Is the Whole Anti-CO2 Hysteria Campaign Just a Distraction??

Discussion in 'Environment & Conservation' started by bringiton, Sep 27, 2019.

  1. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It was definitely a global phenomenon -- though not a universal one -- and there is no reason to expect it to be simultaneous. Recent warming hasn't been universal or simultaneous everywhere, either.
    Except that the MWP was global.
     
    AFM likes this.
  2. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,789
    Likes Received:
    8,618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There are so many garbage papers paid for by our tax dollars that alarmists can “prove” anything they want to.
     
    bringiton likes this.
  3. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,789
    Likes Received:
    8,618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes. Our current warming is not uniform over the entire globe.
     
  4. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,422
    Likes Received:
    2,186
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yep, like I predicted. The data disagrees with your religious beliefs, so it must be fraudulent.

    And so you confuse Arctic Ice cover with temperature. And you think the MWP was global, despite all the evidence saying the opposite.

    Given your degree of confusion and your blind adherence to dogma, it's really not possible to have a rational discussion with you. I thank you for demonstrating that, as it's my main point.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2019
  5. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,789
    Likes Received:
    8,618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The evidence supports the MWP being global.
     
  6. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,422
    Likes Received:
    2,186
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Gee. Who to trust. Wild claims from internet people, or the actual science and data? This is a real toughie. Not.
     
  7. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,789
    Likes Received:
    8,618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I trust actual science and data. You ???
     
    bringiton likes this.
  8. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,422
    Likes Received:
    2,186
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The real science and data, as opposed to your pseudoscience.

    Oh wait. That's right. The whole planet is conspiring against you, and only you know the real truth.

    Good luck with that.
     
  9. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,789
    Likes Received:
    8,618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Real science and data - all of it.
     
    bringiton likes this.
  10. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,422
    Likes Received:
    2,186
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    But your side automatically discards all inconvenient data. That's how we positively identify you as a pseudoscience devotees.
     
  11. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,789
    Likes Received:
    8,618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The irony ^^^^ is palpable.
     
    bringiton likes this.
  12. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I showed WHY it was fraudulent: it shows the LIA being warmer than the MWP.
    :lol: If they aren't related, why are you worried about arctic ice cover decreasing?
    That's just another bald falsehood. The preponderance of evidence says it was global, as I already showed. It was just smaller in the Southern Hemisphere because the Southern Hemisphere is 90% ocean.
    As they say in Japan, "It's mirror time!"
     
  13. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,422
    Likes Received:
    2,186
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    As an obvious example of how you instantly discared any inconvenient data, you discards every bit of economic data except that from the single economist who agrees with you.

    In stark contrast, we look at all the data.

    We do real science, you do political pseudoscience.
     
  14. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,422
    Likes Received:
    2,186
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No you haven't. You've just claimed it over and over, and posted a link to a fraud-filled paper that all scientists laugh hard at.

    You don't understand the difference between facts and propaganda. We do, hence we see right through your propaganda. Your funniest propaganda is that conspiracy theory about how any data that contradicts your sacred scripture -- meaning all the data -- must be fraudulent. Your religion is always right, by definition, thus by definition anything contradicting your religion must be an evil plot of some kind. While those hellfire religious sermons of yours are kind of amusing, preaching to the choir doesn't make you any new converts.
     
  15. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,789
    Likes Received:
    8,618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You still have not read my sources. Disappointing from one who claims to embrace science - all of it.
     
  16. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is nothing fraudulent about the paper, and I showed that the critique you offered was garbage. Actual scientists do not laugh at it.
    Mirror time. Anyone who knows anything about propaganda knows the anti-CO2 hysteria campaign has the fingerprints of a major PR firm all over it. You can't get that much media coverage of a non-event without spending a $#!+load of money on it.
    You made that up.
    The global climate in fact neither constituting nor threatening any kind of crisis or emergency is not an evil plot. It just flatly disproves the claims of climate crisis and emergency.
     
    AFM likes this.
  17. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,422
    Likes Received:
    2,186
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Do you see anyone outside of your religion falling for it?

    Good science rises to the top. Yours consistently sinks into the mire.
     
  18. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Poisoning the Well fallacy.
    If you wait long enough. 150 years hasn't been long enough in economics.
    Nope. There is self-evidently no climate crisis, no climate emergency. The longer that continues, the more my science is shown to be correct.
     
  19. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,789
    Likes Received:
    8,618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There are only global warming benefits.
     
  20. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, tbf there are also disadvantages, as there are with any kind of significant complex change; but the advantages, especially of increased CO2, are far greater.

    Yes, to the extent that it even happens, global warming will increase precipitation, including in areas that already get too much of it. But increased fresh water supply is generally a good thing, so instead of trying to shut down the global economy by abolishing fossil fuels, we should be investing in hydrological projects -- which would be beneficial even in the absence of global warming -- to take advantage of the increased precipitation that global warming (to the extent that it even happens) will bring.

    Yes, sea level might continue to rise naturally at about the same pace it has since the end of the LIA. Instead of committing economic seppuku over it, we should be investing in infrastructure like the TransAqua project to prevent priceless fresh water from running back into the ocean and being wasted.

    Yes, tropical diseases might expand to higher latitudes. Instead of idiotically trying to stop the climate from changing, we should spend orders of magnitude less money and just get on with eradicating those diseases. DUH.

    Etc.
     
    AFM and Idahojunebug77 like this.
  21. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,789
    Likes Received:
    8,618
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But all of this (as you point out) can be adapted to easily unless economic growth is stifled by alarmist policies which will produce no significant reduction in global CO2 emissions but will reduce wealth creation which for example funds the wefarism in Denmark.

    I’m sure you know that Malaria is not a tropical disease. Again as an example of bad policy the ban of DDT has resulted in ~ 30 million deaths.
     
    bringiton and Idahojunebug77 like this.

Share This Page