Climate Change Arguing

[Better Loosen Up]

Really grammar errors. Your arguing against the vast overwhelming number of scientists and scientific organizations and the the nerve to talk about the real world.

Your arguing against **SCIENCE**.

Going by your grammar errors, i doubt you would know real science if it bit you on the arse.

 

[pugsville]

Going by your grammar errors, i doubt you would know real science if it bit you on the arse.

It still does not change the fact the overwhelming majority of scientific opinion supports me and disagrees with you.

Your clutching straws. Denying basic reality. listening to crackpot conspiracy theorists and just not living in the real world.

You got nothing,

 

[Better Loosen Up]

It still does not change the fact the overwhelming majority of scientific opinion supports me and disagrees with you.

Your clutching straws. Denying basic reality. listening to crackpot conspiracy theorists and just not living in the real world.

You got nothing,

I would agree that the overwhelming majority of scientists believe in some sort of man made climate change. Though, to very different degrees. I would argue that the vast majority most certainly do not believe in catastrophic or apocalyptic man made climate change which is where you seem to sit. And you call me a crackpot! Lol

 

[NSWCROW]

Probably because it wasn't that big.

I heard way more about it during the build up for it than anything else.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAAAA
Keep tellin' yourself that bro

 

[quotemokc]

View attachment 750204

BWAHAHAHAHAHAAAA
Keep tellin' yourself that bro

You were just complaining about the lack of publicity after the event....

It definitely had more fanfare leading up to it, radio stations were pumping it every 15 minutes and news sites were touting mass disruption.

You can't say that its trying to be covered up when it had mass publicity before it had even begun.

 

[pugsville]

I would agree that the overwhelming majority of scientists believe in some sort of man made climate change. Though, to very different degrees. I would argue that the vast majority most certainly do not believe in catastrophic or apocalyptic man made climate change which is where you seem to sit. And you call me a crackpot! Lol

And now the weaseling begins. You have just basically agreed with everything I've posted.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

And now the weaseling begins. You have just basically agreed with everything I've posted.

No i haven't. I really haven't. And this clearly demonstrates your obvious lack of comprehension and critical thinking abilities. My position is that any man-made climate change is very minimal. There is not going to be any sort of man-made climate apocalypse or catastrophe. These alarmist predictions are an absolute bunch of, unsubstantiated, model biased crap. We should not be selling the farm and hijacking our economy with renewable energies in ridiculously short time frames. The UN can go and get you know what with their propagandist rubbish.

 

[NSWCROW]

You were just complaining about the lack of publicity after the event....

It definitely had more fanfare leading up to it, radio stations were pumping it every 15 minutes and news sites were touting mass disruption.

You can't say that its trying to be covered up when it had mass publicity before it had even begun.

Think i'm ****en stupid Hans ?
You were trying to talk down the turnout.

Gotta get up a bit earlier than that to catch ol' Crow-Crow out bro

 

[JackOutback]

No i haven't. I really haven't. And this clearly demonstrates your obvious lack of comprehension and critical thinking abilities. My position is that any man-made climate change is very minimal. There is not going to be any sort of man-made climate apocalypse or catastrophe. These alarmist predictions are an absolute bunch of, unsubstantiated, model biased crap. We should not be selling the farm and hijacking our economy with renewable energies in ridiculously short time frames. The UN can go and get you know what with their propagandist rubbish.

What you mean, is there won’t be any catastrophe in your little part of the world. There will be catastrophic consequences for low lying island nations that you can just ignore. And extreme bushfires and drought are just far enough removed you can pretend they aren’t connected. Though you will undoubtedly complain about the rising costs of food.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

What you mean, is there won’t be any catastrophe in your little part of the world. There will be catastrophic consequences for low lying island nations that you can just ignore. And extreme bushfires and drought are just far enough removed you can pretend they aren’t connected. Though you will undoubtedly complain about the rising costs of food.

Nope. There won't be any of that crap. Nothing outside the natural parameters. There's just no evidence to prove it other than ridiculous biased predictive models. I find it hilarious that people take these 50, 100 year climate predictions seriously when our weather experts can even predict our weather a week in advance. Think about it.

 

[NSWCROW]

Usual salt from the usual glass-jaws

From Alan Jones to the Daily Mail: the Australian media's bizarre reactions to the climate strike

Jones cited Joseph Goebbels while the Mail found a child who said they just wanted the day off school

www.theguardian.com

 

[Kram]

Usual salt from the usual glass-jaws

From Alan Jones to the Daily Mail: the Australian media's bizarre reactions to the climate strike

Jones cited Joseph Goebbels while the Mail found a child who said they just wanted the day off school

www.theguardian.com

I'm not going to like this because you forgot to use the term mutts.

 

[Crankitup]

There’s plenty of scientists, proper climate scientists, who think you’re speaking crazy talk from the conspiracy theory dimension.
Sea levels are rising by insignificant amounts in the Northern Hemisphere and dropping by even smaller amounts in the Southern Hemisphere.
Average temperatures across the globe are stable.
Wild storms, earthquakes, hurricanes, etc are slightly lower since the 1960’s.
Carbon dioxide levels make up 0.04% of gases in the atmosphere. Humans create 40% of this. Australia contributes 1.3% of this.
Every year that passes makes extremists like yourself look sillier. Give it up because you’re embarrassing yourself.

