How Silly is Climate Change Denial?

[manxman]

We are just 10,000 years out of an 'ice age', it was only 100/150 yrs ago that the Thames froze so solid there was christmas fairs held on it each year.

Ofcourse the planet is warming up as part of a long trend, that isnt measured in decades, a decade is just blink in time, fluctuations could be measured in the hundreds of years, never mind decades,imo.

 

[pixelsmith]

I thought there was a global cooling or no temperature increase in the last 18 or so years. In that case, wouldn't you be denying man made global warming?

If you look at the data, temps go up and down. When you look at the trend for the past 18 years there is no increase.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pixelsmith]

Tyger which way do you think temps should go when coming out of an ice age? Up (warmer) or down (colder)?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[boomerang]

Regardless of underlying causes or what actions we take, this is a long term problem with relatively short term implications. A broad proposal:

a) More immediate steps to adapt human populations (or more importantly to make them more adaptable) to trends we see happening around us. For the first time in human history, our species as a whole may have the ability to plan ahead of climate trends.

b) Longer term strategies to reduce the ecological footprint of the ever growing human population on this planet. Zero impact is not realistic. Unfettered impact will result in a world that is unlivable.


The first is going to be tough and the second even tougher. Perhaps they could both be seen as a kind of maturational process for our species.

 

[Burnt State]

Sorry, but for those who didn't see it, this was a scene from The Lorax Part II staring Manx and Pixel. Pixel's bouncing a CO2 baby on his lap. When this baby Onceler grows up he'll be surfing coastlines all across the world as the wave action following the melting of all the ice sheets is going to make for some gnarly coastal action.

But, when the world ends I'm going to be eating cookies too.

 

[Burnt State]

Regardless of underlying causes or what actions we take, this is a long term problem with relatively short term implications. A broad proposal:

a) More immediate steps to adapt human populations (or more importantly to make them more adaptable) to trends we see happening around us. For the first time in human history, our species as a whole may have the ability to plan ahead of climate trends.

adaptability is what we specialize in. many will die, but the species will survive, even if it means they will have to subjugate and exploit the lower classes in even more bizarre ways than the elite do now, as they argue for full throttle, unfettered mining, mountain top removal, fracking and water damning wherever possible.

b) Longer term strategies to reduce the ecological footprint of the ever growing human population on this planet. Zero impact is not realistic. Unfettered impact will result in a world that is unlivable.

That all depends on your standards of unlivability. Many today live in unlivable standards off of garbage heaps, or in scraping heavy metals off of imported circuit boards (it's called international recycling ) or carting out oil from beached ships on the coastline, both busy getting cancer just so some of their family's next generation will be able to eat. Images of street youth and Inuit youth sniffing gasoline are also encouraging of where this is all going.

The first is going to be tough and the second even tougher. Perhaps they could both be seen as a kind of maturational process for our species.

Perhaps, but only after a significant portion of deaths in the species, or if too many of the lower class is wiped out after the middle class disappears. Otherwisem what's the motive for going green? This thread has clearly established that environmental considerations, including the preservation of the diversity of species, is openly mocked as just the natural progression of what we do - kill things, other species and each other. That's the song the Koch Brothers' dad used to sing to them when they were still in their cribs.

 

[Burnt State]

I would like to see you explain the logic behind why you think human activity adding 3% extra C02 into the annual carbon cycle, has any detrimental effect to life on earth at all.

I could understand your concern if our activitie's doubled the natural CO2, or even added just 30%, but 3%, a respectfully sized volcano burping grumbling and showing abit of 'attitude' for a year adds more than that.

Normally you say smart things but I think you've got the whole volcano thing a little screwy. Can you back that up with someone who is a scientist not getting paid by the Koch brothers? My understanding is that humans dwarf volcanoes in toxic emissions by significant factors.

 

[manxman]

Ofcouse i cant backup the volcano thing', i made it up, i just made it a good little sound-bite, but it was pure bullshit.

But there again so was your 'ice sheet' melts .. pure BS.

