you wonder why people buy into this global warming fear campaign.

Most of the world is too cold!

30 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

The average temperature in parts of Thailand is 27 degrees. In NZ it is 13.5 degrees. So NZ could totally handle an increase of 13.5. It would just be like Thailand is now with different kinds of plant life. Thailand also has coral and marine life.

If NZ is warmed by 13.5 C, then it follows logically Thailand gets to 40.5 C. Unless you have a means of temperature segregation, and suspending the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

At 40.5 C, Thai coral would be dead, and its green jungles would become deserts.

1 minute ago, Lacessit said:

If NZ is warmed by 13.5 C, then it follows logically Thailand gets to 40.5 C. Unless you have a means of temperature segregation, and suspending the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

At 40.5 C, Thai coral would be dead, and its green jungles would become deserts.

No it does not. Warming is stronger near the poles. There is no uniform warming. Never has been.

Coral likes temperatures of 23 to 29 degrees so new coral would grow in new areas.