[late]

Just a reminder, kids, T to P is a paid troll.

[Steve_American]

@Truth To Power, Lurkers, it is no use to reply to TTP in detail. He is a denier. He doesn't read the posts. He just makes unfounded assertions. Like the one there where he denied that more Methane is being released in the Arctic already. And all the science that estimates the amount of carbon in the permafrost that can be released as CO2 or Methane.
I'd bet my like if it were possible on my 5 deg. C by 2099 with business as usual. He on the other hand is betting your fife that he is right. Is that OK with you?
.

[Godstud]

AGW is not fake. It is being exaggerated to an enormous extent, however. The world is not doomed. That's hyperbole.

[late]

I will continue to be proved objectively right by objective physical reality

You are as wrong as it is possible to get.

What's worse, paid troll, is you know it.

[Pants-of-dog]

No. It is a self-evident fact of objective physical reality that anyone can confirm for themselves by just looking out their window. Anti-fossil-fuel scaremongers are just trying to gaslight the whole world.

Propaganda needs to be at least vaguely plausible, or the blowback is impressive, making it's author look like a lunatic, or at least a well paid fool.

I am looking out the window right now.

The sunlight looks weirdly orange, and the shadows are all blurry.

This is due to the high number of airborne pollution from the wildfires.

The wildfires are covering something like ten times the amount of land they usually do.

This is due to the dry, warm, short winters and hot, dry summers.

This is caused by anthropogenic climate change.

So, yes, looking out my own window shows me clear evidence of the truth of anthropogenic climate change.

[Truth To Power]

You are as wrong as it is possible to get.

Then why does objective physical reality keep proving me right?

[Pants-of-dog]

The objective physical reality I see outside my window is a clear indication of (and evidence for) anthropogenic climate change.

[Truth To Power]

I am looking out the window right now.

The sunlight looks weirdly orange, and the shadows are all blurry.

This is due to the high number of airborne pollution from the wildfires.

The wildfires are covering something like ten times the amount of land they usually do.

You mean like, 20x the amount they covered in 2020, when CO2 was at effectively the same level? Was CO2 also the cause of the exceptionally low area of forest that burned in that year?

This is due to the dry, warm, short winters and hot, dry summers.

I.e., normal weather variation.

This is caused by anthropogenic climate change.

No, that cannot be true, because dry, warm winters and hot, dry summers have been happening at about the same frequency for thousands of years. This year's abnormally hot summer weather has apparently been caused by an extraordinary -- and very unexpected -- increase in solar activity, which has defied virtually the unanimous expectations of astrophysicists:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cyc ... ession.png

Furthermore, the number of wildfires in Canada shows a clear downtrend since 1980, proving you objectively wrong:

https://cwfis.cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/ha/nfdb

And while there is no obvious trend in area burned since 1980, there is enormous variability, such that year-on-year variation by more than an order of magnitude is not at all unusual.

So, yes, looking out my own window shows me clear evidence of the truth of anthropogenic climate change.

No it doesn't. It just gives you an opportunity to incorrectly reinterpret normal variations in solar activity and local weather and wildfires as anthropogenic climate change. If you were willing to know facts (you aren't), you would be able to know the fact that substantial year-on-year variation in wildfires has been normal for thousands of years -- and that the anthropogenic component of wildfires is due to half of them being started by human activities like cigarette smoking, logging, and campfires -- and arson by anti-fossil-fuel activists -- not CO2 emissions.

[Truth To Power]

The objective physical reality I see outside my window is a clear indication of (and evidence for) anthropogenic climate change.

No it isn't, any more than looking out your window and seeing a neighbor walking their dog is an indication of or evidence for increased dog food sales.

[Truth To Power]

Just a reminder, kids, T to P is a paid troll.

Just a reminder, kids, that is a bald falsehood.

[Truth To Power]

@Truth To Power, Lurkers, it is no use to reply to TTP in detail. He is a denier.

Use of that absurd and disingenuous propaganda term removes any credibility you might have had.

He doesn't read the posts.

Bald falsehood.

He just makes unfounded assertions.

Bald falsehood.

Like the one there where he denied that more Methane is being released in the Arctic already.

Direct, verbatim, in-context quote?

Of course not.

And that, dear readers, tells you all you need to know.

And all the science that estimates the amount of carbon in the permafrost that can be released as CO2 or Methane.

Quote?

Of course not.

My point, of course, is that CO2 and methane from melting permafrost cannot possibly have any significant effect on climate, or they would have done so when the permafrost melted during the Holocene Optimum, and during all the previous interglacials when temperature was higher than it is now. You just refuse to know such facts.

I'd bet my like if it were possible on my 5 deg. C by 2099 with business as usual.

I don't know how old you are, but I am very confident you will live long enough to learn your prediction is false and ridiculous.

He on the other hand is betting your fife that he is right. Is that OK with you?

Is it OK with you that I would bet your life that you don't have to walk on all fours singing Swanee River to avoid cholera?

