|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Oct 28, 2023 7:48:21 GMT
Come now, peeps. This is the Zany section - you're not supposed to disagree with him in here.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Oct 28, 2023 7:51:51 GMT
The fact is that, as I've said before, no one has ever been able to demonstrate CO2 warming in the Earth's system - only in a box in a laboratory. As soon as you try it on Earth the many "stabilisers" that the Earth has step in and counteract any warming effects it might have had in an empty box. That's why the Earth is a relatively stable system. If it didn't have stabilisers it would have burnt up (by an irreversible feed back loop) many millennia ago. So the situation we have is that the Earth has (according to slightly dubious data) warmed by 1.1C since 1850. Considering that the Earth's human population has gone from about 1 billion in 1850 to nearly 8 billion now, and that 75% of the Earth's land area has been "repurposed" in that time (to grow crops and house the huge population), I'd say that was a remarkably small change in temperature. It's evidence of how stable the Earth actually is. Yet political organisations like the IPCC would have us believe that almost all of this temperature increase is caused by CO2, despite having no evidence of the warming effects of CO2 on Earth. And despite the fact that we have very definite evidence that the concreting over the planet and the removal of trees to house people and grow food crops DOES cause significant warming. Yet we're told that this is "insignificant". It's utter nonsense of course. And I'll point again that it's highly suspicious to me that the drive to net zero (i.e. the elimination of CO2 emissions) will lead to the destruction of the capitalist system and the virtual bankrupting of the West's richest economies. Now I wonder who might benefit from that. ??  Indeed. It's a system of control. |
|
|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Oct 28, 2023 8:11:05 GMT
It’s revealing …. those driving this Green Agenda from the very top. …
1) Often belong to sectarian religions that are bullying and breed like rabbits … which is Bad For The Planet (BFTP)
2) They are largely responsible for driving consumerism and most environmental mining damage. The recent catastrophic Amazonian and worldwide tropical deforestation continues unabated, despite many protests … It’s argued THIS drives a drastic change in climate thermals today …. SOLELY because these stupid greedy retards love to destroy and plunder the riches of natural eco-systems …. so they can have luxury woods in their multiple mansions. 🙄 (BFTP)
3) Their hypocritical actions show they have multiple vehicles and motorised ‘playthings’ aplenty… luxury yachts, limousines and private planes … even space rockets that are BFTP.
4) Their MSM lectures us cows and farm animals and intensive farming is to blame because they claim it produce too much CO2 and methane … more than a plague of vegetarians? (Questionable) … Many feel vegetarianism and eating insects will generated more human methane … so I presume human euthanasia will be ramped up to the top of their priority list? … BFTP?.
5) We know human over-population and farting from a bad diet (created by poor Globalist slave wages tbh) …. is more of a waste issue … and contraception is a better solution for the environment than wars, plandemics, forced mass migration, sanction starvation and numerous different secret geo-weathering/toxic spray programmes ongoing since 1949 …. all clearly not working and BFTP.
The electric revolution won’t make a jot of difference to reversing a global warming driven by other factors eg (natural cycles/volcanism/polarity flip + planetary progression/magnetic solar wind cycles) ….
Car, boat, train and plane emissions are improving in quality … but 15 min cities flooded with Third World high energy users - all using non-Green Grid electricity . … is BFTP … and doing nothing more than imposing unnecessary forced draconian lockdown of our FREEDOMS.
… New calculations show the harm of fossil fuels in reformed eco-engines is pretty minimal now …..
