Climate Change

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
28,281
6,151
113
I know that you know this difference between weather and climate so you are just trolling
As I said many times before IMO global warming is a giant pile of exaggerated bullshit.
Yes there's a tiny bit of warming but its not gonna melt the poles, nor the Greenland ice sheet.
The only thing thats gonna melt is your wallet from the extra carbon taxes we have to pay
 

toguy5252

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2009
15,877
6,017
113
As I said many times before IMO global warming is a giant pile of exaggerated bullshit.
Yes there's a tiny bit of warming but its not gonna melt the poles, nor the Greenland ice sheet.
The only thing thats gonna melt is your wallet from the extra carbon taxes we have to pay
if you admit that there is a tiny bit of warming then you must agree that global warming is occurring.

do you know what the difference in an ice bue is at 0 degrees compared ed to 1 degree. It does not take much in the difference in temperature to have significant impact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frankfooter

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
28,281
6,151
113
if you admit that there is a tiny bit of warming then you must agree that global warming is occurring.

do you know what the difference in an ice bue is at 0 degrees compared ed to 1 degree. It does not take much in the difference in temperature to have significant impact.
Wanna do a little Q & A??

I ask you a bunch of questions and you answer in your own words to the best of your ability
 

oil&gas

Well-known member
Apr 16, 2002
14,662
2,451
113
Ghawar
if you admit that there is a tiny bit of warming then you must agree that global warming is occurring.

do you know what the difference in an ice bue is at 0 degrees compared ed to 1 degree. It does not take much in the difference in temperature to have significant impact.
If I understand correctly, that significant impact of climate change
would be something like humanity will be facing impending climate
catastrophe and eventually human extinction unless global
emission is halved by 2030. Apparently calling the impact 'significant'
an understatement would itself be another understatement.

Seriously do people actually believe in such climate BS?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phil C. McNasty

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
28,586
9,671
113
Room 112
Except that damage from climate change disasters, insurance costs and oil subsidies massively dwarf this.
The latest reports say we are very close to hitting 5 tipping points, where the damage gets massively worse and becomes not reversible for centuries.



Dude we've always had climate disasters that ain't ever going to change. The only reason damages and insurance costs are higher is because we have more population and more buildings. I mean to think that by plowing trillions of dollars into fighting the climate bogeyman that somehow natural disasters aren't going to occur is sheer lunacy.
 

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
8,027
5,079
113
if you admit that there is a tiny bit of warming then you must agree that global warming is occurring.

do you know what the difference in an ice bue is at 0 degrees compared ed to 1 degree. It does not take much in the difference in temperature to have significant impact.
I have a question...
Can you demonstrate mathematically how revenue collected in the form of carbon tax improves the climate? Mathematically not theoretically.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bazokajoe

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
28,586
9,671
113
Room 112
Who cares about John Kerry?
Your ignorance never ceases to amaze Frankie.
He is the climate czar for the most powerful country on the planet.
He's a former 5 term Senator, former Secretary of State, ran for POTUS.
He's wealthy has power and influence over policy.
He reports to the UN Security Council.
Some would call him the face of Climate Change.
I'd say that he's someone people should care about.
 

toguy5252

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2009
15,877
6,017
113
If I understand correctly, that significant impact of climate change
would be something like humanity will be facing impending climate
catastrophe and eventually human extinction unless global
emission is halved by 2030. Apparently calling the impact 'significant'
an understatement would itself be another understatement.

Seriously do people actually believe in such climate BS?
It depends upon what you consider a catastrophe. Climate change will lead to lower crop yields, changing livability of many geographies, increased weather events, and many incremental changes which will affect the cost and quality of life for many people. The impacts will increase, even if slowly, over time. It will become like a snowball, rolling down hill, which is an ironic example given the topic.
 

oil&gas

Well-known member
Apr 16, 2002
14,662
2,451
113
Ghawar
..........................................
I'd say that he's someone people should care about.
John Kerry is a big shot in the climate movement.

People should care about Kerry along with a number
of climate change activists/advocates namely, Al Gore,
David Suzuki, Leonardo DiCaprio, Harrison Ford, Arnold
Schwarzenegger, Justin Trudeau, Bill Gates, Richard
Branson, Larry Fink etc. For they all have earned a place
in the pantheon of The Defenders of Climate Hypocrisy.
Climate sheeple may want to look to these hypocrites for
climate leadership. More discerning folks could look to
them to emulate their lifestyle in the midst of a climate crisis.
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
28,281
6,151
113
We have been pumping out CO2's since industrial age started.
There were actually 2 industrial ages, but to simplify lets say the industrial age started around 1900.

