Hottest September Ever Recorded by a LOT Don't listen to the deniers / liars

[blueash]

This graph (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/05/gobsmackingly-bananas-scientists-stunned-by-planets-record-september-heat?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQvoT18a7BtLfEARiHkZvZ7ve4joYBKhAIA CoHCAowwo6qCzDCmcID&utm_content=rundown) uses as a zero point the temperature average over a 30 year period from 1991 to 2020. Of course this was a period when temps were already moving upward as you can see looking at how no years prior to 2002 were warmer than that average. So when a person who regularly posts that we are in a cooling trend selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline, know you are being manipulated and lied to.

[Byte1]

Can you provide a link to your information? Not sure but it seems like your information is pointed toward Europe, right? Interesting, but it also appears like you are attempting to debate your view against someone else's.

[Bill14564]

Certainly matches my personal experience. I remember snowmobiling most weekends in the 70s, maybe one year in the early 80s, and rarely enough snow to cover the ground now. I also remember not even considering AC in the early 80s but now you can barely live without it.

Good luck with the deniers.

[Byte1]

Certainly matches my personal experience. I remember snowmobiling most weekends in the 70s, maybe one year in the early 80s, and rarely enough snow to cover the ground now. I also remember not even considering AC in the early 80s but now you can barely live without it.

Good luck with the deniers.

And now they are calling for a record "COLDEST" winter due to El Nino. I moved to Florida to get away from cold weather and so far I have been surprised by some pretty cold nights during the "winter" months.

[golfing eagles]

This graph (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/05/gobsmackingly-bananas-scientists-stunned-by-planets-record-september-heat?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQvoT18a7BtLfEARiHkZvZ7ve4joYBKhAIA CoHCAowwo6qCzDCmcID&utm_content=rundown) uses as a zero point the temperature average over a 30 year period from 1991 to 2020. Of course this was a period when temps were already moving upward as you can see looking at how no years prior to 2002 were warmer than that average. So when a person who regularly posts that we are in a cooling trend selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline, know you are being manipulated and lied to.

That's fine----SO WHAT??????

8 year cooling trend, 30 year warming trend, 150 years of warming----SO WHAT. It means nothing in the last 4.5 million years of our current ICE AGE marked by 70-120,000 years of alternating periods of glaciation and interglacial thaws. Our current warming trend started about 19,000 years ago and will probably continue for the next 25-30,000 years. At the peak of warming, most of Florida will be gone and our coastal cities will be under 200-400 feet of water, AS IT HAS BEEN AT LEAST A DOZEN TIMES OVER THOSE 4.5 MILLION YEARS. And guess what? Fifty thousand year or so later, NYC will once again be covered by 2 miles of ice, AS IT HAS BEEN AT LEAST A DOZEN TIMES OVER THOSE 4.5 MILLION YEARS. And now for the harsh reality---none of that was influenced by any human (or humanoid) activity. NONE OF IT.

So, the climate change alarmists can go on spouting their garbage. Those few in the position to profit from all the hype will make $billions if not $trillions. The lemmings will march off and buy their EVs and put solar panels on their roofs. The media will continue to push this false narrative---and guess what again---none of it will make the slightest difference. We simply do not have the technology to challenge the power of the sun, Earth's orbit and precession of our axis.

And finally, as a promise to one who is constantly sounding the imminent disaster alarm, here is a picture. It was taken last month off the Isle of Capri in the Mediterranean (well actually, the Gulf of Naples) at high tide. The dark line along the cliff about 15-20 feet ABOVE the water (above the boat on the left, sorry about the resolution but it was hazy) is erosion from where the sea level was 2,000 years ago when Ceasar Augustus ruled. So much for ocean levels rising in the last 2,000 years, and at the current rate of rise we have quite a long time just to get back to the level of Roman times. Yes, we'll get there and hundreds of feet more, but not in the next decades, but in many millennia.

[Two Bills]

My time so far on this planet covers the whole of that graph.
It is obvious, whatever data is thrown up to the contrary, that over that period winters are no where near as cold.
The simple reason is, many plants now survive winters in the ground, which would not have done so over 20 years ago.
Gardens can tell you many things, as Nature does not take prisoners.

Man made? Natural climate progression? :shrug:

[Bill14564]

...
And finally, as a promise to one who is constantly sounding the imminent disaster alarm, here is a picture. It was taken last month off the Isle of Capri in the Mediterranean (well actually, the Gulf of Naples) at high tide. The dark line along the cliff about 15-20 feet ABOVE the water (above the boat on the left, sorry about the resolution but it was hazy) is erosion from where the sea level was 2,000 years ago when Ceasar Augustus ruled. So much for ocean levels rising in the last 2,000 years, and at the current rate of rise we have quite a long time just to get back to the level of Roman times. Yes, we'll get there and hundreds of feet more, but not in the next decades, but in many millennia.

You believe sea levels fell 15-20 feet in the 1500 years preceding the "discovery" of the new world (assuming the coast hasn't changed much since that time)? They say a picture is worth a thousand words - it would be nice to see even a few hundred confirming and explaining that.

[golfing eagles]

You believe sea levels fell 15-20 feet in the 1500 years preceding the "discovery" of the new world (assuming the coast hasn't changed much since that time)? They say a picture is worth a thousand words - it would be nice to see even a few hundred confirming and explaining that.

No, I'm stating that the sea level, at least in that part of the Mediterranean Sea, was 15-20 feet HIGHER 2000 years ago. It may very well be rising since some time after hitting a low point, we know it is currently rising. And it will continue to rise. And it's not me stating it, it was an expert on local history and geography.

[Blueblaze]

This graph (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/05/gobsmackingly-bananas-scientists-stunned-by-planets-record-september-heat?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQvoT18a7BtLfEARiHkZvZ7ve4joYBKhAIA CoHCAowwo6qCzDCmcID&utm_content=rundown) uses as a zero point the temperature average over a 30 year period from 1991 to 2020. Of course this was a period when temps were already moving upward as you can see looking at how no years prior to 2002 were warmer than that average. So when a person who regularly posts that we are in a cooling trend selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline, know you are being manipulated and lied to.


Very interesting. And here is a graph ("https://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/us40c.jpg?w=768&h=462)that includes the ACTUAL hottest year ever recorded in the United States -- 1938.

Believe it or not, the word "ever" also includes about 4 billion years of history that occurred before we were even a gleam in our father's eye.

Before you condemn 7 billion people for poverty to adjust the thermostat to your liking, maybe you should try to explain why a year your parents would have remembered was hotter than any year you have experienced since Al Gore told you the world would end in 2017 due to "global warming".

[Davonu]

…Man made? Natural climate progression? :shrug:
Bingo.

[golfing eagles]

My time so far on this planet covers the whole of that graph.
It is obvious, whatever data is thrown up to the contrary, that over that period winters are no where near as cold.
The simple reason is, many plants now survive winters in the ground, which would not have done so over 20 years ago.
Gardens can tell you many things, as Nature does not take prisoners.

Man made? Natural climate progression? :shrug:

WOW---you're old:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl: (just kidding)
But.....your lifespan and that graph covers 0.00018% of our current ice age and 0.00000018% of the climate history of the Earth.
So CLEARLY, OVERWHELMINGLY natural climate progression with a smidgeon of recent man-made thrown in.

[dtennent]

Since I am not a geologist, I would be interested how much of the change that you have noted is due to plate tectonics - the African plate moving into the Eurasian plate in the Mediterranean Sea.

( I forgot to add the quote showing the picture of rocks in the Mediterranean, sorry)

[golfing eagles]

Since I am not a geologist, I would be interested how much of the change that you have noted is due to plate tectonics - the African plate moving into the Eurasian plate in the Mediterranean Sea.

( I forgot to add the quote showing the picture of rocks in the Mediterranean, sorry)

No idea, but logically if the Eurasian and African plates were moving closer to each other, the width of the Mediterranean would narrow and raise the water level. Of course, plates move quite slowly (except in earthquakes, but that is a release of tension and not continental drift), and can be measure in millions of years, so 2,000 years, appears, at least empirically, to be too short a time frame.

