Climate Change Mega Thread

[CapitalB]

Literally every argument you guys make has been answered in the original post.

If you actually took the time to read them you would see that but its increasingly looking like you just totally skipped all the links because you keep raising points that are covered in them like they have not been addressed.

Even the ones in the special debunker debunking section that I made just for you. It specifically goes after the issues you are razing.

If you literally won't take the time to educate yourselves I have no more time for you.

I will however be overjoyed to help any sane rational person that wants more info. To the unreasonable people I say Good Day.

[rustled]

*removed*

[Sparki55]

Blah blah blah
Same BS as always. Not wanting to accept responsibility. Passing the buck onto our children. Imagining that combatting climate change will ruin our way of life, while ignoring the effects it will have on our future.

Just a bunch of shortsighted selfish people that have bought into the lies and misinformation spread by the fossil fuel industries.

There is no real conversation to have here, because none of you are willing to accept reality, nor are you able to comprehend the results of actual science

Why is it always Canada's job to fight this climate cause when the rest of the world doesn't give a . We aren't ignoring it here is Canada, we did accept responsibility and we are reducing our chunk of 1.69% of the worlds pollution down to 1.60% of the world's population (we will probably shrink smaller as other countries start to pollute more. Canada is by far selfish and I have no problem slowly adjusting our country to be green; to tax us to death and push climate action this fast is just going to hurt us economically.

The fight isn't against who is right or wrong about our climate changing. Even if the climate changing isn't due to us I would fully support switching to energies which do not poison the air around us. Let's do it slowly and not burden ourselves while the rest of the world builts 1600 new coal plants.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/01/climate/china-energy-companies-coal-plants-climate-change.html

Over all, 1,600 coal plants are planned or under construction in 62 countries, according to Urgewald’s tally, which uses data from the Global Coal Plant Tracker portal. The new plants would expand the world’s coal-fired power capacity by 43 percent.

[Bigjohn69]

The number of coal-fired power plants under development worldwide saw a dramatic drop in 2016, mainly due to shifting policies in Asia, according to a new report released today by Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, and CoalSwarm. The report, Boom and Bust 2017: Tracking The Global Coal Plant Pipeline, is the third annual survey of the global coal plant pipeline. Its findings include a 48 percent decline in overall pre-construction activity, a 62 percent drop in new construction starts, and an 85 percent decline in new Chinese coal plant permits.

Reasons for the rapid fall-off include a dramatic clampdown on new coal plant projects by Chinese central authorities and financial retrenchment by coal plant backers in India. In China and India, construction is now frozen at over 100 project sites.

In addition to the decline in new plant development, the survey also found a record-breaking 64 gigawatts of coal plant retirements in the past two years, mainly in the European Union and the U.S. — the equivalent of nearly 120 large coal-fired units (see note).

This has been a messy year, and an unusual one,” said Ted Nace, director of CoalSwarm. “It’s not normal to see construction frozen at scores of locations, but central authorities in China and bankers in India have come to recognize overbuilding of coal plants as a major waste of resources. However abrupt, the shift from fossil fuels to clean sources in the power sector is a positive one for health, climate security, and jobs. And by all indications, the shift is unstoppable.”

“The staggering uptick in clean energy and reduction in the new coal plant pipeline is even more proof that coal isn’t just bad for public health and the environment — it’s bad for the bottom line,” said Nicole Ghio, senior campaigner for the Sierra Club’s International Climate and Energy Campaign. “Markets are demanding clean energy, and no amount of rhetoric from Donald Trump will be able to stop the fall of coal in the U.S. and across the globe.”