…. So the conclusion drawn from the above … suggests the Globalist’s Green Agenda is mostly science being used and abused … to roll out a Totalitarian template … and has little to do with Net Benefit to the Planet and it’s green environmental concerns.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 28, 2023 8:18:29 GMT
It has been proved as you agree in the lab. So the question changes to; How much can earths stabilisers cope with. Then you need to look at tipping points. Water becomes ice at 0°C but it melts at 0.1°C Tiny change. The extra heat is not distributed evenly across the globe as a nice 1.1°C increase for everyone. It swirls around the world causing weather patterns to change and temperature to vary by much more than 1.1°C Yes it is amazing we have got off so lightly. The earth has mitigated much of the damage humans have done, but there comes a point. Is your view that we should do nothing and accept the changes to our climate. Or that there is nothing we can do? A political organisation so powerful it can tell China's scientists what to think. I don't think so. You have switched from we DO know Co2 causes warming but not how earth can mitigate its effect. To; despite having no evidence of the warming effects of CO2 on Earth. Now who's telling scare stories. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 28, 2023 8:19:00 GMT
Come now, peeps. This is the Zany section - you're not supposed to disagree with him in here. Child. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Oct 28, 2023 8:21:07 GMT
It’s revealing …. those driving this Green Agenda from the very top. … 1) Often belong to sectarian religions that are bullying and breed like rabbits … which is Bad For The Planet (BFTP) 2) They are largely responsible for most environmental mining damage and recent catastrophic Amazonian and tropical deforestation that continues unabated, despite many protests … and drives a drastic change in climate thermals today … just because these stupid greedy retards want luxury wood in their multiple mansions (BFTP) 3) These retards have multiple vehicles and motorised ‘playthings’ … luxury yachts, limousines and private planes … even space rockets that are BFTP. 4) Their duplicitous MSM lectures us cows and farm animals/intensive farming is to blame because they claim it produce too much CO2 and methane … more than a plague of vegetarians? (Questionable) … Many feel vegetarianism and eating insects will generated more human methane … so human euthanasia will be next on their list … BFTP?. 5) We know human over-population and farting from a bad diet created by poor wages, is more of a waste issue … and contraception is a better solution for the environment than wars, plandemics, forced mass migration and their secret geo-weathering programmes ongoing since 1949 …. all clearly not working and BFTP! The electric revolution won’t make a jot of difference to reversing a global warming driven by other factors eg (natural cycles/volcanism/polarity flip + planetary progression/magnetic solar wind cycles) …. Car, boat, train and plane emissions are improving in quality … but 15 min cities flooded with Third World high energy users - all using non-Green Grid electricity . … is BFTP … and doing nothing more than imposing unnecessary forced draconian lockdown of our FREEDOMS. … New calculations show the harm of fossil fuels in reformed eco-engines is pretty minimal now ….. …. So the conclusion drawn from the above … suggests the Globalist’s Green Agenda is mostly science being used and abused … to roll out a Totalitarian template … and has little to do with Net Benefit to the Planet and it’s green environmental concerns. Many, and would suggest most, of those who agree with the move towards green energy bear no resemblance to your posted descriptions. Your post suggests that you are unable to step outside of your often exposed 'conspiracy' mindset. |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Oct 28, 2023 8:41:22 GMT
It has been proved as you agree in the lab. So the question changes to; How much can earths stabilisers cope with. Then you need to look at tipping points. Water becomes ice at 0°C but it melts at 0.1°C Tiny change. The extra heat is not distributed evenly across the globe as a nice 1.1°C increase for everyone. It swirls around the world causing weather patterns to change and temperature to vary by much more than 1.1°C Yes it is amazing we have got off so lightly. The earth has mitigated much of the damage humans have done, but there comes a point. Is your view that we should do nothing and accept the changes to our climate. Or that there is nothing we can do? A political organisation so powerful it can tell China's scientists what to think. I don't think so. You have switched from we DO know Co2 causes warming but not how earth can mitigate its effect. To; despite having no evidence of the warming effects of CO2 on Earth. Now who's telling scare stories. You always miss the point zany. Always. There does come a point when the Earth may flip into a new stable state - either warmer or cooler. But the point is that it's not CO2 that's going to cause this - it's our relentless destruction of the Earth's stabilisers - like trees and vegetation etc. Obviously the 1.1C is not spread evenly but nobody ever said that it was. It's the CAUSE of the 1.1C rise that we're debating. You keep on forgetting what the debate is about. It's about whether CO2 is the cause of warming. And the IPCC does not tell any scientists what to think. The IPCC is not a scientific organisation in that it does NO research. It has the consistent hypothesis that CO2 DOES cause all the warming - this is hard coded into their model. It then cherry picks science that is compatible with this hypothesis and ignores any that isn't. That's not science but the IPCC is not a scientific organisation. It's purpose is to present a settled view of climate change to governments. As for scare stories it's you who make those up. I'm just pointing out that the CO2 warming theory is highly unlikely yet many countries will benefit from pushing this agenda. I'm afraid this is 2023, zany and you need to be aware that disinformation is a very powerful tool. They call it "non-lethal warfare". |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 28, 2023 9:10:19 GMT