[Unthinking Majority]

Potemkin, yes there is a choice. You are keeping the people from seeing it with your positions.

The other choice is for 30 million progressives to meet in the street this summer and demand progressive alternatives be on the ballot in 2024.
Yes, the corp Dems are economically much like the corp Repuds, and both are very different from the MAGA Repuds.

Public opinion polls tell us that a solid majority of likely voters and even more unlikely voters are in favor of many "Progressive policies and laws". We can if we work at it get progressives on the Primary Dem ballot and then on the General election ballot and vote them into office. We have to minds of the voters, we just need to get them to believe that we can win.

There are a few real progressives in Congress, like Sen. Sanders. We just need 59 more in the Senate and 220 more in the House.

The corp Media is not at all progressive. It is anti-progressive. You can't wait for them to tell you what to do. You need to act when I tell you what to do. You need to find another way to communicate with other progressives. Social media can be blocked. Form phone trees. Get phone numbers. Get creative.
I live in Thailand, so I can't get in the street. You-all need to do that now. Next year is too late. You need to win Primary elections next winter and spring.
Getting 30 million progressives into the street is the 1st intermediate goal.
.

The only thing American voters need are politicians who serve the people instead of corporations and themselves.

They need leaders with integrity. Integrity is when you uphold good moral principles even when nobody is watching. This is why I like politicians like Bernie Sanders and Jesse Ventura.

[Pants-of-dog]

You mean like, 20x the amount they covered in 2020, when CO2 was at effectively the same level? Was CO2 also the cause of the exceptionally low area of forest that burned in that year?

No, this is either a strawman or you misunderstand.

No one claimed that Co2 directly causes wildfires.

Again, anthropogenic climate change has caused warm dry winters and hit dry summers, increasing the amount of wildfires and the length if time they burn.

This is the argument.

Since you are not addressing it, it has not been refuted in the least.

I.e., normal weather variation.

No. It is not normal for every decade to have had hotter drier summers and winters than the last decade for the last few decades, to the point that wildfires are so common that people can see the problem right outside their window.

No, that cannot be true, because dry, warm winters and hot, dry summers have been happening at about the same frequency for thousands of years.

No, this is incorrect.

By looking out my window at objective physical reality, it has been directly observed by me and everyone else that winters are getting hotter, shorter, and drier here in the prairies.

It is illogical and arbitrary to demand we look out the window at objective reality and then pivot entirely and tell us to ignore this information.

This year's abnormally hot summer weather has apparently been caused by an extraordinary -- and very unexpected -- increase in solar activity, which has defied virtually the unanimous expectations of astrophysicists:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cyc ... ession.png

No, this is not correct.

The sun has been trundling along in its usual 11 year cycle and so the very slight warming caused by the (completely normal and expected) increase in solar activity is not a significant cause of the ongoing heat problems.

Furthermore, the number of wildfires in Canada shows a clear downtrend since 1980, proving you objectively wrong:

https://cwfis.cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/ha/nfdb

The data does not cover 2023, which is the time that is happening outside my window in objective physical reality.

This year has been unprecedented.

https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/alberta-wil ... -1.6391711

And while there is no obvious trend in area burned since 1980, there is enormous variability, such that year-on-year variation by more than an order of magnitude is not at all unusual.

This year is unusual.

Again, I looked out my window and saw the objective physical reality that is unusual and caused by anthropogenic climate change.

No it doesn't. It just gives you an opportunity to incorrectly reinterpret normal variations in solar activity and local weather and wildfires as anthropogenic climate change. If you were willing to know facts (you aren't), you would be able to know the fact that substantial year-on-year variation in wildfires has been normal for thousands of years -- and that the anthropogenic component of wildfires is due to half of them being started by human activities like cigarette smoking, logging, and campfires -- and arson by anti-fossil-fuel activists -- not CO2 emissions.

If you do not want people to look outside their window and see the objective physical reality that shows that anthropogenic climate change is real and directly affecting them, stop telling people to look out the window.

“Climate change is warming the climate across Canada,” said Nathan Gillett, a research scientist with Environment and Climate Change Canada. “It’s warming the climate in western Canada.

“We know it’s increasing the chance of heat waves,” he explained. “As the climate gets warmer, as we see more heat waves, that dries out the forest more quickly, it dries out the litter, and that increases the risk of wildfire.”

There will still be year-to-year variations, he added.

“But over time, we expect more heat waves, more extreme fire seasons like the one we’re seeing now in Alberta. These events are going to become more and more frequent into the future as the climate continues to warm.”

https://globalnews.ca/news/9705916/clim ... e-weather/

I picked Global since it is owned by Fox. It will be hard for you to accuse Fox of being leftist, so I predict you will accuse the scientist of being a liar.

[Rancid]

Just a reminder, kids, T to P is a paid troll.

We're all bought and paid for one way or another.

I will not reveal my handlers though.

