Climate change
- Thread starter Mafesto
- Start date
B
Bacon
Well-known member
I've seen that before. Pretty interesting. Mostly crickets from the other side.
You guys are funny... an old white guy says it's all BS any you treat it as gospel. I wonder how much oil and coal lobbyists pay him?
His whole point is the false assumption that the US government only funds proponents of climate change. He completely neglects to address the fact that the US government funds a FRACTION of the climate scientists in the states let alone the rest of the world. How about during the 8 years that W was in power? You think they would have only funded the left then? All the climate scientists in the rest of the world couldn't give a sh$t who or what point of view the US government funds.
I've asked it before and I'll ask it again, if mankind has no effect on climate how has the CO2 level gone from 280ppm to 410ppm in 160 years? Please explain in your own words if you are all such experts.
Increased CO2 means more heat, whatever you believe the laws of physics are the laws of physics.
For what it is worth, we are expecting record lows tonight.
If it's wise to question people who label themselves as experts why do you automatically believe someone who tells you it's all a hoax created by the Chinese and not the scientific data presented by the worlds climate scientists (that have absolutely zero connection to funding by the US govt? The guy in that video stated absolutely zero basis for any of his claims, and by insinuating that the funding provided by the US govt would influence all climate scientists when only a fraction of them are in the US makes it very easy to see that he is selling BS. I'm not calling him out because he isn't taking my point of view, I'm calling him out because he is spouting baseless BS.
As for the last 20 years, the reduction in glacial mass on the coast of BC speaks for itself. I see it every time I'm out riding. not to mention the fact that the Showcase T-bar on Blackcomb mtn had to be re-aligned last summer after around 25-30 years because the glacier melted so much, or that the adjacent Horstman T-bar is barely rideable the first half of the season anymore again because the glacier has melted away at such a fast rate that even ski area infrastructure at the most successful resort in North America can't keep up?
I'll take science and first hand experience to back it up over some angry old guy on TV any day.
Have to love the double standard with people pushing for climate change at any cost(as long as they are not inconvenienced), regardless of how little impact it has on the environment, Obama(and every other dirt bag celebrity) are out flying all over the world with fighter pilot escorts. Guess Obama is not all that concerned after all about the climate as he is contributing more too CO2 then I could in 10 lifetimes
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...r-ending-sizzling-ultra-luxury-vacations.html
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...r-ending-sizzling-ultra-luxury-vacations.html
Is it reasonable to conclude tthe following two things?
That climate change is affected by population (population obviously correlates to pollution),
And therefore higher more densely populated regions are experiencing a more drastic effect on their climate.
Case and point, look at the densely populated countries and the direct results from population related pollution.
That climate change is affected by population (population obviously correlates to pollution),
And therefore higher more densely populated regions are experiencing a more drastic effect on their climate.
Case and point, look at the densely populated countries and the direct results from population related pollution.
I have an agenda with the above comment.
It's logical to agree that we are ruining our great country by allowing mass immigration as we have in the past.
Urban sprawl replaces vegetation with buildings, wetlands with concrete and wildlife with humans.
Then there's the whole economic self destruction of creating a population that our economy cannot sustain.
We are literally s#itting in our own nest by intentionally ruining our great country, both socially and climately.
It's logical to agree that we are ruining our great country by allowing mass immigration as we have in the past.
Urban sprawl replaces vegetation with buildings, wetlands with concrete and wildlife with humans.
Then there's the whole economic self destruction of creating a population that our economy cannot sustain.
We are literally s#itting in our own nest by intentionally ruining our great country, both socially and climately.
To environmental alarmists, carbon dioxide is a pollutant and its existence in Earth's atmosphere is one of the greatest threats facing our planet today. But if plants could talk, they'd tell you a totally different story. To plants, carbon dioxide is food, and right now they are begging for more!
According to Mike Adams, editor of NaturalNews.com, "CO2 is desperately needed by food crops, and right now there is a severe shortage of CO2 on the planet compared to what would be optimum for plants." He also notes that "greenhouse operators are actually buying carbon dioxide and injecting it into their greenhouses in order to maximize plant growth."
The Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food supports this position when it says, "CO2 increases productivity through improved plant growth and vigour … earlier flowering, higher fruit yields … improved stem strength and flower size."
To keep carbon dioxide from being viewed in a positive light, environmental alarmists often shorten "carbon dioxide" to just "carbon". Dr. E. Calvin Beisner, founder of the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, writes, "By calling carbon dioxide 'carbon,' the alarmists fool people. They raise specters of black soot that's truly dangerous to health. Then they speak of a 'carbon tax,' or 'carbon footprint,' or reducing 'carbon emissions' or 'carbon pollution'".
If anything, our planet would be a whole lot greener if we put more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. And the plants would breathe easier, too!
Prayer:
Heavenly Father, I praise You for the ingenious oxygen-carbon dioxide cycle that provides what plants, animals and humans need to exist! Protect us from the "word pollution" intended to deceive us. In Jesus' Name. Amen.