You always miss the point zany. Always. There does come a point when the Earth may flip into a new stable state - either warmer or cooler. But the point is that it's not CO2 that's going to cause this - it's our relentless destruction of the Earth's stabilisers - like trees and vegetation etc. Obviously the 1.1C is not spread evenly but nobody ever said that it was. It's the CAUSE of the 1.1C rise that we're debating. You keep on forgetting what the debate is about. It's about whether CO2 is the cause of warming. And the IPCC does not tell any scientists what to think. The IPCC is not a scientific organisation in that it does NO research. It has the consistent hypothesis that CO2 DOES cause all the warming - this is hard coded into their model. It then cherry picks science that is compatible with this hypothesis and ignores any that isn't. That's not science but the IPCC is not a scientific organisation. It's purpose is to present a settled view of climate change to governments. As for scare stories it's you who make those up. I'm just pointing out that the CO2 warming theory is highly unlikely yet many countries will benefit from pushing this agenda. I'm afraid this is 2023, zany and you need to be aware that disinformation is a very powerful tool. They call it "non-lethal warfare". If you are not talking about Co2 not causing warming, then don't talk about Co2 not causing warming. In a thread called "Do we really know, human greenhouse gas emissions cause" If you are talking about better ways to mitigate the increased warming caused by Co2 then say so in the first place. Because funny enough most ECO warriors know that deforestation is part of the problem and are tackling it. Your claims that 75%? of the planet land surface are repurposed are fictitious by any method I can see. 57% of the land is considered uninhabitable Desert of mountainous. Of the remaining 43% half is agricultural 21.5% of total 30% of the worlds entire land surface is forested. 20% natural grassland No idea what your parameters for repurposed include. If I run safari tours in the Serengeti is that land 'repurposed' The IPCC can be whatever you want, that does not explain why scientists from pretty much every country in the world agree with their position. The previous suggestions were that it was dependence of funding that kept scientists in line, a ridiculous idea in itself if you know ANY scientists. But made more so by the fact that China gets no funding and yet still agrees with its conclusions. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Oct 28, 2023 9:32:23 GMT
You always miss the point zany. Always. There does come a point when the Earth may flip into a new stable state - either warmer or cooler. But the point is that it's not CO2 that's going to cause this - it's our relentless destruction of the Earth's stabilisers - like trees and vegetation etc. Obviously the 1.1C is not spread evenly but nobody ever said that it was. It's the CAUSE of the 1.1C rise that we're debating. You keep on forgetting what the debate is about. It's about whether CO2 is the cause of warming. And the IPCC does not tell any scientists what to think. The IPCC is not a scientific organisation in that it does NO research. It has the consistent hypothesis that CO2 DOES cause all the warming - this is hard coded into their model. It then cherry picks science that is compatible with this hypothesis and ignores any that isn't. That's not science but the IPCC is not a scientific organisation. It's purpose is to present a settled view of climate change to governments. As for scare stories it's you who make those up. I'm just pointing out that the CO2 warming theory is highly unlikely yet many countries will benefit from pushing this agenda. I'm afraid this is 2023, zany and you need to be aware that disinformation is a very powerful tool. They call it "non-lethal warfare". If you are not talking about Co2 not causing warming, then don't talk about Co2 not causing warming. In a thread called "Do we really know, human greenhouse gas emissions cause" If you are talking about better ways to mitigate the increased warming caused by Co2 then say so in the first place. Because funny enough most ECO warriors know that deforestation is part of the problem and are tackling it. Your claims that 75%? of the planet land surface are repurposed are fictitious by any method I can see. 57% of the land is considered uninhabitable Desert of mountainous. Of the remaining 43% half is agricultural 21.5% of total 30% of the worlds entire land surface is forested. 20% natural grassland No idea what your parameters for repurposed include. If I run safari tours in the Serengeti is that land 'repurposed' The IPCC can be whatever you want, that does not explain why scientists from pretty much every country in the world agree with their position. The previous suggestions were that it was dependence of funding that kept scientists in line, a ridiculous idea in itself if you know ANY scientists. But made more so by the fact that China gets no funding and yet still agrees with its conclusions. So you still have no point to make. Other than you agree with the agenda because well, you just do. Meanwhile other people, who actually know something of the science, question what they're being told. And sensibly so. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 28, 2023 9:41:25 GMT
If you are not talking about Co2 not causing warming, then don't talk about Co2 not causing warming. In a thread called "Do we really know, human greenhouse gas emissions cause" If you are talking about better ways to mitigate the increased warming caused by Co2 then say so in the first place. Because funny enough most ECO warriors know that deforestation is part of the problem and are tackling it. Your claims that 75%? of the planet land surface are repurposed are fictitious by any method I can see. 57% of the land is considered uninhabitable Desert of mountainous. Of the remaining 43% half is agricultural 21.5% of total 30% of the worlds entire land surface is forested. 20% natural grassland No idea what your parameters for repurposed include. If I run safari tours in the Serengeti is that land 'repurposed' The IPCC can be whatever you want, that does not explain why scientists from pretty much every country in the world agree with their position. The previous suggestions were that it was dependence of funding that kept scientists in line, a ridiculous idea in itself if you know ANY scientists. But made more so by the fact that China gets no funding and yet still agrees with its conclusions. So you still have no point to make. Other than you agree with the agenda because well, you just do. Meanwhile other people, who actually know something of the science, question what they're being told. And sensibly so. Why involve yourself in this when you know nothing about it? All you add is stupid insults. Pointless |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Oct 28, 2023 10:02:23 GMT
Zany. You clearly can't handle disagreement. You've even requested your own section, so that you can mitigate that disagreement and still you can't accept just how many people don't agree with you.
