Politics Climate Change Paradox (cont in part 2)

Should we act now, or wait for a unified global approach


  • Total voters
    362

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Once again... "pin prick in time"

So natural disasters happen , your response to that "lol, it happened 200 years ago, whats the big deal".

Natural disasters doesn't happen. Your response "how's the weather now?"

In the meantime 40 million people starving in Southern Africa due to the worst drought in 100 years.

Omg yes 100 years, what happened before that???

lol.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Already has got more frequent and intense since AGW took hold. Freo seems nearly ready to abandon Port Beach and retreat inland.

Was it worse than when severe storms killed 27 people in 1894 - and the seawall at Cossack, Woodbrook homestead and tramway was washed away? Or is it just normal extreme weather?

 
Was it worse than when severe storms killed 27 people in 1894 - and the seawall at Cossack, Woodbrook homestead and tramway was washed away? Or is it just normal extreme weather?


And to think there was an even bigger WILLY-WILLY only 12 years earlier in 1882!

Sorry, i just wanted to say WILLY-WILLY
 
Was it worse than when severe storms killed 27 people in 1894 - and the seawall at Cossack, Woodbrook homestead and tramway was washed away? Or is it just normal extreme weather?

Global trends are for more extreme TC events. Better Loosen Up understands the link between warmer oceans and TCs. He might like to explain it to you.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Anyone got a source for that graph?
If old mate started posting his sources, people might realise his whole reputation is propped up on copy and pasting random screen caps of s**t he finds via the glorified google search called Science Direct.
 
What in the mother lovin' fu** is this bullshit?!!!!!! :tearsofjoy: :tearsofjoy: :tearsofjoy: :tearsofjoy: :tearsofjoy:

View attachment 884693


Something for the resident 'scientist' to read,maybe you can understand the context of the post you quoted lol

Disclaimer : more than 3 lines involved


 
If old mate started posting his sources, people might realise his whole reputation is propped up on copy and pasting random screen caps of s**t he finds via the glorified google search called Science Direct.
Could it even have been cut and paste from his ultimate source of truth?

Twitter FTW!

Could it have been posted by a Norwegian oil industry shill?

For those playing at home, it's Kjell Arne Høyvik‏. Who works for Statoil and also likes to post doctored Hitler videos making jokes about Covid 19.
 
Global trends are for more extreme TC events. Better Loosen Up understands the link between warmer oceans and TCs. He might like to explain it to you.


Another cyclone to hit India.


'it happens', move on.
 
Science below: look away Voodoo believers.


Climate change is increasing the damage that cyclones like Nisarga and Amphan cause in several ways like increasing sea surface temperatures that can make cyclones more powerful, increasing the rainfall intensity during the storm and rising sea levels, which increases the distance inland that storm surges reach.
The strongest cyclones have become more common across the world and scientists project that climate change will continue to make the strongest cyclones more powerful.

The strength of cyclones affecting the countries bordering the North Indian Ocean has been increasing as the planet has warmed, say multiple studies.
Climate change is increasing the danger from cyclones in several ways like cyclones are fueled by available heat.

Warming seas can make cyclones more powerful by increasing the potential energy available to them, effectively increasing their power ceiling or speed limit.

Higher sea-surface temperatures mean that cyclone wind speeds can increase.
Globally, ocean temperatures have increased as a result of climate change and there has been a global increase in the observed intensity of the strongest storms over recent decades.
 
Science below: look away Voodoo believers.


Climate change is increasing the damage that cyclones like Nisarga and Amphan cause in several ways like increasing sea surface temperatures that can make cyclones more powerful, increasing the rainfall intensity during the storm and rising sea levels, which increases the distance inland that storm surges reach.
The strongest cyclones have become more common across the world and scientists project that climate change will continue to make the strongest cyclones more powerful.

The strength of cyclones affecting the countries bordering the North Indian Ocean has been increasing as the planet has warmed, say multiple studies.
Climate change is increasing the danger from cyclones in several ways like cyclones are fueled by available heat.

Warming seas can make cyclones more powerful by increasing the potential energy available to them, effectively increasing their power ceiling or speed limit.

Higher sea-surface temperatures mean that cyclone wind speeds can increase.
Globally, ocean temperatures have increased as a result of climate change and there has been a global increase in the observed intensity of the strongest storms over recent decades.
Ironically, there is no 'science' in the article.

All I see is the same 'phenomenon' with no scientific support stated over and over and over and over again.

Is there a Pulitzer Prize for repetition? The author of this article would be a strong nomination.
 
Last edited:
Inagine a government with the initiative to develop and upscale a project like this as part of our economic recovery.


"This technology makes it possible to store, separate, release or protect valuable commodities, enabling companies to develop high value products."

But homebuilder is good too. I'm sure the building industry won't gouge an extra 25k out of new homebuilders and add to the property bubble.
 
Inagine a government with the initiative to develop and upscale a project like this as part of our economic recovery.


"This technology makes it possible to store, separate, release or protect valuable commodities, enabling companies to develop high value products."

But homebuilder is good too. I'm sure the building industry won't gouge an extra 25k out of new homebuilders and add to the property bubble.

Why should we be capturing CO2 from the atmosphere when we currently only have around 400ppm anyway? I really don't think this is a great idea.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top