Agree with everything but the 40% anthropogenic CO₂ emissions part. I always thought it was about 4%. Just done some digging and that seems about right. Reference year is a while ago but there won't be a huge difference now.



There seems to be a popular idea perpetuated that CO₂ levels are at an unprecedented high. In reality there has been periods when there has been 18 times the levels of CO₂ that we presently have, with no cars, factories etc around to blame for it. The levels can rise & fall markedly without mankind's help. As seen above, approximately 96.5% of CO₂ emissions are from natural sources. Thinking that by fiddling around with the remaining 3.5% emissions for a gas that makes up 0.05% of our atmosphere, when many argue that CO₂ isn't the major driver of our climate, seems a bit silly.

CO₂ gets all the limelight whilst a GHG that exists in MUCH higher concentrations in our atmosphere (water vapour) gets largely ignored by AGW believers. The excuse most often given is that its effect is hard to quantify but the reality is that its effect is so large that it makes a nonsense any discussion of CO₂.

 

[NSWCROW]

alan jones calls the kids " turds "


Keep it up al , it's really discouraging them BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA

 

[NSWCROW]

Why is Greta Thunberg so triggering for certain men?

Articles of 2019: How can a 16-year-old girl in plaits inspire such rage?

www.irishtimes.com

They can’t admit it even to themselves, so they ridicule her instead. But the truth is that they’re afraid of her

 

[happy_eagle]

Why is Greta Thunberg so triggering for certain men?

Articles of 2019: How can a 16-year-old girl in plaits inspire such rage?

www.irishtimes.com

Same goes for David Hogg and the Parkland kids.

 

[medusala]

Your arguing against **SCIENCE**.

You can repeat it as often as you like but it wont make it true.

Those projections are simply models with little predictive value. That is hardly hard science.

 

[medusala]

The cult of Greta Thunberg

This young woman sounds increasingly like a millenarian weirdo.

www.spiked-online.com

And now the green cult has pushed Ms Thunberg into the position of its global leader, its child-like saviour, the messiah of their miserabilist political creed. What they have done to Ms Thunberg is unforgivable. They have pumped her – and millions of other children – with the politics of fear. They have convinced the next generation that the planet is on the cusp of doom.

 

[Northalives]

You can repeat it as often as you like but it wont make it true.

Those projections are simply models with little predictive value. That is hardly hard science.

If you understood the relationship between the earth, the sun and the properties of the very important molecule called carbon dioxide, then you could easily prove or disprove whether or not man made global warming/climate change is actually happening.

 

[Sainteric]

Alright guys, thanks for the 'debate' and enjoy your summer, all the best but don't fall into an ideological trap, it's not worth it.

Your at the bottom of that hole aren't you?

 

[Socrates2]

Your at the bottom of that hole aren't you?

You don't understand the science so refrain from making things up please, it's embarrassing.

 

[Crankitup]

The cult of Greta Thunberg

This young woman sounds increasingly like a millenarian weirdo.

www.spiked-online.com

And now the green cult has pushed Ms Thunberg into the position of its global leader, its child-like saviour, the messiah of their miserabilist political creed. What they have done to Ms Thunberg is unforgivable. They have pumped her – and millions of other children – with the politics of fear. They have convinced the next generation that the planet is on the cusp of doom.

The following is courtesy of Dinesh D'Souza.

Children—notably Nordic white girls with braids and red cheeks—were often used in Nazi propaganda. An old Goebbels technique!

 

[Power Raid]

Well only if you throw science and logic out the window.

You serious thing that Shifting in our nest endless is some sort of reasonable and substainable way to live and it will not bite us in the arse

CSIRO report costing of future cost of power Nuclear power is simply not competitive. How much faith do you have in givernment regulation ? Intelligent mokeys or dolphins or hyper intellignet shades of blue might be able to regulate nuclear power but I dont hold much hope for Humans doing so responsible way right now. Nuclear power is very expensive has massivelead times, huge regulation and corruption problems, waste problems and is dominated by huge vest corporate interests.

We're a very rich society. We spend much energy and resources producing abolutely useless rubbish. TWe can afford to live with more sustainability.

Rolls Royce have their gen 4 SMR pricing at $0.05-0.075 per kwh depending on interest rates.

At current interest rate environments, I can’t see many technologies delivering safe, clean, reliable power at $0.05 per kWh.

 

[pugsville]

Rolls Royce have their gen 4 SMR pricing at $0.05-0.075 per kwh depending on interest rates.

At current interest rate environments, I can’t see many technologies delivering safe, clean, reliable power at $0.05 per kWh.

Marketing rubbish.provide an independent evaluation.

 

[pugsville]

You can repeat it as often as you like but it wont make it true.

Those projections are simply models with little predictive value. That is hardly hard science.

It's true. You are arguing againstt the vast majorityof sicentists and scinetific organizations.

In the orginal post I provided plenty of evidence fact to back it up.

The statement that you are aguying aginst ** *SCIENCE** is just true.

It's your 2 bit opinion versus ***SCIENCE***