UN Climate Report - Global crisis by 2040

CaseyIt always seems a little suspect that we are always like ten years away from total disaster. Like in the course of human history we just happened to figure it out exactly 10 years before shit hits the fan? How convenient.

CaseyIt always seems a little suspect that we are always like ten years away from total disaster. Like in the course of human history we just happened to figure it out exactly 10 years before shit hits the fan? How convenient.

LonelyWe need to start building everything out of wood. A good chunk of emmisions are from construction industry/using materials like cement and asphalt.

CaseyIt always seems a little suspect that we are always like ten years away from total disaster. Like in the course of human history we just happened to figure it out exactly 10 years before shit hits the fan? How convenient.

robbinJAHoodBut then we have no trees and less oxygen

We need to utilize ways to reuse and build with all the shit we already have made. We’re making more trash than we even know what to do with. Waste Management bought themselves out of their glass recycling contracts in all the counties surrounding where I live because they don’t make enough money off of recycling it. SAD

CaseyIt always seems a little suspect that we are always like ten years away from total disaster. Like in the course of human history we just happened to figure it out exactly 10 years before shit hits the fan? How convenient.

CLQYou're really going to have to expand on your stupid fucking "point." It doesn't make any sense. What do you mean over the course of history we are 10 years out?

CaseyIf you’re strictly playing a numbers game, the idea that human beings first cultivated fire 400,000 years ago, becan to use it on an industrial scale in 1760 AD to the point that it altered the atmosphere and in 2018 correctly predicted that they had exactly 12 years to right this inexorable wrong that had been committed by mankind, and then for the first time in 4 billion years of life on this planet a species pro-actively avoided its own demise prior to suffering the consequences of fucking up. Sure, I’ll buy that.

LonelyI think I can agree with this point and still acknowledge the existence of climate change.

CaseyI would hope so. Climate change is based on data and observation. Many of the smartest and best educated people in the world have dedicated their lives to developing climate models in hopes that they are in some way meaningful for society.

I am just pointing out that the solution to politicization in one direction is not politicization in the other.

CaseyIf you’re strictly playing a numbers game, the idea that human beings first cultivated fire 400,000 years ago, becan to use it on an industrial scale in 1760 AD to the point that it altered the atmosphere and in 2018 correctly predicted that they had exactly 12 years to right this inexorable wrong that had been committed by mankind, and then for the first time in 4 billion years of life on this planet a species pro-actively avoided its own demise prior to suffering the consequences of fucking up. Sure, I’ll buy that.

CLQI honestly can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. Its midterms and i'm a little braindead but could someone dumb it down to what he is trying to say? I don't want to go off on something that I didn't understand fully. Anyway if you didn't want this to be political, you can thank the Republican party for making it political.

CaseyNo sarcasm. I was making the point that it seems coincidental that the point of no return has been determined to be in the near future. Seems every bit as likely a purely data driven conclusion would say we have already passed it, it is way in the future, or there is no reliable way of knowing.

CaseyNo sarcasm. I was making the point that it seems coincidental that the point of no return has been determined to be in the near future. Seems every bit as likely a purely data driven conclusion would say we have already passed it, it is way in the future, or there is no reliable way of knowing.

The referenced post has been removed.

GRaboneSnowYou obviously have no actual knowledge of organic chemistry.

Did you even know that during the Jurassic period there was 5000 ppm of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere? Or that the Hawaiian eruptions produced more carbon dioxide than France did in 2 years? Or that trees need carbon dioxide to live?

You probably believe that CO2 happens to be the master control to global temperatures unlike... You know.. the big ball of fire in the centre of the solar system or cloud cover or the millions of other elements and compounds in our atmosphere.

Yeah I'm sure it's the 400ppmA of CO2 in the atmosphere that alter the climate.

CLQA volcano release about 65 to 300 million tonnes of CO2 per year. The burning of fossils fuels and land use account for 34 billion tonnes of CO2 every year. Yes man you are genius for figuring out that trees need CO2 to live.

You are genius for thinking its the Sun as well!! Only that the temperature of the Sun is trending down, so the Earth should really be cooling.

Your "knowledge" of organic chemistry is freshman of year of high school 8 years ago and being stoned watching Fox News.

Feel free to look up, yes research thats right, some of your arguments before you comment.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

**This post was edited on Oct 10th 2018 at 12:40:32am

**This post was edited on Oct 10th 2018 at 12:40:50am

GRaboneSnowThanks for replying to my obvious bait.

Here's some "research" for you since you think you are so smart.