[Stu from NYC]

Very interesting. And here is a graph ("https://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/us40c.jpg?w=768&h=462)that includes the ACTUAL hottest year ever recorded in the United States -- 1938.

Believe it or not, the word "ever" also includes about 4 billion years of history that occurred before we were even a gleam in our father's eye.

Before you condemn 7 billion people for poverty to adjust the thermostat to your liking, maybe you should try to explain why a year your parents would have remembered was hotter than any year you have experienced since Al Gore told you the world would end in 2017 due to "global warming".

Perhaps instead of saying we heard it on the internet it must be true, should say Al Gore said and it must be ______.:bigbow:

[golfing eagles]

Perhaps instead of saying we heard it on the internet it must be true, should say Al Gore said and it must be ______.:bigbow:

Isn't that the same thing, since he invented it???:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[dtennent]

No idea, but logically if the Eurasian and African plates were moving closer to each other, the width of the Mediterranean would narrow and raise the water level. Of course, plates move quite slowly (except in earthquakes, but that is a release of tension and not continental drift), and can be measure in millions of years, so 2,000 years, appears, at least empirically, to be too short a time frame.

You do realize that the Mediterranean Sea is connected to the Atlantic Ocean via the Straits of Gibraltar. Also, Mount Blanc in the Alps is 15,776 feet above sea level. Given that the Alps were also created by plate tectonics. This would mean that Mont Blanc would take about 1.5 million years o ties to that height if we use the apparent shift in land mass in your picture (20 ft in 2000 years). A change of 0.01 ft per year would be barely perceptible.

[golfing eagles]

You do realize that the Mediterranean Sea is connected to the Atlantic Ocean via the Straits of Gibraltar. Also, Mount Blanc in the Alps is 15,776 feet above sea level. Given that the Alps were also created by plate tectonics. This would mean that Mont Blanc would take about 1.5 million years o ties to that height if we use the apparent shift in land mass in your picture (20 ft in 2000 years). A change of 0.01 ft per year would be barely perceptible.

A 20 foot difference in ocean level is not created by land mass shifts, we are talking about global temperatures and the amount of water tied up in polar ice caps. I can't imagine continental drift plays a major role.

[frayedends]

Of the 50 or so climate alarmist predictions I've heard over my life, the number that have come to fruition is zero. I bought this house in Massachusetts on a small mountain expecting to sell it as waterfront property, and darnit if you wouldn't know it's still on a mountain.

[JP]

So if I turn up my thermostat and don't drive that's going to make an effect. Are you CRAZY. Look at the sheer number of people in India, China, Africa etc and they want to live like us so they are JUST STARTING to buy cars, get electricity, etc and do you think they are going to give that up....NOT. Plus, how do you know CO2 level increases are not from the huge amount of undersea volcanos? The climate may be changing but it always has and always will. Humans have always had to adapt to live besides the main problem with our planet right now is OVERPOPULATION. If we had half the people, everything would be fine.

[Bill14564]

A 20 foot difference in ocean level is not created by land mass shifts, we are talking about global temperatures and the amount of water tied up in polar ice caps. I can't imagine continental drift plays a major role.

I’ll post the link later to the study of Augusto’s Capri home that is now *under* 4.2m of water. It includes the statement that the Med has risen since Roman times. Or maybe the sea levels are different on opposite sides of the island.

[golfing eagles]

I’ll post the link later to the study of Augusto’s Capri home that is now *under* 4.2m of water. It includes the statement that the Med has risen since Roman times. Or maybe the sea levels are different on opposite sides of the island.

Or maybe pictures don't lie? Or maybe the local "expert" lacked expertise? Or maybe it doesn't matter since in 50,000 years we'll all be underwater anyway----note 50 THOUSAND years NOT 20, or 50 or 100

[Bill14564]

Or maybe pictures don't lie? Or maybe the local "expert" lacked expertise? Or maybe it doesn't matter since in 50,000 years we'll all be underwater anyway----note 50 THOUSAND years NOT 20, or 50 or 100

Fair enough.

Where I am it hasn’t rained in the last three days but still there is water in the streets near drainage grates. There is also a salt water flood warning for the rest of the day. Sea rise is affecting cities today, tens of thousands of years before the period some seem to be focused on.

[golfing eagles]

Fair enough.

Where I am it hasn’t rained in the last three days but still there is water in the streets near drainage grates. There is also a salt water flood warning for the rest of the day. Sea rise is affecting cities today, tens of thousands of years before the period some seem to be focused on.

Also fair enough. But there is a huge difference between a puddle in a city street and being under 400 feet of water. But then again, no one knows for certain what the "expected" sea rise will be. I suspect it is different in each of the dozen or more freeze/thaw cycles we've had over the last 4.5 million years.

[Topspinmo]

This graph (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/05/gobsmackingly-bananas-scientists-stunned-by-planets-record-september-heat?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQvoT18a7BtLfEARiHkZvZ7ve4joYBKhAIA CoHCAowwo6qCzDCmcID&utm_content=rundown) uses as a zero point the temperature average over a 30 year period from 1991 to 2020. Of course this was a period when temps were already moving upward as you can see looking at how no years prior to 2002 were warmer than that average. So when a person who regularly posts that we are in a cooling trend selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline, know you are being manipulated and lied to.

So how was your vacation?

[oldtimes]

Even if the whole climate issue is real I don't believe that the ridiculous measures that they are trying to mandate and going to make much difference. Why electric cars, which have their own issues, and appliances? Why not corporate jets and yachts and excessive mcmansions? Why do we take the hit while the super rich go unscathed? Published estimates of top billionaires' annual emissions in 2021 and found that a superyacht — with permanent crew, helicopter pad, submarines and pools — emits about 7,020 tons of carbon dioxide a year, over 1,500 times higher than a typical family car.

[frayedends]

Even if the whole climate issue is real I don't believe that the ridiculous measures that they are trying to mandate and going to make much difference. Why electric cars, which have their own issues, and appliances? Why not corporate jets and yachts and excessive mcmansions? Why do we take the hit while the super rich go unscathed? Published estimates of top billionaires' annual emissions in 2021 and found that a superyacht — with permanent crew, helicopter pad, submarines and pools — emits about 7,020 tons of carbon dioxide a year, over 1,500 times higher than a typical family car.

Follow the money. None of the climate alarmists have any actual solutions. The policies they propose line their pockets, steal from ours and don’t reduce pollution at all. No studies need to be read to see this plainly obvious fact.

[Battlebasset]

When the climate alarmists start hyperventilating, I just roll my eyes and walk away. There is nothing significant we can do, especially as well less than half the population of the world, to change the climate OF AN ENTIRE PLANET.

Should we work to reduce pollution? Absolutely, and the US, Western Europe, and Japan have led the way in this area since the 1970's. But CO2 is not pollution, it is a necessary component of life on earth.

Is the average temperature increasing? Perhaps. But all we can do is adapt to it. EV, solar, and wind will make little to no difference, anymore than washing my car makes it rain. And nuclear, which is zero emissions, also leads to hyperventilation of the same people. Who by the way, when you look at how they live their personal lives, gives no indication that they believe in what they say.

So I'm going to live my life as I see fit, and ignore the Chicken Littles. Gotta go watch the Bears lose now.

[JMintzer]

Fair enough.

Where I am it hasn’t rained in the last three days but still there is water in the streets near drainage grates. There is also a salt water flood warning for the rest of the day. Sea rise is affecting cities today, tens of thousands of years before the period some seem to be focused on.

Kent Island is sinking...

[bob47]

No idea, but logically if the Eurasian and African plates were moving closer to each other, the width of the Mediterranean would narrow and raise the water level. Of course, plates move quite slowly (except in earthquakes, but that is a release of tension and not continental drift), and can be measure in millions of years, so 2,000 years, appears, at least empirically, to be too short a time frame.

Since the Mediterranean Sea isn't a closed body of water, why would the level rise if it got narrower?

[Bill14564]

Kent Island is sinking...

Could be, wasn't aware. Affected by high levels more often but is not where I currently am. Guess that makes the effects even more widespread.

[blueash]

Can you provide a link to your information? Not sure but it seems like your information is pointed toward Europe, right? Interesting, but it also appears like you are attempting to debate your view against someone else's.