Notes:
Mike Adams, "CO2 myth busted: Why we need more carbon dioxide to grow food and forests," NaturalNews.com, 3/31/13. E. Calvin Beisner, "A Call for Accurate Language About CO2 in the AGW Discussion," The Cornwall Alliance, 11/25/15.
According to Mike Adams, editor of NaturalNews.com, "CO2 is desperately needed by food crops, and right now there is a severe shortage of CO2 on the planet compared to what would be optimum for plants." He also notes that "greenhouse operators are actually buying carbon dioxide and injecting it into their greenhouses in order to maximize plant growth."
The Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food supports this position when it says, "CO2 increases productivity through improved plant growth and vigour … earlier flowering, higher fruit yields … improved stem strength and flower size."
To keep carbon dioxide from being viewed in a positive light, environmental alarmists often shorten "carbon dioxide" to just "carbon". Dr. E. Calvin Beisner, founder of the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, writes, "By calling carbon dioxide 'carbon,' the alarmists fool people. They raise specters of black soot that's truly dangerous to health. Then they speak of a 'carbon tax,' or 'carbon footprint,' or reducing 'carbon emissions' or 'carbon pollution'".
If anything, our planet would be a whole lot greener if we put more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. And the plants would breathe easier, too!
Prayer:
Heavenly Father, I praise You for the ingenious oxygen-carbon dioxide cycle that provides what plants, animals and humans need to exist! Protect us from the "word pollution" intended to deceive us. In Jesus' Name. Amen.
Notes:
Mike Adams, "CO2 myth busted: Why we need more carbon dioxide to grow food and forests," NaturalNews.com, 3/31/13. E. Calvin Beisner, "A Call for Accurate Language About CO2 in the AGW Discussion," The Cornwall Alliance, 11/25/15.
No doubt. Heaven forbid there being evidence that will melt our resident snowflakes.
You guys are reaching pretty hard with that one... I thought man couldn't change the climate anyway, now it's good that we can??
Progression:
"Climate doesn't change!!!"
"Climate change is natural!!!"
"Man's contribution is insignificant!!!"
"It's actually a good thing!!!"
"Well, too late now, why bother?"
Isn't it obvious when facts are used man made global warming hysteria is shown for the sham it is, FOLLOW THE MONEY!
PARIS — Carbon dioxide is a wonderful and essential gas, it is not driving dangerous climate change, and life on planet Earth is currently starving for more, explained scientist Robert Carter, former chief of the School of Earth Sciences at Australia's internationally renowned James Cook University. In the past, CO2 concentrations have been many times higher than they are today, he added, blasting the establishment press for its “lies” on climate.
All of the facts on CO2 and climate run contrary to the global-warming alarmism narrative promoted by the United Nations, the Obama administration, the media, and the $360-billion-per-year “climate” industry. But they are facts nonetheless, and it is time for the press to start reporting on them honestly, the climate realist explained.
Speaking at a climate realist summit in Paris as the UN's massive COP21 conference was taking place nearby, Dr. Carter emphasized that there is no climate crisis and that many experts have even been predicting global cooling over the long term.
In an interview with The New American after his presentation, Carter explained that the CO2 added to the atmosphere in recent decades has been responsible for a tremendous greening of the planet. “That's a huge environmental benefit,” he said, adding that much of the greening had occurred along arid areas such as the Sahara Desert.
For agriculture and those who depend on it — essentially everybody who eats food — the increase in CO2 is good news, too. It has also provided huge benefits for oceans, Dr. Carter and other scientists at the Heartland Institute's “Day of Examining the Data” explained.
And contrary to the bizarre demonization of the gas of life as “carbon pollution” by the UN, Obama, and others, it is nothing of the sort.
“If you talk to most scientists, they will acknowledge that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant,” explained Dr. Carter. “Indeed, it's grotesque to call it a pollutant. It's an abuse of logic, it's an abuse of language, and it's an abuse of science.... Carbon dioxide is literally the stuff of life.”
The optimal CO2 level for most plants, he said, is somewhere between 1,000 and 2,000 parts per million. Current levels are around 400 ppm, Carter added. That is why CO2 is often pumped into greenhouses.
Numerous other experts at the summit echoed those sentiments.
Despite that, the UN adopted the agreement based on the false assumption that man's miniscule CO2 emissions — emitted by literally every human activity — threaten the planet with dangerous warming. That was facilitated by propaganda from what Carter blasted as the “mainstream media.”
“The mainstream media, over the two weeks before the conference and during the conference, have been running day in and day out, untruthful scare stories” on climate, he said. “Those are just lies.”
Dr. Carter also suggested massive government funding to research alleged man-made global-warming was driving at least some scientists into playing along with the climate alarmism or remaining silent about the scandalous deception.
Noting that there are no government agencies to prevent earthquakes or volcanic eruptions, Dr. Carter also said that it would be “every bit as stupid” for politicians to believe they can stop climate changes.
Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, is currently based in Europe. He can be reached at anewman@thenewamerican.com. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU.
PARIS — Carbon dioxide is a wonderful and essential gas, it is not driving dangerous climate change, and life on planet Earth is currently starving for more, explained scientist Robert Carter, former chief of the School of Earth Sciences at Australia's internationally renowned James Cook University. In the past, CO2 concentrations have been many times higher than they are today, he added, blasting the establishment press for its “lies” on climate.
All of the facts on CO2 and climate run contrary to the global-warming alarmism narrative promoted by the United Nations, the Obama administration, the media, and the $360-billion-per-year “climate” industry. But they are facts nonetheless, and it is time for the press to start reporting on them honestly, the climate realist explained.
Speaking at a climate realist summit in Paris as the UN's massive COP21 conference was taking place nearby, Dr. Carter emphasized that there is no climate crisis and that many experts have even been predicting global cooling over the long term.
In an interview with The New American after his presentation, Carter explained that the CO2 added to the atmosphere in recent decades has been responsible for a tremendous greening of the planet. “That's a huge environmental benefit,” he said, adding that much of the greening had occurred along arid areas such as the Sahara Desert.
For agriculture and those who depend on it — essentially everybody who eats food — the increase in CO2 is good news, too. It has also provided huge benefits for oceans, Dr. Carter and other scientists at the Heartland Institute's “Day of Examining the Data” explained.
And contrary to the bizarre demonization of the gas of life as “carbon pollution” by the UN, Obama, and others, it is nothing of the sort.
“If you talk to most scientists, they will acknowledge that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant,” explained Dr. Carter. “Indeed, it's grotesque to call it a pollutant. It's an abuse of logic, it's an abuse of language, and it's an abuse of science.... Carbon dioxide is literally the stuff of life.”
The optimal CO2 level for most plants, he said, is somewhere between 1,000 and 2,000 parts per million. Current levels are around 400 ppm, Carter added. That is why CO2 is often pumped into greenhouses.
Numerous other experts at the summit echoed those sentiments.
Despite that, the UN adopted the agreement based on the false assumption that man's miniscule CO2 emissions — emitted by literally every human activity — threaten the planet with dangerous warming. That was facilitated by propaganda from what Carter blasted as the “mainstream media.”
“The mainstream media, over the two weeks before the conference and during the conference, have been running day in and day out, untruthful scare stories” on climate, he said. “Those are just lies.”
Dr. Carter also suggested massive government funding to research alleged man-made global-warming was driving at least some scientists into playing along with the climate alarmism or remaining silent about the scandalous deception.
Noting that there are no government agencies to prevent earthquakes or volcanic eruptions, Dr. Carter also said that it would be “every bit as stupid” for politicians to believe they can stop climate changes.
Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, is currently based in Europe. He can be reached at anewman@thenewamerican.com. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU.
Let's go over this again:
I'll agree that higher CO2 levels help plants grow better. Hotter temperatures don't though, and that leaves out all the other detrimental effects of climate change.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddar...arbon-dioxide-levels-will-help-and-hurt-crops
Some reading on Robert Carter, with his statements, and rebuttal sources:
https://www.skepticalscience.com/Bob_Carter_arg.htm
I'll agree that higher CO2 levels help plants grow better. Hotter temperatures don't though, and that leaves out all the other detrimental effects of climate change.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddar...arbon-dioxide-levels-will-help-and-hurt-crops
Some reading on Robert Carter, with his statements, and rebuttal sources:
https://www.skepticalscience.com/Bob_Carter_arg.htm
You do realize that the last time atmospheric CO2 was between 1000-2000ppm there was minimal ice at the poles (if any?) and there were ferns bigger than your house right?? Lots of giant predators that are long extinct too. Wonder what the temperatures were like? Sea level? Prolly not great conditions for humans...hmmmm... oh yea, the fossil record and ice cores are fake news, I forgot.
I'll still take the NASA data over some dude who wants to bring back giant ferns... but again, I thought man couldn't change the climate?
F
freekweet mods
Well-known member
I would think all the other gases released from burning anything has an affect on the atmosphere and the climate more than co2. Sulpher oxide,nitrogen oxide, carbon monoxide,are just a few.Does this mean we stop using fossil fuels,stop burning wood for our home heating or campfires,stop SNOWMOBILING-absolutely not what sort of idiot would do that. But for those who think that burning close to 100 million barrels of fuel per day and billions of tons of coal per year is not going to have consequences you must be incredibly naive or have a smooth spot on your brain. I know thirty years ago there was not the continuous haze in the sky that I see every day . Clear, bright, bluebird skies from valley floor on up are a thing of the past. I firmly believe that we are destroying ourselves in an effort to make the jet set, burn everything for money, we need more convenience, more power, more jets, more travel, more of everything that burns something to achieve a desire or want of somebody-anybody. Taking efforts to clean the air and water and soil is just common sense logical thinking , sadly the zealots on either side make it nearly impossible to do.