[Thats BS as in bullshit, not pure burnt state]

 

[pixelsmith]

I see Tyger can like posts but is unable to defend his position. Lol. Very typical.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[boomerang]

Burnt, your points are well taken.

But any workable solution to whatever dysfunction we may be causing the planet must realistically work in concert with human nature. Going green is in large part a sum-zero game. Exactly who is going to give up what ? Even assuming that %100 percent of whatever current climactic changes on earth are due to human industrial activity, most individuals and nations will be guaranteed to put their own perceived material self-interest ahead of larger abstractions.

This kind of thing has always been a central dilemma inherent in governance. The traditional solution has been the application of penalty for violation--i.e. law enforcement. Clean air and water regulations in "the west" have yielded long term benefits for "the west". But a certain critical percentage of the citizenry must be on board. We have had a degree of ecological success by the combined application of legal regulation and technology. And unfortunately, also by quietly out-sourcing polluting industries elsewhere.

The really ugly truth is that petroleum economies have made the middle class standard of living possible. Even if the distribution of benefit has been woefully unequal. This is both the blessing and curse of our times. The wealthier in society will always have personal transportation and plenty of electrical amperage for personal comfort. I can just as easily visualize a politically green world inhabited by billions of the disenfranchised laboring under a petroleum driven, beef eating upper class as the kind of dystopia you describe. And which in large part already exists.

 

[manxman]

I dont see it like that, i see this past 10/15yrs since peak oil, and the next 20 yrs, as being a 'battlefield' of the alternatives, as countries diversify their oil/fuel based tax systems, these things take decades, theres no such thing as free energy, even if a way of producing it at ero cost was found, ways to tax the delivery, and consumption will be found, the shift in revenue collection is already in full flow, green taxes, thats why theres all the spin and bullshit around 'climate change', and why CO2 is the bogey--man of pollution.

CO2 is plant food, the more there is, the greener the planet gets, that is just one of those inescapable pesky lil truths, and the extra 3% humans pump into the NATURAL carbon cycle is a drop in the ocean.

Theres many many many industrial pollutants, CO2 isnt one of them.

 

[pixelsmith]

Most "warmists" have no clue that CO2 is essential for all life on earth and that we have a symbiotic relationship with plants. They do not realize how CO2 starved the planet is right now, and that with the help of industrialization we probably "saved the earth". They should be thankful for coal and fossil fuels.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Burnt State]

Anyone got a comparison on green taxes vs. oil profits? I think those numbers, just like human pollution vs. volcanoes, not the super ones that block out the sun and kill everything - just your standard volcano, are on huge scale differences. We pollute more than the volcanoes, and Greenland is melting. It's worth looking into I say.

Boomerang's points are valid in that we have yet to get off oil or nat. gas and now that the polar north is freeing up the race to claim space to get at previously unattainable oil and gas will hold off peak oil. What most sensible nations with access to tech are doing, while manufacturing heads off to other parts of the developing world, is becoming information processing nations of professionals - high end economies, and they are all bulking up on green energies. They know it's healthier for their citizens, so why not move all the cancer causing oil based industries elsewhere. Like the industrial revolution I think we are witnessing something unique 20 years into the digital revolution. What we do and how we do it can all be solar charged & battery powered and we will pay for those lower polluting technologies as just a natural function of our own advances. Class differences will ensue.

The issues that are specific to conservative gov't ideologies who love their oil profits b/c of their big margins based off of old industrial frameworks that no one wants to pay to change will never shift or go green (US, Canada, Australia, Russia), but China is starting to shift, even as they industrialize smaller cities. Canada won't even let their scientists talk to the public about such matters a la 1984 Ministry of Truth and they are threatening audits of bird watching charity groups who speak out on environmental issues and complain about gov't ok'd pesticides that are killing all the bees. Those ideological implications and control mechanisms are good indicators. Pro-business and pro-petroleum gov'ts who muzzle science is all a thinking person needs to hear, no, when choosing environmental sides?