“2016 marked a veritable turning point,” said Lauri Myllyvirta, senior global campaigner on Coal and Air Pollution at Greenpeace. “China all but stopped new coal projects after astonishing clean energy growth has made new coal-fired power plants redundant, with all additional power needs covered from non-fossil sources since 2013. Closures of old coal plants drove major emission reductions especially in the U.S. and UK, while Belgium and Ontario became entirely coal-free and three G8 countries announced deadlines for coal phase-outs.”


https://endcoal.org/2017/03/new-report- ... ate-goals/

[Sparki55]

The number of coal-fired power plants under development worldwide saw a dramatic drop in 2016, mainly due to shifting policies in Asia, according to a new report released today by Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, and CoalSwarm. The report, Boom and Bust 2017: Tracking The Global Coal Plant Pipeline, is the third annual survey of the global coal plant pipeline. Its findings include a 48 percent decline in overall pre-construction activity, a 62 percent drop in new construction starts, and an 85 percent decline in new Chinese coal plant permits.

you may want to read the article I posted, it will explain how once China took a stance on coal, the large corporations made plans to build 1600 plants all over the world.

[The Green Barbarian]

I'm sorry, you seem to be expecting for your kind offer to "educate" those of us who you presume surely must have failed to read all of your links, but your pomposity and utter lack of self-awareness has me going all
Good day!

Great post Rustled. I "literally" can't add anything to this so I will also say "good day!"

[Jflem1983]

So its been unusually cold for a few days. How long until the mayor is on tv claiming its the warmest year ever and we all need to live in caves to save the planet. So sick of this bs

[CapitalB]

So its been unusually cold for a few days. How long until the mayor is on tv claiming its the warmest year ever and we all need to live in caves to save the planet. So sick of this bs

I mean its been cold here mostly because the arctic air currents have grown unstable from too much hot air. The arctic is definitely the area taking the most climate change damage, all the ice is melting. BBC planet earth 2 has a good few hours of watching polar bears drown that shows the difference up there pretty well.

[averagejoe]

The arctic is definitely the area taking the most climate change damage, all the ice is melting.

You do not take into consideration of the number of active underwater volcanoes warming up the Arctic ice and melting it. This has been discussed many times already. Get your science right.

[averagejoe]

I mean its been cold here mostly because the arctic air currents have grown unstable from too much hot air. The arctic is definitely the area taking the most climate change damage, all the ice is melting. BBC planet earth 2 has a good few hours of watching polar bears drown that shows the difference up there pretty well.

Underwater Volcanoes Heating the Arctic Ocean

https://www.iceagenow.info/underwater-v ... tic-ocean/

Volcanoes Erupt Beneath Arctic Ice

https://www.livescience.com/4992-volcan ... c-ice.html

[CapitalB]

Underwater Volcanoes Heating the Arctic Ocean

https://www.iceagenow.info/underwater-v ... tic-ocean/

Volcanoes Erupt Beneath Arctic Ice

https://www.livescience.com/4992-volcan ... c-ice.html

My understanding from when I first saw that news was that if the ice hadn't already been significantly reduced this wouldn't have had as strong of an effect.

Which is supported by this quote from the second article you posted

"We don't believe the volcanoes had much effect on the overlying ice," Reeves-Sohn told LiveScience, "but they seem to have had a major impact on the overlying water column."

There is definitely non man made things effecting the climate as well, there are a lot of variables its a very complex system. Any kind of system where you massively increase the amount of any variable into the system in a short period of time is going to cause problems. The problem with many interconnected systems is its hard to impossible to figure out how those problems are going to manifest aside from generally assuming they won't be good. Which is safe to assume because the margin of "good" outcomes is significantly narrower than everything else.

[Omnitheo]

We have a lot of volcanologists. They study these sorts of things and are quite aware of how much CO2 they give off, and what overall effects they have on the climate. And currently it is a fraction of what humans are producing and affecting.

[averagejoe]

Why don't Climate Change promoters never discuss this? They always leave the important parts out....

[averagejoe]

We have a lot of volcanologists. They study these sorts of things and are quite aware of how much CO2 they give off, and what overall effects they have on the climate. And currently it is a fraction of what humans are producing and affecting.

We have? LOL well where is your data then?

An active volcano is only a fraction? I think it's a little more than a fraction for the reason of the melting ice in the Arctic?

[averagejoe]

You maybe right...underwater volcanoes wouldn't affect the Arctic ice?