[late]

We're all bought and paid for one way or another.

I will not reveal my handlers though.

There are very few here that get a paycheck for being here.

You are conflating perspective with propaganda...

[Truth To Power]

No, this is either a strawman or you misunderstand.

False, as usual.

No one claimed that Co2 directly causes wildfires.

You claimed it does so indirectly, so the logic is the same. So please explain how CO2 indirectly caused the record low fire season just three years ago. Now.

Again, anthropogenic climate change has caused warm dry winters and hit dry summers, increasing the amount of wildfires and the length if time they burn.

This is the argument.

And it is objectively false, as natural cyclical climate variation produced periods of warm dry winters and hot dry summers for millions of years before there were any people.

Since you are not addressing it, it has not been refuted in the least.

And you call me a "denier"?

It is not normal for every decade to have had hotter drier summers and winters than the last decade for the last few decades,

Sure it is, because climate is cyclical.

to the point that wildfires are so common that people can see the problem right outside their window.

Yes, of course it is, because climate is cyclical.

No, this is incorrect.

My statement was objectively correct.

By looking out my window at objective physical reality, it has been directly observed by me and everyone else that winters are getting hotter, shorter, and drier here in the prairies.

No, that is false. All you observed was some smoke. The rest is all invalid inference.

It is illogical and arbitrary to demand we look out the window at objective reality and then pivot entirely and tell us to ignore this information.

What you have directly observed is quite different from what you have incorrectly inferred from it.

No, this is not correct.

It is most definitely correct.

The sun has been trundling along in its usual 11 year cycle

No, your claim is again just objectively false, as usual. The graph I posted a link to shows the sun has been far more active than normal for the last ~1.5 years.

and so the very slight warming caused by the (completely normal and expected)

No, your claim is objectively false, as usual. Astrophysicists were almost unanimously predicting a quiet solar cycle.

increase in solar activity is not a significant cause of the ongoing heat problems.

It is indisputably the principal cause; and heat is less of a problem than cold, as I have already explained to you, very patiently, multiple times, in clear, simple, grammatical English.

The data does not cover 2023, which is the time that is happening outside my window in objective physical reality.

And a bit of smoke is not CO2 or a climate crisis. You are going far beyond what you can actually observe in objective reality, and making wildly invalid inferences about its cause.

This year has been unprecedented.

https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/alberta-wil ... -1.6391711

In Alberta. Every year will be unprecedented somewhere.

This year is unusual.

Because the sun has been so extraordinarily active.

Again, I looked out my window and saw the objective physical reality that is unusual and caused by anthropogenic climate change.

No, that is merely an invalid inference on your part. All you saw was a bit of smoke, which has been there every few years for thousands of years.

If you do not want people to look outside their window and see the objective physical reality that shows that anthropogenic climate change is real

That is merely an incorrect inference, not an observation of reality.

and directly affecting them, stop telling people to look out the window.

Keep looking our your window. Just stop makin' $#!+ up about what you see there.

“Climate change is warming the climate across Canada,” said Nathan Gillett, a research scientist with Environment and Climate Change Canada. “It’s warming the climate in western Canada.

“We know it’s increasing the chance of heat waves,” he explained. “As the climate gets warmer, as we see more heat waves, that dries out the forest more quickly, it dries out the litter, and that increases the risk of wildfire.”

There will still be year-to-year variations, he added.

“But over time, we expect more heat waves, more extreme fire seasons like the one we’re seeing now in Alberta. These events are going to become more and more frequent into the future as the climate continues to warm.”

https://globalnews.ca/news/9705916/clim ... e-weather/

The climate will not continue to warm unless the sun continues to be unusually active. Temperature had been declining from 2016 until solar activity unexpectedly soared starting last year:

https://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content ... 20x9-1.jpg

[Pants-of-dog]

False, as usual.

So you then agree that CO2 is not directly causing wildfires but instead is causing wildfires to cover more land and start earlier, by the method I explained earlier.

And yes, climate is often cyclical. The Earth should be cooling down if the cycles were staying the same. Instead, the Earth is warming.

In terms of wildfires, the cycle is a new normal of unprecedented air pollution.

And no, the sun is not causing it.

Also, this thing where you swear at people while telling them that you are some calm and rational and clear person is contradictory.

[skinster]

to the point that wildfires are so common that people can see the problem right outside their window.

Speaking of wildfires..

[Godstud]

If CO2 was responsible for wildfires then the world would have burned apart millions of years ago when the earth had much higher concentrations of CO2(10x). The idea that CO2 is a pollutant is poppycock.

The science on this is politicized. It makes no sense if you do a deep dive on it with some critical thinking.

Climate science is virtue signaling, now. Is it a problem? Yes.
Is it one that requires dismantling mankind, and technology, to address? No.

[Pants-of-dog]

Quote where anyone said that CO2 was causing wildfires.

This is a picture of today from a local paper:



https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/smoke-cover ... -1.6546950