Climate change.

[liisgo]

Agreed and its unfortunate to see the students being used as pawns to further an agenda
Where is the intelligence to see that human activity will never be able to roll back the change

Herr Trudeau has plans for all the textbooks that don't support his agenda.

If it doesn't promote Liberal ideology, it will be destined for the burn pile (of course, we'll pay for carbon credits to offset the CO2 from the pyres).

Sieg Heil!

Hey, are the ones in this photo, un vaccinated people of canada like Trudeau states?

[JLives]

I dare you to link actual papers instead of blogs.

We've been through this thousands of times over the years. People who know man-made climate change is a hoax post all kinds of research, which is immediately dismissed. Even if it is "peer-reviewed" etc, it doesn't matter. We can post insightful information from the likes of Tim Ball, Judith Curry, William Happer, Bjorn Lomborg etc, but these people are just immediately dismissed as "bloggers", or as "deniers", or "climate deniers" (who denies the climate exists?).

Of course any scientists who dare claim that this whole thing is a hoax is immediately black-balled by "the scientific establishment", which is a joke, and actually criminal. Must keep up the hoax of the "consensus", which doesn't exist. NASA etc don't want the rivers of government money to stop, and those rivers are controlled by those who are growing fat and uber-rich on carbon credits. Can't stop that gravy train of cash, no matter what, keep it flowing. Gotta keep reaching for everyone's pockets while keeping them scared, and brain-washing all the kiddies in school.

The evil non-existent apocalyptic fairy-tale must be scaring everyone 24-7. No other options.

And please stop plagiarizing me. Do have original thoughts.

I wasn't really plagiarizing you, just showing you that your words could be turned around into actual truth, instead of mega lies. And it worked, beautifully.

I don't see any links to papers in this post? Having a hard time finding them?

[captkirkcanada]

Thousands of climate scientists (not to be confused with those who play scientists on the internet and on TV shows like Al Gore, Bill Nye and David Suzuki) studied the issue and the vast majority of their research concluded human activities are not accelerating climate change. These scientists are all over the planet and funded by a variety of public and private sources. Some worked for big Green "charitable organizations" (lol) and were paid to say that man-made climate change exists, but were unable to do so, because it doesn't. You won't find these scientists on YouTube and blogs though, you'll need to go to their actual papers, which are very good.

If you want to read what the lying global elitists who want to sell you carbon credits, read the trash put out by the morally bankrupt and evil UN. They are true scum.

I dare you to link actual papers instead of blogs. And please stop plagiarizing me. Do have original thoughts.

They cant explain this hoax so as far as im concerned the hoax is saying climate change is a hoax and isnt helped along by human activities . Ask them to go sit in a car today with windows rolled up and explain why the inside of the car is hotter than the outside

[Jlabute]

James Hansen was one of the "starters". He lied his activist a$$ off, got himself arrested multiple times, and disabled the A/C system before a presentation to Senate to help manipulate an outcome. He has a masters in Astronomy. So there you go, one person with one incomplete opinion.

Actually thousands of actual climate scientists (not to be confused with those who play scientists on the internet)

I don't know anyone who ever said they were a 'climate scientist' when they weren't. Maybe they are related to one. The original question of "who started it" called James Hansen of NASA, the "Father" of climate change (awareness). Although his point of view had him arrested multiple times.

As thousands of people with various educational disciplines study earths climate, they all have various opinions and expertise. I would be suspicious if two people agreed on everything about climate due to how complex it is and there are many unknowns.

studied the issue and the vast majority of their research concluded human activities are accelerating climate change.

Hmmm, not sure what is accelerating, perhaps you can tell us. You mean negative acceleration?
If "warming" is accelerating there would be a linear trend of 0.14C/decade, going up to 0.15C/decade, and continue increasing. A year back, the 30-year linear trend changed from 0.14C/decade to 0.13C/decade, which is an average drop in the warming rate. Such rates naturally change over long periods of time. Discerning what is natural change from what is not is practically impossible. Those who perfectly agree on climate are more likely religious zealots, not scientists.

The linear warming as of Aug 1, 2022
+0.13 C/decade (+0.11 C/decade over the global-averaged oceans, and +0.18 C/decade over global-averaged land).

These scientists are all over the planet and funded by a variety of public and private sources.

Public/Government sources are the ones mostly biased.

Some worked for oil companies and were paid to disprove it but were unable to. You won't find these scientists on YouTube and blogs though, you'll need to go to their actual papers. Or IPCC or NASA for well presented summaries of their work.

