Federal Government Confirms Nearing Apocalypse -- it's very hard to dismiss this. - Page 42 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15058514
@jimjam

Re: I no longer waste time discussing climate change with climate change deniers.

I've just scanned the last two pages. Short read. I kept wondering when our new poster would come to this conclusion too. BTW, this is true of most of @Hindsite's posts.
#15058517
Stormsmith wrote:I've just scanned the last two pages. Short read. I kept wondering when our new poster would come to this conclusion too. BTW, this is true of most of @Hindsite's posts.


I guess I'm a glutton for punishment.

Truth is I use it as a means to investigate and better understand a subject that's fascinated me for over forty years.
#15058520
jimjam wrote:I no longer waste time discussing climate change with climate change deniers.

Every informed person is aware that climate changes and always has, so the use of the propaganda term, "climate change denier" merely proves deceitful intent.
What you see below is a foretaste of not what is coming but what is here now.
Image


The irony is that CO2 is likely partly to blame for the Australian fires -- but only because of its fertilization effect, not because it has had any significant warming effect. Higher CO2 helps plants grow, especially in dry climates (because of its water-sparing effect). Much of the area burned in Australia would have had less vegetation without the CO2 fertilization effect. So the real cause is not global warming at all but the combination of CO2 fertilization, the blocking of controlled burns by environmentalist fools, and the failure of the monsoon caused by COOLER temperatures in the Indian Ocean.
(pps … WTF is this Re shit?)

I'm wondering that, too.
#15058522
BeesKnee5 wrote:I guess I'm a glutton for punishment.

Truth is I use it as a means to investigate and better understand a subject that's fascinated me for over forty years.


It fascinates me too, but these days, my concern for improving the environment trumps investigating cause. One thing that bugs me is how badly we do at trying to balance environmental issues, eg there was a time when we were urged to save a tree, use plastic bags. Save a tree, buy a tinsel Christmas tree. Now we're being told to plant trees, but what to do when they snuff it, or require watering (I'm thinking California here)
#15058532
Truth To Power wrote:Every informed person is aware that climate changes and always has

Of course, I suspect that even "uninformed" people can figure this out. What we are looking at today is climate change of a serious and increasing degree. Not a week goes by that I do not read "warmest ever" reports coming in from the 4 corners of the globe. Sea creatures migrating north in search of cooler water. Polar ice melting at record speeds. Rising ocean levels, etc. I doubt that these reports are all a part of an organized world wide conspiracy of deceitful propaganda fanatics.

Truth To Power wrote:blocking of controlled burns by environmentalist fools


While the practice of large-scale hazard-reduction burning certainly has its place in the suite of land management approaches, it is also one of the most complex landscape operations to plan and carry out. The key constraint is that conditions must be just right — not too wet, or the fuel won’t burn, but not so dry that land managers lose control. (It gets awkward if the burn lit to protect houses and critical assets burns them down.)

This is the double-edged sword of global warming: A hotter, drier landscape is too dry to burn safely, even during cooler winter months. Tinder-dry fuel is them primed for monster fires that sweep across entire landscapes, even in areas where hazard reduction has been carried out.

"Environmentalist fools" may, in fact, be deceitful propaganda.

Truth To Power wrote:COOLER temperatures in the Indian Ocean.


Global warming also has many ironies. New "hot" geographic areas can disrupt long established weather streams/patterns and cause movement of cold air to places not accustomed to cooler temps.

And as I mentioned earlier: Russia has published a plan to adapt its economy and population to climate change, aiming to mitigate damage but also “use the advantages” of warmer temperatures.

The document, published on the government’s website on Saturday, outlines a plan of action and acknowledges changes to the climate are having a “prominent and increasing effect” on socioeconomic development, people’s lives, health and industry.

Russia is feeling global warming more than any other nation due to their makeup of massive polar regions. Is the Russian government comprised of "environmentalist fools"?
#15058538
BeesKnee5 wrote:That well known New South Wales Monsoon season

:lol: :lol:


It drizzled through most of December. Just enough to make going outside a bit of a pain, but at least enough to break the dried out ground so it is more likely to absorb water properly. Since Christmas, it's being monsooning. The water level has risen to normaĺ, our little Creek is running now (usually November) and I'm happy :) . I worry that the well will run dry. Maybe that would be what it takes to get the cheapskates on the street to 'ok' the residents of the street to install city-run water.
#15058553
BeesKnee5 wrote:Facts don't make claims. They just give you the information to allow you to understand.

Explain again how you conclude that facts are left wing propaganda whenever they don't match your preconceptions.

If their predictions consistently turn out to be false, then I conclude that they must just be left-wing propaganda began by Al Gore.
#15058569
Hindsite wrote:If their predictions consistently turn out to be false, then I conclude that they must just be left-wing propaganda began by Al Gore.