The very first couple words are your link, Note that per the routine on this website they are a different color. Click on it

[blueash]

Very interesting. And Here is a link that works (https://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/us40c.jpg?w=768&h=462]here is a graph [/URL]that includes the ACTUAL hottest year ever recorded in the United States -- 1938.

Believe it or not, the word "ever" also includes about 4 billion years of history that occurred before we were even a gleam in our father's eye.

Before you condemn 7 billion people for poverty to adjust the thermostat to your liking, maybe you should try to explain why a year your parents would have remembered was hotter than any year you have experienced since Al Gore told you the world would end in 2017 due to "global warming".

For starters your link is faulty. A simple Google search using "1938 was the hottest year in the US" gets to the truth as opposed to what you wrote. 1938 was a hot year in the US but not on a global scale.

[URL="https://skepticalscience.com/1934-hottest-year-on-record.htm) that will debunk your statement about it being the hottest year ever in the US and clarifying that global climate change means GLOBAL not just a local area.
Note that the data in the graph at this link only go to 2016. While the middle of the 1930s was exceptionally hot in the US and Canada this was a local phenomenon, part and parcel of the dust belt disaster. Interestingly the winters were brutally cold.

[blueash]

So how was your vacation?

Haven't been on a vacation. No idea what you might be suggesting.

[golfing eagles]

Since the Mediterranean Sea isn't a closed body of water, why would the level rise if it got narrower?

At one time I think it was closed. But that's irrelevant since continental drift is not a factor here

[Topspinmo]

Haven't been on a vacation. No idea what you might be suggesting.


Just haven’t seen you posting in a while.

[MrChip72]

Certainly matches my personal experience. I remember snowmobiling most weekends in the 70s, maybe one year in the early 80s, and rarely enough snow to cover the ground now. I also remember not even considering AC in the early 80s but now you can barely live without it.

Good luck with the deniers.

I treat the deniers the same as people with face/neck tattoos or orange spray tan treatments. Easy way to identify low IQ people.

[cjrjck]

I treat the deniers the same as people with face/neck tattoos or orange spray tan treatments. Easy way to identify low IQ people.

Let's just say that I am a skeptic, I may or may not be, but for the sake of argument let's assume I am. So what? Why is it important that I or anyone else believe you? What difference does it make? Just asking.

[BlueStarAirlines]

Let's just say that I am a skeptic, I may or may not be, but for the sake of argument let's assume I am. So what? Why is it important that I or anyone else believe you? What difference does it make? Just asking.

It has become like a religion for some people.

[Ski Bum]

Let's not forget that during past warm periods, the earth had the greatest amount of life and biodiversity. The planet was not some great sahara desert. Quite the contrary. That much moisture, unlocked into our atmosphere, caused prime conditions for life to thrive. The coldest periods come with the least amount of life.

[golfing eagles]

I treat the deniers the same as people with face/neck tattoos or orange spray tan treatments. Easy way to identify low IQ people.

Really?

First of all, we need to get the definitions straight:
The true "deniers" are those that lack the intellect or education to understand that the climate has been changing for billions of years, the most recent change is that we have been in an ICE AGE for the last 4.5 million years. They don't understand that during this time there have been repetitive cycles of glaciation and interglacial thaws over a dozen times. They don't understand that we are on the warming arm of these cycles, and that started about 19,000 years ago, WITH NO HELP FROM HUMANS. They don't understand that the #1 greenhouse gas is water vapor, not CO2. They have no understanding of paleoclimatology.

As far as identifying those with a low IQ,,,,,,,,,,,,

[golfing eagles]

It has become like a religion for some people.

More like a cult. Except those propagating it are likely to make a whole lot more profit than Jim Jones

[Softball77]

I'll believe in Global Warming when the proponents of global warming live their lives as if it is true. (Like stop flying your private jets to Davos to tell us to reduce our carbon footprint). Rules for thee, but not for me.

[roadrnnr]

That's fine----SO WHAT??????

8 year cooling trend, 30 year warming trend, 150 years of warming----SO WHAT. It means nothing in the last 4.5 million years of our current ICE AGE marked by 70-120,000 years of alternating periods of glaciation and interglacial thaws. Our current warming trend started about 19,000 years ago and will probably continue for the next 25-30,000 years. At the peak of warming, most of Florida will be gone and our coastal cities will be under 200-400 feet of water, AS IT HAS BEEN AT LEAST A DOZEN TIMES OVER THOSE 4.5 MILLION YEARS. And guess what? Fifty thousand year or so later, NYC will once again be covered by 2 miles of ice, AS IT HAS BEEN AT LEAST A DOZEN TIMES OVER THOSE 4.5 MILLION YEARS. And now for the harsh reality---none of that was influenced by any human (or humanoid) activity. NONE OF IT.

So, the climate change alarmists can go on spouting their garbage. Those few in the position to profit from all the hype will make $billions if not $trillions. The lemmings will march off and buy their EVs and put solar panels on their roofs. The media will continue to push this false narrative---and guess what again---none of it will make the slightest difference. We simply do not have the technology to challenge the power of the sun, Earth's orbit and precession of our axis.

And finally, as a promise to one who is constantly sounding the imminent disaster alarm, here is a picture. It was taken last month off the Isle of Capri in the Mediterranean (well actually, the Gulf of Naples) at high tide. The dark line along the cliff about 15-20 feet ABOVE the water (above the boat on the left, sorry about the resolution but it was hazy) is erosion from where the sea level was 2,000 years ago when Ceasar Augustus ruled. So much for ocean levels rising in the last 2,000 years, and at the current rate of rise we have quite a long time just to get back to the level of Roman times. Yes, we'll get there and hundreds of feet more, but not in the next decades, but in many millennia.

So Well Said

I am so sick of these Climate Cultist.

Nothing They propose will do anything to change the climate, only make everybody poorer chasing this ridiculous folly

[Rwirish]

Minus 108 wind chill in Antartica yesterday. Things are really warming up.

Take cover, the end is coming.

[banjobob]

I’m not a denier or a liar but if you think you can in anyway change the climate ,you are in a fantasy world. If the Hair on Fire about it crowd think humans are the cause then maybe India and China should do something about their massive pollution problems. This country has the strictest anti pollutions laws in the world.

[huge-pigeons]

Climate activists/climate so called scientists (like Al “know nothing” gore, or Greta “know even less than gore” Thunberg) have been pushing these “sky is falling” propagandas for 100 years. How many scare tactics do we need to hear/see before we just say all of this is BS?

For example, if it is true that 1938 was the warmest year, isn’t it a coincidence that the graph presented to us here started in 1940? We do have temperature records going back 100 years so the graph could be extended.

Just like prior posts on TOTV, why is it that these so called climate experts/activists claim we will be under water or even perished in a ten year timeframe? Predictions made decades ago about Miami/LA will be under water because of glacier thawing are simply not true but it doesn’t stop them for continuing their propaganda. Now we have around 6 years left before we perish if we don’t get rid of gas cars and all the farting cows!

[golfing eagles]

So Well Said

I am so sick of these Climate Cultist.

Nothing They propose will do anything to change the climate, only make everybody poorer chasing this ridiculous folly

Unfortunately, it's getting worse. How many corporations are now stating their "climate friendly pledge". Just their policy and thinking is blowing enough hot air to make global warming a self-fulfilling prophecy. Then add the hot air bloviation from the media. I'm afraid, that similar to the thousands of useless new positions in corporate America and academia that were artificially created for God knows what reason, we will see "Climate Change Officers" springing up all over the place. They will ensure compliance with the "climate change policy". Offer subsidies to those that buy EVs, bigger bonuses to those that walk to work, penalize those that "warm up" their car in 20 below weather conditions. Then the pendulum can swing even further so as to mandate living within walking distance of work, forcing business travel to be via train or bus. Mandatory training on how to reduce carbon footprints to zero. And all the time the climate change elite will be flying in private jets and taking out private yachts. Yep, the future is bright:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[TomPerry]

What’s the difference between Climate Change and Weather Cycles? How do you know the current trend is which? How much is attributed to nature and how much is human activity? What scientific repeatable data proves the amount contributed by human activity and the amount contributed by nature? How much climate change is based on consensus of “scientists”? Please answer these questions.

