Shocker: study finds global warming may be net beneficial for the global economy

Well yeah you can deny anything. But you can't be skeptical of the Earth being spherical.

 

Because you can't argue.

 

Further I simply didn't respond to the links. I deleted them from the response. I responded to your argument. Run away and put me on ignore seal your echo chamber up tight. Makes no difference to me.

 

Consensus isn't science. There was once consensus that the sun revolved around the Earth.

 

Save your anti petroleum propaganda for one of your faithful. I know that's strictly political.

anti petroleum propaganda. Preach your religion to the blindly faithful. I don't buy it.

 

I love the argument - "...global warming has happened in the past - therefor it's nothing to worry about ...".

They always seem to forget, that the last time it happened, there weren't 4 billion people living on the coasts of the world and we didn't have 7 billion people who had built their lives and food production with the current climate in mind.

Sure we can survive as a specie, but there is a reason why the US Military considered climate change one of the greatest threats to world peace.

 

...there are literally thousands of flat earthers who exist today.

 

Ok dude.

 

Oh that's clever.

Use the opinions of folks who lived 400 years ago to justify your beliefs today.

 

You asked for names and CVs and then delete them because they are not an argument?

Your denial is pathetic.

 

Anti petroleum propaganda? What a dumb argument.

You want to make it such that petroleum does not produce CO2 as a byproduct? Go for it.

I bet the petroleum companies would pay you billions for the patents because they recognize the problems associated with CO2 emissions and they have for decades.

 

Clearly, mass starvation is imminent.

 

That is what they get for raising all those farting cows.

 

Warming is a good thing. More CO2 is a good thing.

That said, with change we will have to make adjustments where needed.

Areas that are vast deserts today were lush, green, and fertile thousands of years ago. Civilization adjusted.

I think the worst aspect of the whole CO2 boogeyman hoax, is that good science is not being put forth that would offer constructive recommendations for what adjustments would be helpful.

And that's a shame.

 

Came across this interview with Dr. Patrick Moore, one of the founders of Greenpeace, earlier today.

Thought it was pretty interesting.

 

So you ignore all the studies that say that global warming is harmful but you immediately cherry pick the one study that says its beneficial.

 

Corn yields broke out of static yields when hybridization was implemented. The continued increases in yield are due to more factors than you can shake a stick at. One is indeed climate change. One example, we plant corn at least a week earlier now than 20 years ago. Last frost date keeps getting earlier. Same applies to soybeans. Longer growing season equals higher yields.

 

Unless you have lack of rainfall, then your crops just wither on the vine - not to mention that that increased warmth leads to larger locust swarms.

And while you may get some larger crop yields in some areas, the increased warming leads to choral reef die off (70% of the world’s coral reefs are in sever trouble) which greatly reduces food production from the sea, which would be a net loss to the billions of people who rely on such production.

This “study” completely disregards non-agricultural food production. It also disregards the growing collapse of the population of pollinators around the world.

 

Why is more warming and more CO2 a good thing? And is there a limit to such a good thing?

 

the vast majority of plants and animals thrive under warmer conditions with elevated CO2 levels

 

Warmer than the conditions in which they evolved and thrived for thousands or millions of years though?

 

yes

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth

 

Can you prove humans can actually change it or was the primary cause for it Cubed?

Can you? If not and we both know you can't the debate is academic.

 

Yes. It was political.

Until the flat earthers can actually

#1 Find actual proof of the primary catalyst for climate change and

#2 prove humans are the primary cause for climate change

Until those flat earthers can actually prove either of those the entire debate is worthless.

 

What would qualify as "actual proof" in your mind? Even a hypothetical example.