Thread: Any doubts about Climate Change?

Originally Posted by NZdick1983

move away from animal farming for food, back to agricultural farming, etc, etc)

I am a pragmatic conservationist. It is not possible to uninvent the automobile. Farming can be arable, pastoral or mixed, but if you or anyone else tries to deny me filet steak and potatoes, I will kill you.
In principal, steak and potatoes apart, you are correct.

^ I understand.. I'm not vegan.. love my steak too!

Just minimizing my processed meat consumption for my own health (and that of the planet). We should try to eat a plant based diet anyway.

Electric cars (and other alternative sources of energy for transport, etc) have been viable for a long time... the oil companies have squashed most of the inventions to further their own cause ($$)...

Originally Posted by NZdick1983

We should try to eat a plant based diet anyway.

Have you ever tried vegetarian sausages? FFS Ozzie Weetbix contains less sawdust.

Can't say that I have.... sounds disgusting.

That being said, lots of yummy vegetarian dishes.. how about this for a vege burger..

Originally Posted by NZdick1983

That being said, lots of yummy vegetarian dishes.. how about this for a vege burger..

Sorry mate, ya can't make fillet steak from vegetables.

^ Can't make a heart attack from one either

This is an interesting article:

The US Brings Up the Rear When it Comes to Reducing Carbon Emissions

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dru...bon-emissions/

^At least it's not Fox News. 555

555 or the Daily Mail

Originally Posted by chassamui

Originally Posted by NZdick1983

We should try to eat a plant based diet anyway.

Have you ever tried vegetarian sausages? FFS Ozzie Weetbix contains less sawdust.

They are getting less bad though. I have tried out of curiosity. Not a vegan.

Originally Posted by chassamui

Sorry mate, ya can't make fillet steak from vegetables.

Sure you can. Just filter them through a cow first.

I think cows eat mostly grass so yeah, why not. 555

^ For the umpteenth time.

I am not disputing man made climate change. I am not even saying that man's influence on the current warming trend is not significant or will not lead to catastrophe. I had a look at the 97% consensus claim. The way it is portrayed is that this consensus is on man's influence on the warming trend is significant and that it will lead to catastrophe.

However if you examine the details, there is no such consensus. The 97% consensus is that man has some influence on the climate. That's it. Nothing more can be extrapolated from it. To use that figure to bolster claims that man's influence on the climate is significant and that it will lead to catastrophe is bogus and nothing more than propaganda.

It makes me wary of supporting anything that will cost trillions of dollars, if we are going to spend that sort of money, it should not be based on bs claims and propaganda.

Originally Posted by longway

^ For the umpteenth time.

I am not disputing man made climate change. I am not even saying that man's influence on the current warming trend is not significant or will not lead to catastrophe. I had a look at the 97% consensus claim. The way it is portrayed is that this consensus is on man's influence on the warming trend is significant and that it will lead to catastrophe.

However if you examine the details, there is no such consensus. The 97% consensus is that man has some influence on the climate. That's it. Nothing more can be extrapolated from it. To use that figure to bolster claims that man's influence on the climate is significant and that it will lead to catastrophe is bogus and nothing more than propaganda.

It makes me wary of supporting anything that will cost trillions of dollars, if we are going to spend that sort of money, it should not be based on bs claims and propaganda.

Yet we're spending trillions of dollars on oil, gas, coal and plastic, you fucking idiot.

Your kind of mindset is exactly the kind of confused gibberish that they set out to create with this vast campaign of misinformation and paid shills. And who can blame them with that amount of money at stake?

^the trillions that will be spent addressing 'climate change' will be added to the trillions being spent on energy requirements already you dullard. it makes everything that is powered vastly more expensive to run.

still waiting for any of you to come up with a coherent rebuttal.

Originally Posted by longway

For the umpteenth time.

I am not disputing man made climate change. I am not even saying that man's influence on the current warming trend is not significant or will not lead to catastrophe. I had a look at the 97% consensus claim. The way it is portrayed is that this consensus is on man's influence on the warming trend is significant and that it will lead to catastrophe.

However if you examine the details, there is no such consensus. The 97% consensus is that man has some influence on the climate. That's it. Nothing more can be extrapolated from it. To use that figure to bolster claims that man's influence on the climate is significant and that it will lead to catastrophe is bogus and nothing more than propaganda.

It makes me wary of supporting anything that will cost trillions of dollars, if we are going to spend that sort of money, it should not be based on bs claims and propaganda.

For the second time, no, what you're doing is being specious and spurious and trying to muddy the waters.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Your kind of mindset is exactly the kind of confused gibberish that they set out to create with this vast campaign of misinformation and paid shills. And who can blame them with that amount of money at stake?

You've gotta almost have a begrudging respect for the way that they've managed to muddy the waters like they have.

I mean, clearly, they don't have to try to hard to sway the intellects the likes of which we see on display in this thread, but the sheer scale of it is still kinda impressive.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Yet we're spending trillions of dollars on oil, gas, coal and plastic, you fucking idiot.

Originally Posted by longway

^the trillions that will be spent addressing 'climate change' will be added to the trillions being spent on energy requirements already you dullard. it makes everything that is powered vastly more expensive to run.

still waiting for any of you to come up with a coherent rebuttal.

You would get a coherent rebuttal if you could offer a coherent argument.

The simple fact is you don't understand either the science or the economics.

You probably swallowed the Solyndra shit.

Originally Posted by NZdick1983

Electric cars (and other alternative sources of energy for transport, etc) have been viable for a long time...

There is insufficient energy generated in the US for everyone in the US to have an electric car!

Better start getting used to this I think.

How hot is it in the West? Let us count the ways.

By Madison Park, CNN
Updated 0402 GMT (1202 HKT) June 21, 2017

San Francisco (CNN)It's so hot in the West that the scorching heat is breaking records, causing massive power outages and prompting flight cancellations.

On Tuesday, Phoenix hit a daily record reaching 119 degrees Fahrenheit, which ranked as the fourth hottest day on record for the Arizona city. Death Valley, California, lived up to its name as it set a daily record at a high of 127 degrees, according to the National Weather Service.
Las Vegas was also scorching and tied an all-time record high at 117 degrees Fahrenheit on Tuesday.



Excessive heat warnings have been issued for inland California, southern Nevada and parts of southwest Arizona until Friday. More than 29 million residents in California are under a heat warning or advisory.
Here's how the sweltering heat wave is affecting the West:

1. Some planes can't fly

The heat wave was already affecting travel in Phoenix, American Airlines canceled 43 flights Tuesday to and from Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport due to extreme heat, the airline said.
There could be more cancellations later Tuesday, an airline spokesman said. Seven flights were canceled due to weather on Monday, when the temperature reached 118 degrees, rounding out the total to 50 weather-related cancellations in two days.
Some smaller regional jets cannot take off in temperatures hotter than 117 degrees, it said in a statement.
"Our smaller regional operations -- those that use our CRJ aircraft types -- will be most affected by the heat," the airline's communication specialist Kent Powell told CNN. "We really aren't expecting any change to the operation with our mainline aircraft."
Because hotter air is thinner, planes also need more speed to take off and, thus, require more runway. Sky Harbor's runways are long enough to accommodate most planes in hot weather, American Airlines said.

2. Heat records are being shattered

-- In Phoenix, the 118 degrees on Monday tied the record set exactly a year ago.


3. Wildfires are burning

'This is on another level': They came, they camped, they baked at Death Valley
Firefighters across California are battling several fires, including one near Big Bear spreading to 950 acres. They dealt with a grass fire in Sacramento that broke out during Monday's evening commute. Cal Fire warned of high fire danger with hot and dry conditions.

4. Power is being knocked out

Power outages have been reported over the last few days in California's Central Valley, the Bay Area and southern parts of the state.
As temperatures increase, more people turn on air conditioners, which use a lot of electricity and can strain the power system.

5. Roads buckle under the heat

The heat could've been a factor as four lanes of Highway 50 in West Sacramento began to buckle on Sunday. Drivers reported the giant cracks forming on the road and the lanes were repaired, reported CNN affiliate KGO.

^ my office was in danger last night! 90F and 68% humidity.

Drink lots of fluids.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by longway

^the trillions that will be spent addressing 'climate change' will be added to the trillions being spent on energy requirements already you dullard. it makes everything that is powered vastly more expensive to run.

still waiting for any of you to come up with a coherent rebuttal.

You would get a coherent rebuttal if you could offer a coherent argument.

The simple fact is you don't understand either the science or the economics.

You probably swallowed the Solyndra shit.

I don't get a coherent rebuttal because there isn't one.

The 97% consensus on catastrophic man made climate change doesn't exist.

Originally Posted by NZdick1983

^ I understand.. I'm not vegan.. love my steak too!

Just minimizing my processed meat consumption for my own health (and that of the planet). We should try to eat a plant based diet anyway.

Electric cars (and other alternative sources of energy for transport, etc) have been viable for a long time... the oil companies have squashed most of the inventions to further their own cause ($$)...

C'mon man, you don't really believe that?

They would make far more money using being the first with competitive electric car tech. It could be patented and be worth trillions.

The second that alternative energy sources become as cheap as fossil fuels and as reliable, they will replace them in a very short period of time.

Originally Posted by longway

The 97% consensus on catastrophic man made climate change doesn't exist.

Yes it does and it is easily verified by published peer reviewed study.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/glo...s-advanced.htm

Originally Posted by longway

They would make far more money using being the first with competitive electric car tech.

No they wouldn't.

Originally Posted by longway

The second that alternative energy sources become as cheap as fossil fuels and as reliable, they will replace them in a very short period of time.

No shit and that is precisely why they are pushing this snowjob science denial. They want to keep pumping the oil out of the ground you nitwit.