[derkster]

Thank you for your intelligent and factual rebuttal to the sheepies who go along with whatever the fake news and crooked government agencies put out as the narrative of the day.

[Bill14564]

I’m not a denier or a liar but if you think you can in anyway change the climate ,you are in a fantasy world. If the Hair on Fire about it crowd think humans are the cause then maybe India and China should do something about their massive pollution problems. This country has the strictest anti pollutions laws in the world.

You deny that man can impact climate change but somehow that doesn't make you a denier?

India and China feel that fighting poor living conditions and famine is more important right now. This was the subject of a long thread about a year ago. As we make progress towards greener power generation and transportation, they will be able to make use of it to solve their humanitarian problems while decreasing their pollution problems.

[derkster]

Wow, you captured the most significant 60 years in the history of the universe to shut us down. I can't believe I almost missed seeing the light.

[Bill14564]

What’s the difference between Climate Change and Weather Cycles? How do you know the current trend is which? How much is attributed to nature and how much is human activity? What scientific repeatable data proves the amount contributed by human activity and the amount contributed by nature? How much climate change is based on consensus of “scientists”? Please answer these questions.

There are many studies, graphs, discussions, lectures, and other publications that answer these questions. The information is readily available to any who are truly interested in the facts, the science behind the facts, and the data that supports the science.

[golfing eagles]

You deny that man can impact climate change but somehow that doesn't make you a denier?

Likewise, aren't those that dismiss the last 4.5 million years of paleoclimatology the true deniers????? Or, as that Joyce Bay whatever idiot on "The View" would say----"da--nye-ah"

[Eclas]

We are definitely in a warming trend for some time but if anyone thinks that we are the cause of it then they must be watching msnbc regularly.

[jackandbeth]

We are above the frost line so yes, we get colder nights. 1-2 frosts per year.

[M2inOR]

1. Important to differentiate climate change from pollution. We can do something to stop polluting the environment. We cannot do anything to stop climate change.

2. Human activity is not causing climate change. There are many other factors which are responsible:
a) geologic events like volcanic activity in the short term, and plate tectonics longer term
b) Earth's axis wobble changes the tilt along with its oval orbit around the sun, causing the Earth to be closer and farther away from the Sun.
c) celestial events like the great collisions from large meteors and/or comets over the Earth's history.

It's folly to think that humanity can stop climate change.

We will have better outcomes if we all learn how to adapt to that inevitable climate change, whether it's cooling or warming.

[spinner1001]

Oh, what to do about it? What to do?

Limit each person’s air flights to 4 per year like France? Have the government require every new vehicle sold after 2034 to be zero emission like California? Forced reduction of the human population with a limit of one natural child per couple like China (did), a la one branch of climate activists like Greta Thunberg, Time Magazine’s person of the year for 2019.

[Bill14564]

Also fair enough. But there is a huge difference between a puddle in a city street and being under 400 feet of water. But then again, no one knows for certain what the "expected" sea rise will be. I suspect it is different in each of the dozen or more freeze/thaw cycles we've had over the last 4.5 million years.

Likewise, aren't those that dismiss the last 4.5 million years of paleoclimatology the true deniers????? Or, as that Joyce Bay whatever idiot on "The View" would say----"da--nye-ah"

Dismissing the last 4.5M years as irrelevant is not denying that the climate, the geology, and many other things were different then. That was then, this is now. Things were different then, we are living now. What happened then did happen and presents a baseline to identify the deviation resulting from manmade causes.

Perhaps in 4.5M years the oceans will dry up - I will not be here to see it. Perhaps in 1M years my house would be under 400 feet of water without manmade climate change but again, I will not be here to see it. My concern is for the next 100 years.

To be clear, I could not care less about 400 feet of water over my house; the things that I care about are much, much smaller. I care about the water that comes up through the street drains at normal high tides. I worry more about the water that is now standing in the streets at the drains at low tides. I worry about the inches of water the homeowners in Shore Acres in St Petersburg drive though on a regular basis.

I could not care less about 400 feet above my house some million years in the future, I worry about the possibility of one inch of water driving people out of their homes in the next few decades.

[Blueblaze]

I treat the deniers the same as people with face/neck tattoos or orange spray tan treatments. Easy way to identify low IQ people.

Brilliant way to convince yourself that you've won the argument! In fact, it's exactly the same tactic my granddaughter uses to win every argument with her little bother -- just accuse your opponent of being a poopy-head!

Why bother to understand any pesky facts that might interfere with your own brilliant analysis of every situation? When you're always right, it's obvious that everyone else is just a poopy-head! So just remind them, and you've won!

[golfing eagles]

Dismissing the last 4.5M years as irrelevant is not denying that the climate, the geology, and many other things were different then. That was then, this is now. Things were different then, we are living now. What happened then did happen and presents a baseline to identify the deviation resulting from manmade causes.

Perhaps in 4.5M years the oceans will dry up - I will not be here to see it. Perhaps in 1M years my house would be under 400 feet of water without manmade climate change but again, I will not be here to see it. My concern is for the next 100 years.

To be clear, I could not care less about 400 feet of water over my house; the things that I care about are much, much smaller. I care about the water that comes up through the street drains at normal high tides. I worry more about the water that is now standing in the streets at the drains at low tides. I worry about the inches of water the homeowners in Shore Acres in St Petersburg drive though on a regular basis.

I could not care less about 400 feet above my house some million years in the future, I worry about the possibility of one inch of water driving people out of their homes in the next few decades.

It's good to hear that your concern is for the next 100 years. So, now you can sleep soundly since absolutely nothing significant with regards to climate is going to change in that time frame. Pleasant dreams.
Could you get an inch of water in your streets? Of course, that happens all the time---it's called WEATHER. Look at the flooding from Ian. But it has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with CLIMATE.

[oldtimes]

I'll believe in Global Warming when the proponents of global warming live their lives as if it is true. (Like stop flying your private jets to Davos to tell us to reduce our carbon footprint). Rules for thee, but not for me.

Exactly! Get your own house in order first.

[Bill14564]

It's good to hear that your concern is for the next 100 years. So, now you can sleep soundly since absolutely nothing significant with regards to climate is going to change in that time frame. Pleasant dreams.
Could you get an inch of water in your streets? Of course, that happens all the time---it's called WEATHER. Look at the flooding from Ian. But it has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with CLIMATE.

You don't seem to be paying attention. Perhaps I used too many words.

"blue sky" flooding is happening today and is on the rise.

Standing water in storm drains is happening today. You don't really think the streets were laid out knowing that they would constantly have water in them, do you?

The street flooding in Shore Acres (I know someone who lives there) during regular high tides has become worse over just the past five years.

All these have come to pass due to sea level rise. The rate of sea level rise has been shown to have increased due to manmade influences on climate change. Not weather and not hurricanes but an increasing rate of climate change. There is the reality, there is the science, there is the data, and yet there are still deniers.

[Jameson]

The MSM will guide us.

[Justputt]

This graph (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/05/gobsmackingly-bananas-scientists-stunned-by-planets-record-september-heat?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQvoT18a7BtLfEARiHkZvZ7ve4joYBKhAIA CoHCAowwo6qCzDCmcID&utm_content=rundown) uses as a zero point the temperature average over a 30 year period from 1991 to 2020. Of course this was a period when temps were already moving upward as you can see looking at how no years prior to 2002 were warmer than that average. So when a person who regularly posts that we are in a cooling trend selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline, know you are being manipulated and lied to.

The time period you're showing is insignificant. Last year we visited a park outside of Sedona, AZ that had a visitor center showing what the area was like a couple hundred million years ago. It was COASTAL WETLANDS!!! There are numerous ice core based graphs that show CO2 vs temperature and there are A LOT on disconnects lasting hundreds of thousands of years. I do believe in reducing ALL pollution and moving to cleaner energy, but this breakneck, break the bank, break traditional energy, etc. to rush down a road that isn't even paved is crazy!

[golfing eagles]

........

All these have come to pass due to sea level rise. The rate of sea level rise has been shown to have increased due to manmade influences on climate change. Not weather and not hurricanes but an increasing rate of climate change. There is the reality, there is the science, there is the data, and yet there are still deniers.