It all happens with votes and ideological foresight. Those who are caught in the paradigm of "plants love co2" miss the larger upheavals in the natural order of things and the larger stresses placed on species and the water masses. You can wish that all away by holding onto the mantra that "everything dies in its own time" but that's akin to gambling on credit IMHO. Such attitudes only end well for the house who controls the odds and knows how to maintain power in the face of social destruction i.e. the destruction of that addict.

 

[Burnt State]

Most "warmists" have no clue that CO2 is essential for all life on earth and that we have a symbiotic relationship with plants. They do not realize how CO2 starved the planet is right now, and that with the help of industrialization we probably "saved the earth". They should be thankful for coal and fossil fuels.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you really wanna get saved try wrapping your mouth around one of those emission pipes and tell me when you reach nirvana.

 

[Muadib]

Muadib. .

Just call my name and I'll be there....

Ofcouse i cant backup the volcano thing', i made it up, i just made it a good little sound-bite, but it was pure bullshit.

But there again so was your 'ice sheet' melts .. pure BS.

[Thats BS as in bullshit, not pure burnt state]

I give you credit for at least admitting that the volcano thing is pure nonsense. I agree with Burnt State, you're normally one of the more intelligent posters on this site, but you've gone tits up on this one, my manc friend.

Humans Dwarf Volcanoes for CO2 Emissions : Discovery News

Climate myths: Human CO2 emissions are too tiny to matter - environment - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist

Now, sit back and wait for Pixel to come in and say something like "LMFAOOOOO at your sources" blah blah blah, but he'll fail to post anything of substance, as usual, and he'll completely ignore the fact that everything he points to is bought and paid for by the oil and gas industry.

Tyger, you're too smart to get drawn into a debate with this guy, his position on everything from conspiracies, to 9/11 to global warming have been so thoroughly debunked on this site by myself and others who are much more intelligent than I am, that I'm starting to seriously believe the guy has some kind of mental disability, due to the fact that he's still spewing the same nonsense years later, minus the more egregious crap about Obama's birth certificate, the Amero, the North American Union, forcible government disarmament, I could go on and on about all of the shit he's spewed that's turned out to be completely incorrect, but honestly, why bother? I'm only posting because I got an email saying I was mentioned, then I read the thread and got thoroughly pissed off because we've tread all this ground before and this guy still keeps repeating the same crap like nobody ever addressed and disproved his nonsense, they have, several times. It's a pointless exercise with this guy, and I leave you all to it. For some background on Pixel and his nonsense theories on global warming, including a thorough dismantling of them by myself and others, I refer everyone to this thread:

Global Warming Happy Fun-Time | The Paracast Community Forums

And I'm out, see you all in another few months or so....

 

[Tyger]

Just call my name and I'll be there....

So nice to hear from you! And thanks for posting the link to that other Warming thread. I couldn't find it when I went looking.

Hope all is well, Muadib, and look forward to your returning to posting here.

 

[pixelsmith]

Lmao. Maudib couldn't dismantle a tinker toy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Muadib]

Lmao. Maudib couldn't dismantle a tinker toy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How fortunate for me that most of your arguments are about as well put together as that tinker toy you mentioned. Anyone who has doubts about my ability to continuously disprove and debunk your horseshit is free to read any of the threads in which we've argued, you don't exactly come off well to say the least, as others have pointed out.

So nice to hear from you! And thanks for posting the link to that other Warming thread. I couldn't find it when I went looking.

Hope all is well, Muadib, and look forward to your returning to posting here.

Thank you for the kind words Tyger, things have been a bit hectic with work lately and should be slowing down in the next month or two, at which point I may return. We shall see...

 

[pixelsmith]

Maudib where is the warming? lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pixelsmith]

Maudib won't dare get into this again. No warming, increased hurricanes, extreme weather, sea level rise, drowning polar bears, melted poles, disappearing glaciers, etc etc... Nothing he or his ilk predicted has come true. The failed climate models have actually proven the fake 97% CONsensus absolutely wrong. Lmao. They couldn't even get them to accurately predict backwards in climate history with known data. They don't work, period.
I welcome Maudib to come back and defend the CO2 theory. Bring it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk