5 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

More CO2 is not beneficial for humans. It's not even good for plants in the tropics at 900 ppm. The enzyme in plants which enables photosynthesis curls up its toes and is deactivated above 35 C, which we would have as a lower threshold.

The deaths from heat stress in humans would be astronomical, except for those people rich enough to afford aircon 24/7.

The Holocene is classed as an interglacial period which began about 11,700 years ago, characterized by a mostly warm and stable climate. Humans have shifted the needle in a mere 300 years of burning fossil fuels.

Guterres -"The era of global warming has ended; the era of global boiling has arrived. "

https://press.un.org/en/2023/sgsm21893.doc.htm

fact check: we are stuck in the deepest ice age since before complex life even evolved

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

12 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

More CO2 is not beneficial for humans. It's not even good for plants in the tropics at 900 ppm. The enzyme in plants which enables photosynthesis curls up its toes and is deactivated above 35 C, which we would have as a lower threshold.

The deaths from heat stress in humans would be astronomical, except for those people rich enough to afford aircon 24/7.

The Holocene is classed as an interglacial period which began about 11,700 years ago, characterized by a mostly warm and stable climate. Humans have shifted the needle in a mere 300 years of burning fossil fuels.

We are 150 years away from 900ppm. So it is 16 trillion dollar scam.

12 minutes ago, mordothailand said:

Guterres -"The era of global warming has ended; the era of global boiling has arrived. "

https://press.un.org/en/2023/sgsm21893.doc.htm

fact check: we are stuck in the deepest ice age since before complex life even evolved

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

How do you explain Australia is experiencing record heat levels. polar bears are losing habitat, and Greenland ice melt is about 250 billion tonnes for the last two decades? That doesn't sound like a "deep ice age" to me.

8 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

How do you explain Australia is experiencing record heat levels. polar bears are losing habitat, and Greenland ice melt is about 250 billion tonnes for the last two decades? That doesn't sound like a "deep ice age" to me.

Polar bears are fine

Polar bears in Svalbard, Norway are getting fatter despite rapid loss of sea ice

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-33227-9

a deep ice age is defined as having any permanent ice anywhere in the northern hemisphere

an ice age is defined as having any permanent ice anywhere in the southern hemisphere (like late Cenozoic ice age)

we are now in an interglacial period in current deep ice age (Quaternary ice age)

15 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

How do you explain Australia is experiencing record heat levels. polar bears are losing habitat, and Greenland ice melt is about 250 billion tonnes for the last two decades? That doesn't sound like a "deep ice age" to me.

Why are you cherry picking?

34 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

We are 150 years away from 900ppm. So it is 16 trillion dollar scam.

Where are you getting these pointless so called bits of info from?

One minute you copy and paste long bits of unattributed AI "stuff" then you post unfounded/unlinked cr@p like this.

9 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

Why are you cherry picking?

Why are you asking that question?

Is it the wrong "climate change" season for cherry picking?

27 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

How do you explain Australia is experiencing record heat levels. polar bears are losing habitat, and Greenland ice melt is about 250 billion tonnes for the last two decades? That doesn't sound like a "deep ice age" to me.

How hot was it in 500bc? What about 55ad or 3000bc? Any idea how the rainfall or droughts? No of course no.

Just alarmist cherry picking from 40 years of data.

4 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

Where are you getting these pointless so called bits of info from?

One minute you copy and paste long bits of unattributed AI "stuff" then you post unfounded/unlinked cr@p like this.

Don't troll me boy.

1 hour ago, mordothailand said:

Guterres -"The era of global warming has ended; the era of global boiling has arrived. "

https://press.un.org/en/2023/sgsm21893.doc.htm

fact check: we are stuck in the deepest ice age since before complex life even evolved

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

Frost is more deadly to crops than heat.

47 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

How do you explain Australia is experiencing record heat levels. polar bears are losing habitat, and Greenland ice melt is about 250 billion tonnes for the last two decades? That doesn't sound like a "deep ice age" to me.

Cold-related deaths account for approximately 4.6 million deaths annually worldwide, out numbering heat related deaths 9:1.

Why do you alarmists want people to die?

1 hour ago, mordothailand said:

Polar bears are fine

Polar bears in Svalbard, Norway are getting fatter despite rapid loss of sea ice

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-33227-9

a deep ice age is defined as having any permanent ice anywhere in the northern hemisphere

an ice age is defined as having any permanent ice anywhere in the southern hemisphere (like late Cenozoic ice age)

we are now in an interglacial period in current deep ice age (Quaternary ice age)

They are adapting, I am not sure humans are smart enough to do the same.