Yes, seas levels are rising. And yes, they will continue to rise. And yes, there will be more flooding. And yes, in about 50,-60,000 years half of Florida will be underwater. AS HAS BEEN THE CASE OVER A DOZEN TIMES IN THE LAST 4.5 MILLION YEARS. However, all of that has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with human activity. THAT is the science, THAT is the data, and yet there are still deniers. I understand the profit motives of those power brokers that are pushing the false narrative, I even understand the media complicity since they are chasing ratings. I even understand the uber-hypocrites that want to dictate a lifestyle to everyone else while they do as they please. What I fail to understand is how anyone can buy into this garbage. I do understand to a small degree our young people who buy this crap hook, line and sinker, since they are ignorant, inexperienced, yearn to find they own identity and want to join "a cause". But mature people with half a brain? I just don't get it.

[oldtimes]

You don't seem to be paying attention. Perhaps I used too many words.

"blue sky" flooding is happening today and is on the rise.

Standing water in storm drains is happening today. You don't really think the streets were laid out knowing that they would constantly have water in them, do you?

The street flooding in Shore Acres (I know someone who lives there) during regular high tides has become worse over just the past five years.

All these have come to pass due to sea level rise. The rate of sea level rise has been shown to have increased due to manmade influences on climate change. Not weather and not hurricanes but an increasing rate of climate change. There is the reality, there is the science, there is the data, and yet there are still deniers.

And again I will be more inclined to believe them when they get out of their ivory towers and lead by example.

[golfing eagles]

Oh, what to do about it? What to do?

Limit each person’s air flights to 4 per year like France? Have the government require every new vehicle sold after 2034 to be zero emission like California? Forced reduction of the human population with a limit of one natural child per couple like China (did), a la one branch of climate activists like Greta Thunberg, Time Magazine’s person of the year for 2019.

First of all, Time magazine's "Man of the Year" carries very little weight---after all, in 1938, they chose Adolf Hitler.

Now I do have to wonder if Greta is eating bugs like she wants the rest of us to do. If so, I would suggest dung beetles for her. But does anyone believe her??? Now, if Gandhi said he was eating bugs, I'd believe him--he had credibility. Greta, Al, Leonardo---not so much.

[golfing eagles]

And again I will be more inclined to believe them when they get out of their ivory towers and lead by example.

Even then, I wouldn't. It would only prove that they moved from deluding the public to deluding themselves as well.

[Marine1974]

I guess you don’t believe the earth was much warmer than now ? One of the warmest times was during the geologic period known as the Neoproterozoic, between 600 and 800 million years ago. Conditions were also frequently sweltering between 500 million and 250 million years ago but man survived. But believe it or not the earth atmosphere fixed itself without having to spend 55 trillion . . What a scam money grab and we have people who believe in this .
The CO2 in our atmosphere is .02 percent.. but , you can believe what you will I’m not buying it .what will you say when September of 2024 is cooler ? .

[Vermilion Villager]

That's fine----SO WHAT??????

8 year cooling trend, 30 year warming trend, 150 years of warming----SO WHAT. It means nothing in the last 4.5 million years of our current ICE AGE marked by 70-120,000 years of alternating periods of glaciation and interglacial thaws. Our current warming trend started about 19,000 years ago and will probably continue for the next 25-30,000 years. At the peak of warming, most of Florida will be gone and our coastal cities will be under 200-400 feet of water, AS IT HAS BEEN AT LEAST A DOZEN TIMES OVER THOSE 4.5 MILLION YEARS. And guess what? Fifty thousand year or so later, NYC will once again be covered by 2 miles of ice, AS IT HAS BEEN AT LEAST A DOZEN TIMES OVER THOSE 4.5 MILLION YEARS. And now for the harsh reality---none of that was influenced by any human (or humanoid) activity. NONE OF IT.

So, the climate change alarmists can go on spouting their garbage. Those few in the position to profit from all the hype will make $billions if not $trillions. The lemmings will march off and buy their EVs and put solar panels on their roofs. The media will continue to push this false narrative---and guess what again---none of it will make the slightest difference. We simply do not have the technology to challenge the power of the sun, Earth's orbit and precession of our axis.

And finally, as a promise to one who is constantly sounding the imminent disaster alarm, here is a picture. It was taken last month off the Isle of Capri in the Mediterranean (well actually, the Gulf of Naples) at high tide. The dark line along the cliff about 15-20 feet ABOVE the water (above the boat on the left, sorry about the resolution but it was hazy) is erosion from where the sea level was 2,000 years ago when Ceasar Augustus ruled. So much for ocean levels rising in the last 2,000 years, and at the current rate of rise we have quite a long time just to get back to the level of Roman times. Yes, we'll get there and hundreds of feet more, but not in the next decades, but in many millennia.
Yup... there you have it folks......one polaroid pic (of something?!?) disproves 1,000's of scientific analysis from around the globe....try harder. :mornincoffee:

[Ptmcbriz]

I think people are missing the point of climate change, regardless the cause. Humans should be good stewards of the earth and polluting it is not any form of being a good steward. From the studies I’ve seen the overall climate change is caused by Mother Nature, BUT our trends have accelerated since the industrial age. Humans can’t change Mother Nature but we definitely can influence the speed of it. We can compound the problem, and I would think people wouldn’t want to pollute the earth. Unfortunately, I see many attitudes of not caring because it won’t happen in their lifetime. Sad how mankind can be so short sided.

[Whitley]

Battle of the Bills and Blues.

[Whitley]

Perhaps instead of saying we heard it on the internet it must be true, should say Al Gore said and it must be ______.:bigbow:

He was right about manbearpig. I am being supercereal.

[golfing eagles]

Yup... there you have it folks......one polaroid pic (of something?!?) disproves 1,000's of scientific analysis from around the globe....try harder. :mornincoffee:

I don't have to try at all---the FACTS speak for themselves. But apparently there a large number of sheeple that are not drinking, but gulping down the false climate change agenda Kool-Aid by the tanker full. Amazing how easily some people can be misled by an aggressive media and internet campaign. They probably are the most susceptible to hypnosis as well. At least they can take some comfort from the fact that they are lining the pockets of those power brokers who are behind this false climate change agenda.

PS: Polaroid???? What??? Are you posting from 1955??????

[ChrisCarson]

A.I. will kill us all long before the climate becomes a factor.

[maistocars]

Amen Golfing Eagles! Where do these folks find the time? As mentioned above, they seem to be trying to convince themselves.

[Bill14564]

Yes, seas levels are rising. And yes, they will continue to rise. And yes, there will be more flooding. And yes, in about 50,-60,000 years half of Florida will be underwater. AS HAS BEEN THE CASE OVER A DOZEN TIMES IN THE LAST 4.5 MILLION YEARS. However, all of that has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with human activity. THAT is the science, THAT is the data, and yet there are still deniers. I understand the profit motives of those power brokers that are pushing the false narrative, I even understand the media complicity since they are chasing ratings. I even understand the uber-hypocrites that want to dictate a lifestyle to everyone else while they do as they please. What I fail to understand is how anyone can buy into this garbage. I do understand to a small degree our young people who buy this crap hook, line and sinker, since they are ignorant, inexperienced, yearn to find they own identity and want to join "a cause". But mature people with half a brain? I just don't get it.

Since your facts don't match those from the climatologists it seems you must have done tour own research.

[Whitley]

A 20 foot difference in ocean level is not created by land mass shifts, we are talking about global temperatures and the amount of water tied up in polar ice caps. I can't imagine continental drift plays a major role.

Sincere question. IF; Matter can neither be created nor destroyed; all of the H2O that has ever existed on planet Earth currently exists; Fill a glass of water and ice cubes to the brim and as the ice melts going from solid to liquid the level remains the same; then -Must we worry about rising seas from melting glaciers? Perhaps the melting of frozen snow/ice that covers land would lead to sea level rise. Does melting glaciers floating in the seas contribute to significant water level rise?

[golfing eagles]

Since your facts don't match those from the climatologists it seems you must have done tour own research.