One could go to the IPCC, the originators of RCP8.5. You wouldn't call that biased at all? RCP8.5 is the primary source of media article scares and lies, and exaggerations. Something that many scientists have debunked or disqualified. You will also find your favorite scientists on YouTube, especially if you look for debates. Nothing wrong with disseminating information. You can ALSO read articles. No one is stopping you.





Climate study is exceedingly complex. That's the problem, the earth is an enormous open system and our understanding of it is at 5%. It is more complicated than the human brain and we don't know much about that either. It is hard enough to directly measure the state of multiple systems across the globe, let alone boil it down in to a MODEL. Relying on MODELs for policy is ridiculous... especially since they are all wrong. MODELs incorrectly model the present, past, and therefore, future.

[Rat Fink 318]

The article doesn't mention man-made climate change. So I guess you can still thank me.

Actually, the entire horrible article is laden with the usual lies, hyperbole and apocalyptic nonsense we see all the time from the man-made climate change crowd of liars. The biggest lie is couching it as just "climate change", which detracts from the truth, which is that the climate changes naturally, and that no link can be made anywhere to man's activities contributing anything to these natural changes. The author of this article seems to think that mankind and stop the sun from shining. That's how dense these hoaxers are, just disgusting.

But I still don't see where the article mentions man-made climate change or even man.

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contrib ... ature.html

What I commented on and asked about was:

“Andrea Mandel-Campbell is a corporate adviser, bestselling author and founder of a new wildlife conservation adventure travel platform.”

So the (my) next question is (was), “What the heck is a wildlife conservation adventure travel platform?”

And (then) could I take advantage of that with my 318 and the 50 bucks a month I receive from our widened out family’s oil company royalties?

Still no answer on those questions, though. Just some rambling lecture about something I don't know what.

[Jlabute]

They cant explain this hoax so as far as im concerned the hoax is saying climate change is a hoax and isn't helped along by human activities . Ask them to go sit in a car today with windows rolled up and explain why the inside of the car is hotter than the outside

No one else in the world believes this, and the fact you do makes you part of the hoax.
The CO2 and Water in the atmosphere do not behave like the walls of a car on any day.

What effect does more CO2 have? Everyone's opinion is a guess at this time. How do I know? All past predictions have failed, MODELs are wrong, people keep saying it is getting worse while the earth has cooled since 2016. Did you feel it?

[The Green Barbarian]

But I still don't see where the article mentions man-made climate change or even man.

Exactly. It should. The article is misleading, and deliberately so. Man these enviro-shysters pushing this stupid lie about man affecting the environment sure are scum.

[captkirkcanada]

I don't know anyone who ever said they were a 'climate scientist' when they weren't. Maybe they are related to one. The original question of "who started it" called James Hansen of NASA, the "Father" of climate change (awareness). Although his point of view had him arrested multiple times.

As thousands of people with various educational disciplines study earths climate, they all have various opinions and expertise. I would be suspicious if two people agreed on everything about climate due to how complex it is and there are many unknowns.

studied the issue and the vast majority of their research concluded human activities are accelerating climate change.

Hmmm, not sure what is accelerating, perhaps you can tell us. You mean negative acceleration?
If "warming" is accelerating there would be a linear trend of 0.14C/decade, going up to 0.15C/decade, and continue increasing. A year back, the 30-year linear trend changed from 0.14C/decade to 0.13C/decade, which is an average drop in the warming rate. Such rates naturally change over long periods of time. Discerning what is natural change from what is not is practically impossible. Those who perfectly agree on climate are more likely religious zealots, not scientists.

The linear warming as of Aug 1, 2022
+0.13 C/decade (+0.11 C/decade over the global-averaged oceans, and +0.18 C/decade over global-averaged land).

These scientists are all over the planet and funded by a variety of public and private sources.

Public/Government sources are the ones mostly biased.

Some worked for oil companies and were paid to disprove it but were unable to. You won't find these scientists on YouTube and blogs though, you'll need to go to their actual papers. Or IPCC or NASA for well presented summaries of their work.

One could go to the IPCC, the originators of RCP8.5. You wouldn't call that biased at all? RCP8.5 is the primary source of media article scares and lies, and exaggerations. Something that many scientists have debunked or disqualified. You will also find your favorite scientists on YouTube, especially if you look for debates. Nothing wrong with disseminating information. You can ALSO read articles. No one is stopping you.





Climate study is exceedingly complex. That's the problem, the earth is an enormous open system and our understanding of it is at 5%. It is more complicated than the human brain and we don't know much about that either. It is hard enough to directly measure the state of multiple systems across the globe, let alone boil it down in to a MODEL. Relying on MODELs for policy is ridiculous... especially since they are all wrong. MODELs incorrectly model the present, past, and therefore, future.