And you are now reduced to sadly trolling your own threads. Or even starting obvious troll threads.
And it obviously isn't making you happy.
So instead, why not try being wrong a bit less often? Then you won't have people disagreeing with you all the time (well, apart from the lefties and no one takes any notice of them).
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 28, 2023 10:31:37 GMT
Zany. You clearly can't handle disagreement. You've even requested your own section, so that you can mitigate that disagreement and still you can't accept just how many people don't agree with you. And you are now reduced to sadly trolling your own threads. Or even starting obvious troll threads. And it obviously isn't making you happy. So instead, why not try being wrong a bit less often? Then you won't have people disagreeing with you all the time (well, apart from the lefties and no one takes any notice of them). I think you'll find Orac claims rights to the mind zone. I don't have any problem with disagreement. I have a problem with pointless posts like yours. They say nothing, add nothing. I have no idea why you're here on a thread about AGW adding nothing to the subject. Lets see; your contribution is So you still have no point to make. Other than you agree with the agenda because well, you just do.
Meanwhile other people, who actually know something of the science, question what they're being told.
And sensibly so.
Nope can't see anything about the AGW there, just more petty insults. If you have any knowledge on the subject talk about it not me. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2023 10:51:43 GMT
It doesn't matter what we know - the pro-Net Zero crowd want to make it illegal to say anything but that human activity causes climate change. Science in the 21st Century...  Yes, science has been hijacked and for political and financial gain for the few, whilst the many suffer in this country. The UK is soft, where every leftist extremist is taking advantage. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 28, 2023 10:51:52 GMT
The first rule of Mind-Zone is you don't talk about Mind Zone.
The second rule of Mind Zone..
You get the picture lol
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Oct 28, 2023 10:56:31 GMT
Zany. You clearly can't handle disagreement. You've even requested your own section, so that you can mitigate that disagreement and still you can't accept just how many people don't agree with you. And you are now reduced to sadly trolling your own threads. Or even starting obvious troll threads. And it obviously isn't making you happy. So instead, why not try being wrong a bit less often? Then you won't have people disagreeing with you all the time (well, apart from the lefties and no one takes any notice of them). I think you'll find Orac claims rights to the mind zone. I don't have any problem with disagreement. I have a problem with pointless posts like yours. They say nothing, add nothing. I have no idea why you're here on a thread about AGW adding nothing to the subject. Lets see; your contribution is So you still have no point to make. Other than you agree with the agenda because well, you just do.
Meanwhile other people, who actually know something of the science, question what they're being told.
And sensibly so.
Nope can't see anything about the AGW there, just more petty insults. If you have any knowledge on the subject talk about it not me. The problem is you follow those who have knowledge but ignore others who also have knowledge. The point about science is to keep questioning even when something is held to be true and if that truth is found wanting then consider again what is truth. There is a blind certainty of being right in your posts that echoes the positioning of ones fingers into one's ears and screaming not listening. This makes you a dangerous individual in the grand scheme of things and a boon to those who would control us. I know this is the Mind Zone and I am not insulting I am just observing a rather worrying situation. |
|