Which climatologists are they??? The ones who work for the government whose jobs depend on them pushing the false narrative???? Or the ones at the Universities whose tenure, publications and grants are denied if the don't push this false agenda. Try seeing what retired climatologists and those that independent of outside influences have to say. Oh, I forgot, they are the ones that the climate change advocates have labelled "deniers" and "nut jobs".

[waterflower]

Research weather modification..Weather wars. H.A.A.R.P., chemtrails-USAF pilot patch. Weather is controlled.

[golfing eagles]

Sincere question. IF; Matter can neither be created nor destroyed; all of the H2O that has ever existed on planet Earth currently exists; Fill a glass of water and ice cubes to the brim and as the ice melts going from solid to liquid the level remains the same; then -Must we worry about rising seas from melting glaciers? Perhaps the melting of frozen snow/ice that covers land would lead to sea level rise. Does melting glaciers floating in the seas contribute to significant water level rise?

A little more complicated than that, but essentially makes the point. It is only ice that is on land and melts that will substantially increase ocean levels---ie: melting glaciers and ice on Antarctic land mass. There are about 130,000 known glaciers on Earth---some are melting, others are growing. For the next 30-50,000 years there will be much more melting, AS HAS BEEN THE CASE DOZENS OF TIMES IN THE LAST 4.5 MILLION YEARS, ALL WITHOUT HUMAN INFLENCE.

[mntlblok]

Kent Island is sinking...

Well, that's just great. Can't resist a possibly interesting rabbit hole, so wasted some googling time down this one. That "sinking" thing coulda been *really* interesting to learn about, but all I got was this article where "sinking" is merely a euphemism for alarmist levels of sea level rise in a ridiculously short period of time. RISING TIDES – Stevenson Villager (https://stevensonvillager.com/28165/features/rising-tides/)

And *now* learn that "Bill" isn't even currently living in Stevenson! :-) Also, it appears that I still have a bit to figure out about those "signature" listings of former places residence. Guess the lower the listing, the more recent - at least sometimes. I do now know that Victor, NY, apparently has nothing to do with any Kent Island. :-)

[Bwanajim]

That's fine----SO WHAT??????

8 year cooling trend, 30 year warming trend, 150 years of warming----SO WHAT. It means nothing in the last 4.5 million years of our current ICE AGE marked by 70-120,000 years of alternating periods of glaciation and interglacial thaws. Our current warming trend started about 19,000 years ago and will probably continue for the next 25-30,000 years. At the peak of warming, most of Florida will be gone and our coastal cities will be under 200-400 feet of water, AS IT HAS BEEN AT LEAST A DOZEN TIMES OVER THOSE 4.5 MILLION YEARS. And guess what? Fifty thousand year or so later, NYC will once again be covered by 2 miles of ice, AS IT HAS BEEN AT LEAST A DOZEN TIMES OVER THOSE 4.5 MILLION YEARS. And now for the harsh reality---none of that was influenced by any human (or humanoid) activity. NONE OF IT.

So, the climate change alarmists can go on spouting their garbage. Those few in the position to profit from all the hype will make $billions if not $trillions. The lemmings will march off and buy their EVs and put solar panels on their roofs. The media will continue to push this false narrative---and guess what again---none of it will make the slightest difference. We simply do not have the technology to challenge the power of the sun, Earth's orbit and precession of our axis.

And finally, as a promise to one who is constantly sounding the imminent disaster alarm, here is a picture. It was taken last month off the Isle of Capri in the Mediterranean (well actually, the Gulf of Naples) at high tide. The dark line along the cliff about 15-20 feet ABOVE the water (above the boat on the left, sorry about the resolution but it was hazy) is erosion from where the sea level was 2,000 years ago when Ceasar Augustus ruled. So much for ocean levels rising in the last 2,000 years, and at the current rate of rise we have quite a long time just to get back to the level of Roman times. Yes, we'll get there and hundreds of feet more, but not in the next decades, but in many millennia.

You are100% correct!! This hysteria over climate change is a joke. The planet has been changing temperature for millions of years.

The current official highest registered air temperature on Earth is 56.7 °C (134.1 °F), recorded on 10 July 1913 at Furnace Creek Ranch, in Death Valley in the United States.

[golfing eagles]

Well, that's just great. Can't resist a possibly interesting rabbit hole, so wasted some googling time down this one. That "sinking" thing coulda been *really* interesting to learn about, but all I got was this article where "sinking" is merely a euphemism for alarmist levels of sea level rise in a ridiculously short period of time. RISING TIDES – Stevenson Villager (https://stevensonvillager.com/28165/features/rising-tides/)

And *now* learn that "Bill" isn't even currently living in Stevenson! :-) Also, it appears that I still have a bit to figure out about those "signature" listings of former places residence. Guess the lower the listing, the more recent - at least sometimes. I do now know that Victor, NY, apparently has nothing to do with any Kent Island. :-)

Yes, But Victor is a nice suburb of Rochester, NY with really great nearby golf courses (Oak Hill, CC of Rochester, Cobblestone Creek to name a few)

[shut the front door]

Which climatologists are they??? The ones who work for the government whose jobs depend on them pushing the false narrative???? Or the ones at the Universities whose tenure, publications and grants are denied if the don't push this false agenda. Try seeing what retired climatologists and those that independent of outside influences have to say. Oh, I forgot, they are the ones that the climate change advocates have labelled "deniers" and "nut jobs".

https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/members/shut-the-front-door-115064/albums/pics/10311-scientists.png


Same applies to climatologists.

[Bwanajim]

This graph (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/05/gobsmackingly-bananas-scientists-stunned-by-planets-record-september-heat?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQvoT18a7BtLfEARiHkZvZ7ve4joYBKhAIA CoHCAowwo6qCzDCmcID&utm_content=rundown) uses as a zero point the temperature average over a 30 year period from 1991 to 2020. Of course this was a period when temps were already moving upward as you can see looking at how no years prior to 2002 were warmer than that average. So when a person who regularly posts that we are in a cooling trend selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline, know you are being manipulated and lied to.

Man-made climate change is just another attempt to get government control. Planets been warming or cooling for millions of years.! First, it was a coming Ice Age. They were started getting warmer. They called a global warming. Then, when I got a few years of cooling, they called a climate change to cover all the bases.
The current official highest registered air temperature on Earth is 56.7 °C (134.1 °F), recorded on 10 July 1913 at Furnace Creek Ranch, in Death Valley in the United States.
I don’t think they used much fossil fuels back then🙄🙄

[OhioBuckeye]

Does anyone there have Tankless Water Heaters that the builder’s put on the outside of house, if so don’t the owners worry about those heaters freezing & bursting. I want to know because a lot of residents had theirs burst. Not in Florida but other southern states have! Just curious!

[mntlblok]

You deny that man can impact climate change but somehow that doesn't make you a denier?

India and China feel that fighting poor living conditions and famine is more important right now. This was the subject of a long thread about a year ago. As we make progress towards greener power generation and transportation, they will be able to make use of it to solve their humanitarian problems while decreasing their pollution problems.

Might the term "denier" have picked up certain connotations within this realm? Bet you knew that. :-)

[Elixir34]

I agree that in the last few years, the world seems to be warming slightly. But “climate change“ is a Progressive political movement to gain power.

“There is no better subject to illustrate such a colossal deception in today’s world as “climate change“…

Every weather event, or natural disaster that causes discomfort, damage, or death is attributed to “climate change“, which in turn is said to require major changes in the quality of life, the capitalist system, a reduction in economic growth and prosperity, increase taxation and regulation, the surrender of national sovereignty to international governing organizations, and/or significant expanse of domestic government power. Indeed, every household product, from gas stoves, lightbulbs, and dishwashers to air conditioners, washing machines, automobiles, and anything else that uses energy, is now subject to government control.

“And since the time is said to be urgent, requiring instant and vast, federally directed change to save the future of humanity, there is virtually no time for reflection, circumspection, or scientific and factual evaluation of past predictions and their accuracy (actually, inaccuracy) and the direction in which the nation is being forcibly plunged”
~ Mark Levin ~

And this list of energy using devices and appliances to be regulated is now expanded to gas furnaces, ceiling fans and about three dozen more.