Wrong on all counts . We know what happened in the earths past when co2 counts went up . https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1809600115

The data and the math is included at that link .
We know what happens when you build a greenhouse and place it in the suns rays . It gets warmer to the point of being hotter .

We see every year what happens when ppl leave kids an pets in cars with windows up on a sunny day.

[JLives]

I don't know anyone who ever said they were a 'climate scientist' when they weren't. Maybe they are related to one. The original question of "who started it" called James Hansen of NASA, the "Father" of climate change (awareness). Although his point of view had him arrested multiple times.

As thousands of people with various educational disciplines study earths climate, they all have various opinions and expertise. I would be suspicious if two people agreed on everything about climate due to how complex it is and there are many unknowns.

studied the issue and the vast majority of their research concluded human activities are accelerating climate change.

Hmmm, not sure what is accelerating, perhaps you can tell us. You mean negative acceleration?
If "warming" is accelerating there would be a linear trend of 0.14C/decade, going up to 0.15C/decade, and continue increasing. A year back, the 30-year linear trend changed from 0.14C/decade to 0.13C/decade, which is an average drop in the warming rate. Such rates naturally change over long periods of time. Discerning what is natural change from what is not is practically impossible. Those who perfectly agree on climate are more likely religious zealots, not scientists.

The linear warming as of Aug 1, 2022
+0.13 C/decade (+0.11 C/decade over the global-averaged oceans, and +0.18 C/decade over global-averaged land).

These scientists are all over the planet and funded by a variety of public and private sources.

Public/Government sources are the ones mostly biased.

Some worked for oil companies and were paid to disprove it but were unable to. You won't find these scientists on YouTube and blogs though, you'll need to go to their actual papers. Or IPCC or NASA for well presented summaries of their work.

One could go to the IPCC, the originators of RCP8.5. You wouldn't call that biased at all? RCP8.5 is the primary source of media article scares and lies, and exaggerations. Something that many scientists have debunked or disqualified. You will also find your favorite scientists on YouTube, especially if you look for debates. Nothing wrong with disseminating information. You can ALSO read articles. No one is stopping you.





Climate study is exceedingly complex. That's the problem, the earth is an enormous open system and our understanding of it is at 5%. It is more complicated than the human brain and we don't know much about that either. It is hard enough to directly measure the state of multiple systems across the globe, let alone boil it down in to a MODEL. Relying on MODELs for policy is ridiculous... especially since they are all wrong. MODELs incorrectly model the present, past, and therefore, future.

I don't argue climate change. You are barking up the wrong tree. You are not qualified. Neither am I. I listen to those who actually know what they're talking about. I agree with you that it is an incredibly complex issue.

[The Green Barbarian]

We see every year what happens when ppl leave kids an pets in cars with windows up on a sunny day.

Oh good grief, this is such a stupid red herring. Fill that car with plants and an atmosphere, and then see if that car still heats up. You are comparing apples and oranges, all to sell a sick and diseased agenda, on behalf of the global elite. It's sickening. Anyone who truly cares about poor people by definition can't support this disgusting and evil lie about man-made climate change. This stupid hoax is going to start literally killing people, as we will see in Germany this winter, thanks to their stupid dependence on wind and solar power, which was one of the dumbest decisions that country has made since 1933. Imagine, literally sentencing your own people to death in the name of a fairy tale. Just disgusting.

[The Green Barbarian]

I don't argue climate change.

I don't either. But I do argue the stupid, moronic man-made climate change myth. That is a totally disgusting and evil hoax, that is going to be soon be literally killing people. It already is killing people, if you factor in the teenage suicide caused by teens "depressed" by the fools feeding them the garbage that they have "no future" due to the evil sky genie who is going to wreak havoc on their lives, and so they might as well end it all now. This is how evil those pushing this disgusting hoax truly are. They are willing to sacrifice our youth over apocalyptic fairy tales, all to max out Klaus' fat bank account. Just so evil. So wrong. So disgusting.

[JLives]

I don't argue climate change.

I don't either. But I do argue the stupid, moronic man-made climate change myth. That is a totally disgusting and evil hoax, that is going to be soon be literally killing people. It already is killing people, if you factor in the teenage suicide caused by teens "depressed" by the fools feeding them the garbage that they have "no future" due to the evil sky genie who is going to wreak havoc on their lives, and so they might as well end it all now. This is how evil those pushing this disgusting hoax truly are. They are willing to sacrifice our youth over apocalyptic fairy tales, all to max out Klaus' fat bank account. Just so evil. So wrong. So disgusting.

You're not educated nor qualified enough to be someone to listen to on this issue. Neither am I. Scientists are. It is real. It is happening. This much I know is true as we live through yet another record breaking heat wave.