Your post contradicts itself, putting rapid loss of sea ice and an ice age in the same post.

There is not stopping it. Make hay while the Sun shines.

3 hours ago, Lacessit said:

They are adapting, I am not sure humans are smart enough to do the same.

Your post contradicts itself, putting rapid loss of sea ice and an ice age in the same post.

we adapt by emulating tropical climate inside a bubble, so we can survive in europe & space. the biggest obstacle is heating cost

if there wasnt any ice around to lose, we wouldnt be stuck in an ice age, duh

8 hours ago, mordothailand said:

we adapt by emulating tropical climate inside a bubble, so we can survive in europe & space. the biggest obstacle is heating cost

if there wasnt any ice around to lose, we wouldnt be stuck in an ice age, duh

Time to remove your oxygen supply.

Personally, I prefer "climate change" over global warming as things are changing. Freezing in New York, boiling in Bangkok. The climate is changing. Temperatures since the 19th century have climbed slowly but like a frog in a pan of water, you and you family don't feel it until you're dead.

6 minutes ago, Purdey said:

Personally, I prefer "climate change" over global warming as things are changing. Freezing in New York, boiling in Bangkok. The climate is changing. Temperatures since the 19th century have climbed slowly but like a frog in a pan of water, you and you family don't feel it until you're dead.

Bangkok has not changed since 1998.

I have no reason not to trust the experts. They have given good evidence of global warming. From the very first time they said we need to change to avoid a tipping point, I knew we couldn't avoid it. It's inevitable.

I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories with one exception, and that is the source of Covid 19. It seemed fairly clear to me it was likely to be the Wuhan Lab and that all international interested parties would prefer it not to be. The thing that nailed it for me was when the CCP skewed the statistics by telling hospitals they could only count it as an infection if (a) the patient was sick and (b) had visited the wet market.

However, on the subject of climate change, there is no evidence to the contrary. The important thing is global average temperature change. Some places and countries will be cooler, and some will be warmer. What's important is the average.

The UK will be a lot cooler when the Atlantic Conveyor stops working, but that doesn't mean there is no global warming. It's important to look at the big picture and not cherry pick datapoints that suit your narrative.

6 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

I have no reason not to trust the experts. They have given good evidence of global warming. From the very first time they said we need to change to avoid a tipping point, I knew we couldn't avoid it. It's inevitable.

I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories with one exception, and that is the source of Covid 19. It seemed fairly clear to me it was likely to be the Wuhan Lab and that all international interested parties would prefer it not to be. The thing that nailed it for me was when the CCP skewed the statistics by telling hospitals they could only count it as an infection if (a) the patient was sick and (b) had visited the wet market.

However, on the subject of climate change, there is no evidence to the contrary. The important thing is global average temperature change. Some places and countries will be cooler, and some will be warmer. What's important is the average.

The UK will be a lot cooler when the Atlantic Conveyor stops working, but that doesn't mean there is no global warming. It's important to look at the big picture and not cherry pick datapoints that suit your narrative.

The experts say there is nothing to worry about. The alarmists can't find the forests.

There is no tipping point

https://thebreakthrough.org/journal/climate-change-banned-words/climate-tipping-point-real

24 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

Bangkok has not changed since 1998.

Why would you make this up when it is so easy to check?

The annual highest temperature in Thailand has increased by approximately 0.86°C over the past 55 years. In 1960, Bangkok had about 193 days at or above 32°C; by 2018, that number rose to 276 days, and it is projected to reach up to 344 days by 2100.

4 minutes ago, Purdey said:

Why would you make this up when it is so easy to check?

The annual highest temperature in Thailand has increased by approximately 0.86°C over the past 55 years. In 1960, Bangkok had about 193 days at or above 32°C; by 2018, that number rose to 276 days, and it is projected to reach up to 344 days by 2100.

I did not make it up. It is fact.

On 2/23/2026 at 8:45 PM, khaosokman said:

For Bangkok the average temperature in 2023 was the same as 1998

https://en.tutiempo.net/climate

See here. No. Change in 25 years.

9 minutes ago, Purdey said:

Why would you make this up when it is so easy to check?