According to data from the University of Alabama - Huntsville (UAH) published by Dr. Roy Spencer, lower atmospheric temperature recorded on satellite shows that the average temperature has only risen by 0.20 of a degree with a downward trend from 1979 to February of this year.

Data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) shows that global mean land and ocean temperatures have risen by less that 1 degree Celsius from 1880 to 2000 with a downward trend adjusted for anomalies in 2015.

Amoungst the shifting goal posts produced by the likes of Al Gore and company for how many years we have to fix this "problem" the IPCC has produced no significant data to corroborate a runaway global climate catastrophe. You can check the unadjusted data from satellites and deep ocean buoys to show that there has been no runaway change. It is a cash grab, that is it.

GRaboneSnowThanks for replying to my obvious bait.

Here's some "research" for you since you think you are so smart.

According to data from the University of Alabama - Huntsville (UAH) published by Dr. Roy Spencer, lower atmospheric temperature recorded on satellite shows that the average temperature has only risen by 0.20 of a degree with a downward trend from 1979 to February of this year.

Data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) shows that global mean land and ocean temperatures have risen by less that 1 degree Celsius from 1880 to 2000 with a downward trend adjusted for anomalies in 2015.

Amoungst the shifting goal posts produced by the likes of Al Gore and company for how many years we have to fix this "problem" the IPCC has produced no significant data to corroborate a runaway global climate catastrophe. You can check the unadjusted data from satellites and deep ocean buoys to show that there has been no runaway change. It is a cash grab, that is it.

GRaboneSnowThanks for replying to my obvious bait.

Here's some "research" for you since you think you are so smart.

According to data from the University of Alabama - Huntsville (UAH) published by Dr. Roy Spencer, lower atmospheric temperature recorded on satellite shows that the average temperature has only risen by 0.20 of a degree with a downward trend from 1979 to February of this year.

Data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) shows that global mean land and ocean temperatures have risen by less that 1 degree Celsius from 1880 to 2000 with a downward trend adjusted for anomalies in 2015.

Amoungst the shifting goal posts produced by the likes of Al Gore and company for how many years we have to fix this "problem" the IPCC has produced no significant data to corroborate a runaway global climate catastrophe. You can check the unadjusted data from satellites and deep ocean buoys to show that there has been no runaway change. It is a cash grab, that is it.

-eREKTion-Change my mind: Or we could do like a hunger games thing, idk.

TRVP_ANGELBreaking News: US population reduce to 0 as fat people are killed off first

**This post was edited on Oct 10th 2018 at 12:54:48pm

CLQOh just a reminder to everyone, this guy votes! Make to sure to register to vote!!

GRaboneSnowYou do all that and can't even figure out I'm not a fucking 'murican.

GRaboneSnowYou do all that and can't even figure out I'm not a fucking 'murican.

And every source you have used has incredible bias. Forbes, WaPo, Reddit, SkepSci.

Stop clickbaiting people by linking the first results you search up on Google.

**This post was edited on Oct 10th 2018 at 3:48:47pm

CLQYour name is Greg [Redacted]. You live in Whistler but you were born in New Zealand. You lived in the Palmerston North area before moving out to Canada. You already have a receding hairline and you browse Infowars daily, the same website that said Sandy Hook was a hoax. I'm sure whatever "source" you have is Breitbart or something similar

CLQYour name is Greg [Redacted]. You live in Whistler but you were born in New Zealand. You lived in the Palmerston North area before moving out to Canada. You already have a receding hairline and you browse Infowars daily, the same website that said Sandy Hook was a hoax. I'm sure whatever "source" you have is Breitbart or something similar

CLQYour name is Greg [Redacted]. You live in Whistler but you were born in New Zealand. You lived in the Palmerston North area before moving out to Canada. You already have a receding hairline and you browse Infowars daily, the same website that said Sandy Hook was a hoax. I'm sure whatever "source" you have is Breitbart or something similar

hubbardsAlright buddy that’s just fucking predatory... can you bring your critical politics somewhere else? Maybe some obscure Reddit subfourm. NS isn’t for this.

CLQReddit has a lot of anti-doxxing rules, you get IP banned IIRC for doxxing someone. NS has had quite a fair amount of doxxing going on for years, with no rules against. He told me i couldn't figure out he wasn't American, so i spent 5 minutes looking him up to see what he was. Don't let this distract you from the fact that he has posted 0 sources for his claims

GRaboneSnowWow I'm so scared! You managed to find outdated information on me. So let me update you.