If somone continuously make inaccurate predictions that person has to be challenged for his / her ability to make predictions in general, but categorising him / her to some ideology that not everyone is aware of is just absurd.
#15058583
Hindsite wrote:If their predictions consistently turn out to be false, then I conclude that they must just be left-wing propaganda began by Al Gore.


Warnings about climate change preceded Al Gore by decades.

There is an important point here.

A prediction is a declaration that something will happen. This is not what scientists are doing, they are forecasting the likelihood of events based on current and historic evidence.

They do not say the Arctic will be ice free in X years. They say the Arctic is trending towards being ice free and based on current trends it will occur between X and Y.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ice-c ... gore-2014/

So we now have a situation where you deny climate change because a politician misrepresented the scientific forecasts.

The data shows a continued decrease in Arctic Ice volume that if it continues will result in an Ice free summer. At the lowest variance this will be within 5 years, at the highest it will be in within 25 years, probability says it will be somewhere in between.
Image

This isn't leftist or propaganda, it's just evidence from the data. What it does highlight though is why so many became very concerned between 2005 and 2012 as the trend in Ice volume decrease was higher than the longer term average.
#15058636
Truth To Power wrote:Every informed person is aware that climate changes and always has, so the use of the propaganda term, "climate change denier" merely proves deceitful intent.......

Bullshit. You know EXACTLY what is meant by the term and your dancing changes nothing.
#15058637
BeesKnee5 wrote:Warnings about climate change preceded Al Gore by decades.

There is an important point here.

A prediction is a declaration that something will happen. This is not what scientists are doing, they are forecasting the likelihood of events based on current and historic evidence.

They do not say the Arctic will be ice free in X years. They say the Arctic is trending towards being ice free and based on current trends it will occur between X and Y. ......

The good news is that the naysayers are a tiny and shrinking minority around the world.
#15058644
I think that when @jimjam said “climate change deniers”, he meant those people who deny the facts of anthropogenic climate change and the negative impacts associated with anthropogenic climate change.

He did not mean “people who think climate is always perfectly static”.

To accuse jimjam of saying the latter is a strawman.
#15058655
BeesKnee5 wrote:Warnings about climate change preceded Al Gore by decades.

But they were warnings about global cooling.
They say the Arctic is trending towards being ice free and based on current trends it will occur between X and Y.

Yes, well, based on current trends, by next summer everything above 40 degrees north latitude will be frozen.
So we now have a situation where you deny climate change because a politician misrepresented the scientific forecasts.

No, we have a situation where you are making a false claim about someone else's beliefs -- unless you can provide a direct, verbatim, in-context quote where he denies that climate changes (hint: you can't).
The data shows a continued decrease in Arctic Ice volume that if it continues will result in an Ice free summer.

Like the continued decrease in Northern Hemisphere temperature since August that, if it continues, will result in the Northern Hemisphere being frozen by next summer.
At the lowest variance this will be within 5 years, at the highest it will be in within 25 years, probability says it will be somewhere in between.

It will not happen even in 25 years. How will you apologize when it doesn't?
Image

Why does the graph begin in 1979? Oh, wait a minute, that's right: because before 1979, arctic sea ice was INcreasing:

Image

This isn't leftist or propaganda, it's just evidence from the data.

If it is not propaganda, why have the earlier satellite data showing increasing arctic sea ice up to 1979 been removed, erased, censored, deleted, suppressed?
What it does highlight though is why so many became very concerned between 2005 and 2012 as the trend in Ice volume decrease was higher than the longer term average.

The cherry-picked down-phase of a cyclical variation is not the long-term average, sorry.
#15058669
Margaret Thatcher warned about the need to tackle the greenhouse effect in 1989.

Typical commie leftie.

Ten years earlier in 1978 the first ever world climate conference said the world was expected to warm due to greenhouse gases and that the effects may be detectable before 2000.

Image

Al Gore wasn't even close to being first to raise concern about global warming.
#15058728
Senter wrote:The good news is that the naysayers are a tiny and shrinking minority around the world.

I've noticed. It is becoming increasingly embarrassing to deny the obvious.

While there’s widespread scientific consensus that the world is getting warmer, it seems some individuals still need convincing.

In the US, 6% of people say climate change isn’t real, and 9% don’t attribute global warming to human action, according to a survey by YouGov.
#15058755
jimjam wrote:While there’s widespread scientific consensus that the world is getting warmer, it seems some individuals still need convincing.


Eventually there should be some who are inconvincible. If they do not make a difference ignore them. Otherwise, remove them from power.
  • 1
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 48

I think preparation is of some benefit. There is[…]

Bill Barr has to go

1) Like what? Imperialism? Bigger, richer coun[…]

Harry does not have a drop of Windsor blood in hi[…]

Not true, but you can not do anything about the[…]