The annual highest temperature in Thailand has increased by approximately 0.86°C over the past 55 years. In 1960, Bangkok had about 193 days at or above 32°C; by 2018, that number rose to 276 days, and it is projected to reach up to 344 days by 2100.

It is not possible for Thai temperatures to increase much more. Water vapour has a much greater range than co2 and co2 increases will have little impact due to the saturation effect.

Yes, water vapor (

) and carbon dioxide (

) compete for absorption of infrared radiation in the Earth's atmosphere, meaning they both absorb energy at similar wavelength bands. While they have distinct primary absorption peaks, their spectral absorption lines overlap in several regions, most notably around 2.7

m. 

ScienceDirect.com +3

Key details regarding this competition include:

• Primary Overlap Areas: Both gases have absorption bands in the infrared, specifically around 2.7

  m. While water vapor is generally a stronger absorber across the spectrum,

  is a much stronger absorber in the 15-

  m range.

• Reduced Total Impact: Because of this overlap, the total greenhouse effect is less than the sum of what the two gases would absorb individually. If one gas absorbs a photon at a specific frequency, the other cannot.

• 15-Micrometer Band:

  is particularly effective at absorbing radiation at 15

  m, a region that is also partly covered by water vapor, but in which

  plays a critical, often dominant, role in the upper troposphere.

• Water Vapor Dominance: Water vapor covers more of the spectrum and generally absorbs more total infrared radiation, often carrying over 90% of the greenhouse effect load compared to 7-9% for

  Co2

places like the Amazon rainforest or Southeast Asia, the air can contain up to 4% water vapour. This creates a powerful insulating blanket that leads to a specific weather phenomenon:

• Stable Nighttime Temperatures: In humid regions, the temperature doesn't drop much at night. The high concentration of water vapour traps the heat radiating off the ground, keeping the evenings stiflingly warm.

• The Desert Contrast: Compare this to a dry desert. Even if it reaches 45°C during the day, the temperature can plummet to near freezing at night. Because there is so little water vapour in the desert air, the "blanket" is gone, and heat escapes directly into space.

1 hour ago, Purdey said:

Personally, I prefer "climate change" over global warming as things are changing. Freezing in New York, boiling in Bangkok. The climate is changing. Temperatures since the 19th century have climbed slowly but like a frog in a pan of water, you and you family don't feel it until you're dead.

Global warming is the driver of climate change.

Storms called typhoons, hurricanes and cyclones are all the same, the nomenclature just differs according to region.

The magic number for triggering these storms is a water temperature of 26.5 C. For every 1 degree C above that temperature, wind speed increases by 5%. The water temperature prior to Hurricane Harvey in 2017 was 30 C.

Global warming is the second law of thermodynamics at work. Climate change, in the form of storms, is the first law.

15 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Storms called typhoons, hurricanes and cyclones are all the same, the nomenclature just differs according to region.

I thought it was named for the ocean in which it started.

Anyways, they are far fewer than in the 1930s.

https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/a-remarkable-decline-in-landfalling

Climate alarmism is an excuse to create a World Socialist government that controls everything and everyone ....... nothing more!

AI Overview

Natural climate change, including periods with higher temperatures, existed for billions of years before the industrial revolution.

NASA Science (.gov) +4

• Natural Causes: Past climate changes were driven by natural processes, such as variations in Earth's orbit, volcanic activity, or changes in the Sun's intensity.

35 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Global warming is the driver of climate change.

Storms called typhoons, hurricanes and cyclones are all the same, the nomenclature just differs according to region.

The magic number for triggering these storms is a water temperature of 26.5 C. For every 1 degree C above that temperature, wind speed increases by 5%. The water temperature prior to Hurricane Harvey in 2017 was 30 C.

Global warming is the second law of thermodynamics at work. Climate change, in the form of storms, is the first law.

In 300 years Thailand will only be 0.4 degrees warmer.

Go have a Chang.

23 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

I thought it was named for the ocean in which it started.

Anyways, they are far fewer than in the 1930s.

https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/a-remarkable-decline-in-landfalling

Climate alarmism is an excuse to create a World Socialist government that controls everything and everyone ....... nothing more!

The intensity of tropical storms has increased in the present day, compared to the 1930's. That's a perfectly understandable outcome of increasing temperatures of air and water.

From where I sit, billionaires funding far-right governments seems to be the latest trend.

Let me know when you succeed in repealing the laws of thermodynamics.