[Rat Fink 318]

But I still don't see where the article mentions man-made climate change or even man.

Exactly. It should. The article is misleading, and deliberately so. Man these enviro-shysters pushing this stupid lie about man affecting the environment sure are scum.

Sorry, but I don't really care. I'll just keep living the way I do. Because like JLives says, "Leave it to people who know what they're talking about."

[Jlabute]

I don't know anyone who ever said they were a 'climate scientist' when they weren't. Maybe they are related to one. The original question of "who started it" called James Hansen of NASA, the "Father" of climate change (awareness). Although his point of view had him arrested multiple times.

As thousands of people with various educational disciplines study earths climate, they all have various opinions and expertise. I would be suspicious if two people agreed on everything about climate due to how complex it is and there are many unknowns.



Hmmm, not sure what is accelerating, perhaps you can tell us. You mean negative acceleration?
If "warming" is accelerating there would be a linear trend of 0.14C/decade, going up to 0.15C/decade, and continue increasing. A year back, the 30-year linear trend changed from 0.14C/decade to 0.13C/decade, which is an average drop in the warming rate. Such rates naturally change over long periods of time. Discerning what is natural change from what is not is practically impossible. Those who perfectly agree on climate are more likely religious zealots, not scientists.

The linear warming as of Aug 1, 2022
+0.13 C/decade (+0.11 C/decade over the global-averaged oceans, and +0.18 C/decade over global-averaged land).



Public/Government sources are the ones mostly biased.



One could go to the IPCC, the originators of RCP8.5. You wouldn't call that biased at all? RCP8.5 is the primary source of media article scares and lies, and exaggerations. Something that many scientists have debunked or disqualified. You will also find your favorite scientists on YouTube, especially if you look for debates. Nothing wrong with disseminating information. You can ALSO read articles. No one is stopping you.





Climate study is exceedingly complex. That's the problem, the earth is an enormous open system and our understanding of it is at 5%. It is more complicated than the human brain and we don't know much about that either. It is hard enough to directly measure the state of multiple systems across the globe, let alone boil it down in to a MODEL. Relying on MODELs for policy is ridiculous... especially since they are all wrong. MODELs incorrectly model the present, past, and therefore, future.

I don't argue climate change. You are barking up the wrong tree. You are not qualified. Neither am I. I listen to those who actually know what they're talking about. I agree with you that it is an incredibly complex issue.

You say you are un-qualified yet seem primed with specific knowledge from "those you assume to know what they are talking about". How would you know they are right?

So based on your current understanding, you appear to blast anyone offering less than catastrophic outcomes as seen in mainstream ideology, yet you don't seem to comment on more ridiculous and harmful posts such as "the atmosphere is like a car on a hot day", so, you probably do know nothing, or you don't care to correct such erroneous comments so long as they support cataclysmic outcomes or panic? It has all the appearance of a political bias.

So, I agree, climate requires multidisciplinary understanding. No one is a climate expert. There is no higher school of climate. Scientists get involved when they have degrees in Physics, Oceanography, Atmospheric Physics, Volcanism, Chemistry, and a ton more. There are many basic questions that have gone unanswered because, we can't.

My opinion is formed from reading hundreds of science articles, understanding the process of science, and knowing there is heavy political bias, especially from the UN.

[Jlabute]

I don't either. But I do argue the stupid, moronic man-made climate change myth. That is a totally disgusting and evil hoax, that is going to be soon be literally killing people. It already is killing people, if you factor in the teenage suicide caused by teens "depressed" by the fools feeding them the garbage that they have "no future" due to the evil sky genie who is going to wreak havoc on their lives, and so they might as well end it all now. This is how evil those pushing this disgusting hoax truly are. They are willing to sacrifice our youth over apocalyptic fairy tales, all to max out Klaus' fat bank account. Just so evil. So wrong. So disgusting.

You're not educated nor qualified enough to be someone to listen to on this issue. Neither am I. Scientists are. It is real. It is happening. This much I know is true as we live through yet another record breaking heat wave.

You probably didn't hear about the record breaking cold waves. So, if the average global temperature this month is lower than the previous month, does that mean anything? You are inciting panic over something you don't understand. At least I know for the year 2022 so far, all average monthly global temperatures have been significantly lower. than previous years.

There will always be heat waves, especially in an arid or semi-arid region. That is normal weather. It is called summer.

Jul 14, 2022 - The temperature in Alice Springs has dropped below zero degrees Celsius for 12 consecutive mornings. According to the Bureau of Meteorology – which has been keeping records of temperatures in Alice Springs for 81 years – that has surpassed the previous longest streak of below-zero days set in July 1976

There are many more, including south africa. You don't see these in mainstream media because it would hurt the narrative.