[ron32162]

There has always been a month or a day recorded as the hottest always. Also someone that's the tallest the shortest the fattest the longest day of the year. I'm sure there's someone that's the dumbest also. I bet you will really like the newest Guinness book of world records 2024 coming out soon !

[merrymini]

Propaganda is very effective. Like telling people they are responsible for climate change. They are responsible for pollution, which we can and should reduce. The next time someone tells you you can control the temperature fluctuations of the planet, go stand out in the middle of a tornado, that will tell you how much power we have over the forces of the earth. Good luck.

[oldtimes]

Propaganda is very effective. Like telling people they are responsible for climate change. They are responsible for pollution, which we can and should reduce. The next time someone tells you you can control the temperature fluctuations of the planet, go stand out in the middle of a tornado, that will tell you how much power we have over the forces of the earth. Good luck.

But we could have prevented the tornado if we had gone out and bought all new energy efficient appliances.

[bogmonster]

I treat the deniers the same as people with face/neck tattoos or orange spray tan treatments. Easy way to identify low IQ people.
I usually just look for ‘your’ people wearing masks

[Wondering]

And now they are calling for a record "COLDEST" winter due to El Nino. I moved to Florida to get away from cold weather and so far I have been surprised by some pretty cold nights during the "winter" months.
I think it's called Climate Change. Global warming will cause changes in the yearly climate. Do some legitimate fact checking and research and stop believing the propaganda noise networks!

[eyc234]

My time so far on this planet covers the whole of that graph.
It is obvious, whatever data is thrown up to the contrary, that over that period winters are no where near as cold.
The simple reason is, many plants now survive winters in the ground, which would not have done so over 20 years ago.
Gardens can tell you many things, as Nature does not take prisoners.

Man made? Natural climate progression? :shrug:

:bigbow: So true, the continued fight about the cause of climate change is useless and does nothing. Ask the people who are now seeing tornados where there use to be none, ask the people who had their lives destroyed by Ian, ask the people who have had their homes flooded multiple times, ask the people who have been catastrophically changed by fire, whether it is natural or man made. Pretty sure they do not care. Focus needs to be on how do we live better with these changes, from whatever cause, and do our best to mitigate damage to human lives and property. Was told all thru my career, do not come to me with problems, come to me with solutions of the problems.

[blueash]

I'll believe in Global Warming when the proponents of global warming live their lives as if it is true. (Like stop flying your private jets to Davos to tell us to reduce our carbon footprint). Rules for thee, but not for me.

I am sure you apply the same decision making to your view of religion. It is a very rare person who spouts their faith actually lives the tenets of that faith in each action they take. It is a very rare doctor who takes their own advice, it is a very rare cop who follows the law, it is a very rare politician who has ethics...

So your "believe in Global Warming" argument rejection must mean you reject medicine, religion, law enforcement.... or your argument is bogus.

Not even the most ardent rejectionist are now arguing there is no global warming event like they did a few years ago. Now the goalposts have moved and they accept that the planet is rapidly warming as there is now irrefutable evidence of that fact.

Instead it is now that humans play no role in that event or that it doesn't matter because it sure will be nice when it is warmer. You can see both of these arguments presented in this very thread. One person telling us that climate always changes, but ignoring that it does not change as rapidly as it is now without some major shift in the factors that control climate none of which have occurred other than humans burning fossil fuels and changing the amount of greenhouses gases.

Another poster telling us how wonderful hot earth will be because we will have such a nice diverse number of species.

Follow the money others pontificate... Yes, I am sure that those university adjuncts are rolling in cash now, way more that the profits of Exxon and Shell and BP an others, almost none of which is going to cleaning up or new investment or employee benefits. No those obscene profits are going into stock buy backs to increase the net worth of the CEOs and the 1% That is the money you need to be following. That is where the big bucks are.

I will await somebody posting how much those working on fixing the problem profited in 2022. And this is PROFIT not income.

[mntlblok]

Yes, But Victor is a nice suburb of Rochester, NY with really great nearby golf courses (Oak Hill, CC of Rochester, Cobblestone Creek to name a few)

Good to know, as I'll certainly never be visiting. Way too cold up yonder. All those northern NY places run together in my mind. Looks like they all lie along the Erie Canal, though, now that I check. Seems that area could certainly utilize a bunch of that free energy from global warming. Some adapting would seem to be easier - and more welcomed - than other adapting.

Whoa. Back up from *another* rabbit hole. Now know that RPI is nowhere near Rochester and that despite Troy being near Schenectady, it apparently has little historical connection to Westinghouse. Even had to go deep into this hole to come back up with Steinmetz's name - the Schenectady wizard who was so much fun to read about. :-)

[oldtimes]

I am sure you apply the same decision making to your view of religion. It is a very rare person who spouts their faith actually lives the tenets of that faith in each action they take. It is a very rare doctor who takes their own advice, it is a very rare cop who follows the law, it is a very rare politician who has ethics...

So your "believe in Global Warming" argument rejection must mean you reject medicine, religion, law enforcement.... or your argument is bogus.

Not even the most ardent rejectionist are now arguing there is no global warming event like they did a few years ago. Now the goalposts have moved and they accept that the planet is rapidly warming as there is now irrefutable evidence of that fact.

Instead it is now that humans play no role in that event or that it doesn't matter because it sure will be nice when it is warmer. You can see both of these arguments presented in this very thread. One person telling us that climate always changes, but ignoring that it does not change as rapidly as it is now without some major shift in the factors that control climate none of which have occurred other than humans burning fossil fuels and changing the amount of greenhouses gases.

Another poster telling us how wonderful hot earth will be because we will have such a nice diverse number of species.

Follow the money others pontificate... Yes, I am sure that those university adjuncts are rolling in cash now, way more that the profits of Exxon and Shell and BP an others, almost none of which is going to cleaning up or new investment or employee benefits. No those obscene profits are going into stock buy backs to increase the net worth of the CEOs and the 1% That is the money you need to be following. That is where the big bucks are.

I will await somebody posting how much those working on fixing the problem profited in 2022. And this is PROFIT not income.

There are 6 billion more people than there were a hundred years ago so yes humans are contributing to climate change. I just don’t believe the current proposed solutions have been well though out. Electric cars are built with toxic waste and require tens of thousands of gallons of water when they catch fire and the energy grid is no where near ready to handle them. How much energy is needed to produce new energy saving appliances and how do we deal with the old ones?We are simply trading one set of problems for another. All the while lining certain pockets with money.

[Escape Artist]

This graph (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/05/gobsmackingly-bananas-scientists-stunned-by-planets-record-september-heat?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQvoT18a7BtLfEARiHkZvZ7ve4joYBKhAIA CoHCAowwo6qCzDCmcID&utm_content=rundown) uses as a zero point the temperature average over a 30 year period from 1991 to 2020. Of course this was a period when temps were already moving upward as you can see looking at how no years prior to 2002 were warmer than that average. So when a person who regularly posts that we are in a cooling trend selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline, know you are being manipulated and lied to.

You don’t know hot, bubuleh! There’s always a breeze in Florida and if you want scorching hot you needed to go to the southwest in AZ or TX this past summer. This year it’s supposed to be cooler than average.That’s life!

[blueash]

You don’t know hot, bubuleh! There’s always a breeze in Florida and if you want scorching hot you needed to go to the southwest in AZ or TX this past summer. This year it’s supposed to be cooler than average.That’s life!

I always appreciate a well bestowed bubuleh

[golfing eagles]

There are 6 billion more people than there were a hundred years ago so yes humans are contributing to climate change. I just don’t believe the current proposed solutions have been well though out. Electric cars are built with toxic waste and require tens of thousands of gallons of water when they catch fire and the energy grid is no where near ready to handle them. How much energy is needed to produce new energy saving appliances and how do we deal with the old ones?We are simply trading one set of problems for another. All the while lining certain pockets with money.

You actually make a good point. With 6 billion more people, why is the emphasis on cow farts??? According to the USDA there are only 1 billion cows in the world, or about 1/8 of the human population. Are cow farts 8 times larger than human farts? Or are they even 8 times as stinky? Do they contain 8 times as much methane? Inquiring minds want to know :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[oldtimes]

You actually make a good point. With 6 billion more people, why is the emphasis on cow farts??? According to the USDA there are only 1 billion cows in the world, or about 1/8 of the human population. Are cow farts 8 times larger than human farts? Or are they even 8 times as stinky? Do they contain 8 times as much methane? Inquiring minds want to know :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

They are not honestly dealing with the problem, just throwing things out there to look like they are, all the while not impacting themselves.