I live in Auckland, New Zealand. I was at university in Palmerston North 4 years ago now lol.

I USED to live in Whistler. Haven't for 5 months now.

I haven't looked at Infowars in ages or Breitbart. But I do occasionally browse /r/the_donald for juicy memes.

Why would my personal appearance hurt you so much? Doesn't bother me in the slightest bro.


Pretty lit, posting whatever you see on my Facebook and Instagram and using it to try and smear me. Insulting someone only makes you look stupid, not me. But I'm sure you are a nice guy. Just got alot of pent up anger so I'll let it slide.

see you like ad hominem so I won't stoop to your level of pettiness my friend. In any case the onus is on you to predict the future, to show me that a catastrophe is going to happen. I believe it's not, because wolf has been cried too many times and most people on both political and social spectrums are tired of it. So you can't change my mind and insults and frugal data aren't going to do it. So I'm not even sure what point you are trying to prove anymore.

Get out and shred some lines.

**This post was edited on Oct 10th 2018 at 5:35:20pm

**This post was edited on Oct 10th 2018 at 5:40:50pm

hubbardsthis proves two points,
One being that there’s a good reason why doxxing gets you an IP ban, and that’s because it’s a wrathful thing to do.
Second, I think your priorities need to be reconsidered if you are willing to do such a thing only to prove a political point. We’re here because we ski, not because of politics. People can believe what they want to believe and where that will get them in life doesn’t concern you man.
All good vibes here, just don’t want you to get carried away over something so petty.

CLQI was never trying to change your mind, you're to stupid to understand this. I've given plenty of evidence with reliable sources and you have yet to post 1 source. "Frugal data" yet you reject the IPCC, you reject what the vast majority of scientists are saying.

CLQHe literally asked me too! He has a link to his instagram in his profile, its not like i spent any time finding him online. Skiing is political, you're going to have to get over it. Climate change effects skiing, look at Tahoe, Utah, the east coast. It doesn't have to be political, hell Richard Nixon was the one who proposed the EPA. For whatever reason, probably lobbying, Republicans have chosen to go against/not believe in climate change.

Anyway yeah probs shouldn't have doxxed him even though it was insanely easy, you right. Was a lil petty

GRaboneSnowOh dear! What will my poor intelligence do now that it has been wounded so dearly??

Let this quote from Michael Crighton sink in.


"I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.

Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period"

**This post was edited on Oct 10th 2018 at 6:10:38pm

CLQYou are really going to post this quote after talking about Dr. Roy Spencers study which:

The paper doesn't provide enough information to replicate their results

Their results depend on using one particular data set

I would also like you talk about how cigarettes don't cause cancer and how vaccines cause autism. There is a consensus on that in the scientific community.

GRaboneSnowClimate scientist Dr. Judith Curry has prepared a new presentation (highlighted in 56 slides) on climate issues (https://curryja.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/spe-curry-final.pdf) which addresses many climate science topics including global temperatures and the growing divergence between actual temperature measurements and the overly warm exaggerated temperature projections of climate models.

She notes in her presentation that the latest 2013 UN IPCC AR5 climate report presented information showing (slide #24) how climate models over state and exaggerate projections of global temperatures versus actual measured data. Dr. Christy’s Congressional testimony data on climate model global temperature exaggerations is also included in her presentation (slide #25).

In addition to climate models over exaggerating global temperature projections these models also have failed to account for the behavior and impact of major natural climate variation events such as those associated with ENSO as discussed in the Watts Up With That article “Once Again El Nino Didn’t Do What Was Forecast. Why?.

In his article Dr. Ball notes that: “The IPCC claimed with 90% certainty that global warming is due to human CO2. Lack of data combined with omission or lack of understanding of major mechanisms are major reasons why all past, present, and future predictions are wrong. The same is true of major events within the Earth/atmosphere system like El Nino or ENSO. As it is more frequently said these days, if your predictions are wrong the science is wrong.”

Naturally occurring El Nino events have and continue to influence increasing global temperatures and temperature trends and have done so multiple times every decade. (http://ggweather.com/enso/oni.htm).

hubbardsthis proves two points,
One being that there’s a good reason why doxxing gets you an IP ban, and that’s because it’s a wrathful thing to do.
Second, I think your priorities need to be reconsidered if you are willing to do such a thing only to prove a political point. We’re here because we ski, not because of politics. People can believe what they want to believe and where that will get them in life doesn’t concern you man.
All good vibes here, just don’t want you to get carried away over something so petty.