So for the last 124 years we've been putting tons and tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.
Earth temperature has only heated up about 1.5 celsius.
Last time I checked Greenland, arctic and antarctic temperatures were still well into the -30C, -40C and -50C.
Mainland Greenland perhaps a bit warmer, but not by much.

Since we only have about 45 years of oil left (or approximately 1/3 of the 2/3 CO2 we've already put out into the atmosphere), how could that possibly lower the Greenland, arctic and antarctic temperatures to the point where all 3 melt and flood the entire world??
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
97,247
25,523
113
I have a question...
Can you demonstrate mathematically how revenue collected in the form of carbon tax improves the climate? Mathematically not theoretically.
Carbon taxes make it more expensive to burn carbon and offset those by using the tax revenue to invest in renewables.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
97,247
25,523
113
We have been pumping out CO2's since industrial age started.
There were actually 2 industrial ages, but to simplify lets say the industrial age started around 1900.

So for the last 124 years we've been putting tons and tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.
Earth temperature has only heated up about 1.5 celsius.
Last time I checked Greenland, arctic and antarctic temperatures were still well into the -30C, -40C and -50C.
Mainland Greenland perhaps a bit warmer, but not by much.

Since we only have about 45 years of oil left (or approximately 1/3 of the 2/3 CO2 we've already put out into the atmosphere), how could that possibly lower the Greenland, arctic and antarctic temperatures to the point where all 3 melt and flood the entire world??
1 IAU is only about 4.5ºC.

IAU stands for Ice Age Unit.

 

oil&gas

Well-known member
Apr 16, 2002
14,662
2,451
113
Ghawar
It depends upon what you consider a catastrophe. Climate change will lead to lower crop yields, changing livability of many geographies, increased weather events, and many incremental changes which will affect the cost and quality of life for many people. The impacts will increase, even if slowly, over time. It will become like a snowball, rolling down hill, which is an ironic example given the topic.
This sounds more like an attempt to phrase the dire warnings
of climate alarmists to make their message sound more palpable.

It is understandable our perception of catastrophe could be
different. One climate prediction according to climate
'science' seems certain though. Unless global carbon emission
is halved before 2030 nothing done beyond the point of no return,
not even putting a stop on fossil fuel burning altogether, would
make any difference in the course of climate change.
 
Last edited:

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
8,027
5,079
113
1 IAU is only about 4.5ºC.

IAU stands for Ice Age Unit.

Palm trees at the poles....haha that's funny! They have their hooks in you don't they? Lol!

Better write an extra carbon tax cheque to keep the poles from becoming paradise! Lol! OMFG
 

oil&gas

Well-known member
Apr 16, 2002
14,662
2,451
113
Ghawar
.................................................
Since we only have about 45 years of oil left (or approximately 1/3 of the 2/3 CO2 we've already put out into the atmosphere), how could that possibly lower the Greenland, arctic and antarctic temperatures to the point where all 3 melt and flood the entire world??
World will still be pumping oil 45 years from now and beyond into the
future though production volume will be only a fraction of where it is
now. I can assure you the drop in production won't have anything to
do with climate change or transition to renewable energy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phil C. McNasty

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
97,247
25,523
113
Palm trees at the poles....haha that's funny! They have their hooks in you don't they? Lol!

Better write an extra carbon tax cheque to keep the poles from becoming paradise! Lol! OMFG
Wow, I had no idea you were that ignorant.
 

toguy5252

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2009
15,877
6,017
113
We have been pumping out CO2's since industrial age started.
There were actually 2 industrial ages, but to simplify lets say the industrial age started around 1900.

So for the last 124 years we've been putting tons and tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.
Earth temperature has only heated up about 1.5 celsius.
Last time I checked Greenland, arctic and antarctic temperatures were still well into the -30C, -40C and -50C.
Mainland Greenland perhaps a bit warmer, but not by much.

Since we only have about 45 years of oil left (or approximately 1/3 of the 2/3 CO2 we've already put out into the atmosphere), how could that possibly lower the Greenland, arctic and antarctic temperatures to the point where all 3 melt and flood the entire world??
I have no idea whether those stats are correct but I am prepared to assume that they are.

And in terms of the math I cannot tell you what the actual incremental increase in temperature will be.

But if we are at a tipping point and we may well be then even a very small incremental change can have very serious repercussions. To use a stupid analogy again it my be the difference between ice and water. Or perhaps reduce the growing season several days or perhaps move viable farming a little further north or a few more hurricanes and wildfires.

Again very small incremental changes can have outsized impacts.
 
Toronto Escorts