How are they doing with the homeless ? They solve the problem ? Climate scam goes back way back before 70s .
Climate Change
- Thread starter fictionfactor
- Start date
50 years of predictions that the climate apocalypse is nigh
For the past two weeks in Glasgow, Scotland, world leaders have gathered at COP 26, the United Nations Climate Change Conference, to listen to the same message: Disaster is just around the corner.
nypost.com
It’s a good thing thing there are no financial incentives for the Oil and Gas industry, otherwise…. You really dodged a bullet there.
as already discussed in previous threads, scientists and the lawyers working for the worlds 5 largest oil companies already conceded in court, they agree with the climate science.
It’s cute we still have the programmed holdouts though. Maybe next week we can create threads questioning if nicotine is really harmful, and if big anti-lead manipulated data on the neurological disorders it caused! Maybe add a Jordan Peterson interview for good measure.
Now…. It’s not a question on “if” fossil fuels will run out, it’s “when”. Those who invest in and develop the energy technologies of the future will miles ahead. And those who wish to ride out oil and coal till no more can be extracted will be left in the dust. I am not suggesting it will, or even can be an immediate transition… (probably not in the working lifetime of a lot of the oil execs)… but constantly shitting on climate science is just a political stance. Not surprising based on the amount of propaganda the fossil fuel lobbies have spent on political and media campaigns. And most oil execs currently riding the gravy train still have a lot of gravy left in the boat before the retire.
You are living a lie . The lie of climate change and the lie fuel is running out . The first was started early 1900 . The second mid seventies . Yet the world is still inhabited . We feed more people then ever . The fuel that was supposed to run out . Is more abundant then ever .
Without fossil fuel where are you going to get the materials to build your new world ?
You believe fossil fuels are unlimited, and somehow I am living a lie?
Acid rain is caused by Oxides of sulfur and Oxides of Nitrogen mixing with water which lowers the PH of the water and turns it acidic.
Scrubbers on Coal power stations took care of most of the Sulfur Oxide emissions, and vehicle emissions standards took care of most Nitrogen Oxide emissions.
Acid rain is real and the damage it does is real and our counter to it is also real.
Show me where it says we are running out ? They said that in mid 70 that we would be out of oil . There is more oil now then ever .
You need fossil fuels to move your materials . . Do you think plastics are made out of bamboo ?
I don’t have to show you where it says we’re running out. Lol. It will eventually run out. That fact is indisputable.
Since I have been alive I can recall the world will freeze . Then the world is burning and flooding . Yet we are still here . Believing that you can control future climate is satire .
Really ? That is your science ? When will it run out ? 10 years or 1000 years . Is there more oil to find ? You don't know .
No, it was never called global warming. They are two separate but related issues. Global warming causes climate change. Global cooling would also cause climate change. Massive deforestation would cause climate change, as would reforestation. In fact that has already been documented. When Europeans brought diseases to North America in the 15th and 16th centuries, there was a lot of land cleared for farming by natives. After disease killed over 90% of the native population, reforestation occured, and there were observable climatic shifts. Plate tectonics, either short-term like earthquakes, or long-term like continental drift, change ocean currents and that also causes climate change.
We don't hear much about it anymore because we fucking did something about it. Kind of like how we don't hear much about polio or smallpox now.
Oh, this should be fun.
And you provide no source for any of that bullshit? I've been canoeing and camping in the north most of my life, and with the military, and saw the changes when measures were taken to reduce acid rain. Lakes near Sudbury were almost dead, with little but blue-green algae living in them. Now they are returning to health, with biodiversity increasing.
I can also use the Google. Makes me wonder how all these large institutions take it so seriously if it's wrong. I guess Greenpeace and the Sierra Club must have enough money to bribe them. Start with these.
Global warming and climate change
National Research Council: https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/sites/www.nrcan.gc.ca/files/energy/Climate-change/pdf/CCCR_FULLREPORT-EN-FINAL.pdf
US Army Corps of Engineers: Climate Preparedness and Resilience
NASA: https://climate.nasa.gov/
Acid rain
United States Geological Survey: National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program Report to Congress: An integrated assessment
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: https://csl.noaa.gov/aqrsd/reports/napapreport05.pdf
Because we did something about it. One of the few good things Margaret Thatcher ever did was take the lead on that. You see, unlike some wanker in his mother's basement, she had a Masters degree in organic chemistry, and therefore she understood the issue. By the way, we're not out of the woods on that one yet.
You 'think' it's better? A relative term. We don't have the massive mats of algae that we had in the sixties, because we took measures to restrict the amount of phosphates being dumped in, which acted as a fertiliser. But another reason for clearer water (note: clearer doesnt mean the same as cleaner) is because some worthless cunt named Brian Fucking Corrupt Asshole Mulroney cut back on St. Lawrence Seaway protection measures, which led to the introduction of zebra mussels, among other invaders, and their filter-feeding has had a major effect. But there are problems associated with introductions that we may not yet know about.
Larry Bell is a typical right-wing dingbat https://www.google.com/search?q=larry+bell+second+amendment+policy&rlz=1C1CHBF_enCA910CA910&ei=1zuQYe_0IMXL_QaBn6jYDQ&oq=larry+bell+second+amendment+policy&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6BwgAEEcQsAM6BwgAELADEEM6FgguENQCEMgDELADEEMQqAMQmwMQmgM6EwguENQCEMgDELADEEMQqAMQmgM6CgguEMgDELADEEM6DQguENQCEMgDELADEEM6BAguEEM6CwguEIAEEMcBEK8BOgcIABDJAxBDOgUIABCABDoFCC4QgAQ6BggAEBYQHjoFCCEQoAE6BwghEAoQoAE6BAghEBU6CAghEBYQHRAeSgUIOBIBMUoECEEYAFCfgAFY87YBYKa7AWgDcAJ4AIAB4wGIAbAUkgEGMTUuOS4xmAEAoAEByAEPuAECwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz&ved=0ahUKEwivvPaosZb0AhXFZd8KHYEPCtsQ4dUDCA4&uact=5
But let's not just throw ad hominems at him, let's examine his scientific credentials.
Searching... Hmmm, can't find any. He's a writer. Wow. So am I. So listen to me instead. 50/50
You're kidding. A 32 year-old article? We've learned a bit since then. And none of what we've learned has shown the problem to be spurious. It is real. Using an innacurate prediction is like saying "My horse didn't win the race, so I guess it wasn't in it."
And you want another prediction, without hyperbole? How about Svante Arrhenius in 189fucking6? https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Arrhenius
And you want another prediction, without hyperbole? How about Svante Arrhenius in 189fucking6? https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Arrhenius
No, it will (I hope) be accomplished through many different strategies. But people want to fixate on a tax.