[golfing eagles]

I am sure you apply the same decision making to your view of religion. It is a very rare person who spouts their faith actually lives the tenets of that faith in each action they take. It is a very rare doctor who takes their own advice, it is a very rare cop who follows the law, it is a very rare politician who has ethics...

So your "believe in Global Warming" argument rejection must mean you reject medicine, religion, law enforcement.... or your argument is bogus.

Not even the most ardent rejectionist are now arguing there is no global warming event like they did a few years ago. Now the goalposts have moved and they accept that the planet is rapidly warming as there is now irrefutable evidence of that fact.

Instead it is now that humans play no role in that event or that it doesn't matter because it sure will be nice when it is warmer. You can see both of these arguments presented in this very thread. One person telling us that climate always changes, but ignoring that it does not change as rapidly as it is now without some major shift in the factors that control climate none of which have occurred other than humans burning fossil fuels and changing the amount of greenhouses gases.

Another poster telling us how wonderful hot earth will be because we will have such a nice diverse number of species.

Follow the money others pontificate... Yes, I am sure that those university adjuncts are rolling in cash now, way more that the profits of Exxon and Shell and BP an others, almost none of which is going to cleaning up or new investment or employee benefits. No those obscene profits are going into stock buy backs to increase the net worth of the CEOs and the 1% That is the money you need to be following. That is where the big bucks are.

I will await somebody posting how much those working on fixing the problem profited in 2022. And this is PROFIT not income.

First of all, that $200 billion profit pales in comparison to the 130 TRILLION the alarmists want to spend to "combat" climate change.

Secondly, I've made it absolutely clear that we have had cycles of global warming and cooling over a dozen times in the last 4.5 million years, that's an undeniable FACT

I DID NOT state that since the industrial revolution humans have not accelerated the natural cycle of our current warming.

I DID STATE that 8 or 30 or 200 years of data, even if the data is accurate (which it is not by the way, only the last 50 years is reliable) is nowhere near enough of a time frame to draw ANY conclusions. It is impossible to extrapolate 100 years into a prediction of a 100,000 year cycle. Now, how much are humans contributing?? Well, it's not 0% and it's not 100%. Best estimates from unbiasedclimatologists is that it is negligible. The best statement I found from a retired, well respected climatologist was that at most human activity will delay the next period of glaciation by 5-10,000 years, and that is due to the rise of agriculture in Asia over the past 8,000 years, NOT 150 years of industrialization. Is he right??? WHO KNOWS? The answer is NOBODY KNOWS, since we just don't have data that extends over a long enough interval to make projections. But I'm willing to bet the life of my granddaughter that she will not drown due to so-called "climate change" in her lifetime, or even her grandchildren's. Perhaps 1500 generations down the line, perhaps 2500. But will our descendants 50,000 years from now resemble what we accept today as human??? After all, 50,000 years ago we were Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons.

[Blueblaze]

Does anyone there have Tankless Water Heaters that the builder’s put on the outside of house, if so don’t the owners worry about those heaters freezing & bursting. I want to know because a lot of residents had theirs burst. Not in Florida but other southern states have! Just curious!

The year I moved here, 2020, I spent closing day trying to keep my home from freezing on a 10 degree day that hadn't been seen in Houston in 50 years. Unlike Florida, in Houston ALL the plumbing is above ground -- because it never freezes in Houston, don't you know. So your plumbing enters your house from the outside street into your wall about a foot above ground, and goes into the attic, where your hot water tank is located.

And get this -- the "Oil Capital of the World" is powered by a nuclear reactor, that can't survive a 10 degree day because the cooling water comes from a shallow pond! So they shut down the power on 5 million people, and over a million homes were flooded a couple of days later, when their broken ceiling pipes thawed.

Damn that global warming!

But here's the good news -- even in Houston, my insurance was half the cost to insure the same size house (that survived three cat-5 hurricanes unharmed), the exact same distance from the ocean in The Villages!

[spinner1001]

This thread now has over 100 posts. I believe roughly 90% of them are arguments over whether climate change exists or is it a serious global problem. But I don’t believe anyone on this thread or anywhere else has offered a **practical** solution to ‘fix’ climate change in a democratic way. Almost none of us want a totalitarian state like China to require us to follow draconian actions such as only one natural child per couple or preventing a person from flying more than 4 times over their life.

A practical fix is not ‘we can start by [eating bugs or whatever]’. That is not a serious proposal. For those believing that climate change is a serious global problem and needs to be fixed, what is the **practical** fix that moves the needle rather than only good intentions or an action without serious negative consequences? Anyone with a serious fix?

[Byte1]

You don't seem to be paying attention. Perhaps I used too many words.

"blue sky" flooding is happening today and is on the rise.

Standing water in storm drains is happening today. You don't really think the streets were laid out knowing that they would constantly have water in them, do you?

The street flooding in Shore Acres (I know someone who lives there) during regular high tides has become worse over just the past five years.

All these have come to pass due to sea level rise. The rate of sea level rise has been shown to have increased due to manmade influences on climate change. Not weather and not hurricanes but an increasing rate of climate change. There is the reality, there is the science, there is the data, and yet there are still deniers.

If street flooding is the issue, lets use your idea and make an immediate change. ELIMINATE streets! If you are worried that your home is going to flood, then move to higher ground. The weather is going to change and it is going to rain or snow or get hot and dry, whether you stop using fossil fuels or quit eating beef. Remember, you can't change the weather but you CAN change where you live so you won't see street flooding. I've lived through several hurricanes here and my street has yet to flood. We have storm drains.
Regarding "deniers" it seems like you are admitting to being a "denier" because you are denying the science that others are producing to substantiate their view. Why in the world would you demand that other folks "don't listen" to opposing views? Isn't that a form of science? Or, is science where you ignore facts/results that do not support ones agenda?
Personally, I try to do my part in reducing air pollution when possible. I am not about to make believe that I am GOD and that I can influence the changing climate. Perhaps, if someone tells every person in the world to open their windows and crank up their A/C we can cool off the planet? Is that a means of man made climate change?

[Bill14564]

If street flooding is the issue, lets use your idea and make an immediate change. ELIMINATE streets! If you are worried that your home is going to flood, then move to higher ground. The weather is going to change and it is going to rain or snow or get hot and dry, whether you stop using fossil fuels or quit eating beef. Remember, you can't change the weather but you CAN change where you live so you won't see street flooding. I've lived through several hurricanes here and my street has yet to flood. We have storm drains.
Regarding "deniers" it seems like you are admitting to being a "denier" because you are denying the science that others are producing to substantiate their view. Why in the world would you demand that other folks "don't listen" to opposing views? Isn't that a form of science? Or, is science where you ignore facts/results that do not support ones agenda?
Personally, I try to do my part in reducing air pollution when possible. I am not about to make believe that I am GOD and that I can influence the changing climate. Perhaps, if someone tells every person in the world to open their windows and crank up their A/C we can cool off the planet? Is that a means of man made climate change?

Where? Where was there any science showing humans have no influence on climate change? ALL I have seen is denials and the occasional frustratingly-bad attempt at data analysis.

[rsimpson]

Brilliant, Eagles....

[montysl]

It is always easy to use specific subsets of data to prove a predetermined and desired outcome. It is much tougher to look at ALL the data available and attempt to prove the same point. The data available is now representative of MILLENNIA of “climate change” and the cyclical nature of the Earth’s climate. Maybe it would also help to understand the Earth’s orbit around the sun is ELIPTICAL and not a circle! The dimensions and the Earth’s proximity to the sun CHANGES over those millennia, thus causing cycles of cooling and warming. Now that is not to say humans might not be contributing a tiny bit to the symptoms of the much larger issue, but given the history of the Earth to this point, and the inevitability of the cycles continuing, the vast majority of what is happening would happen with, or without us. It might also help to realize that it is HIGHLY profitable to pretend you have developed the flavor of snake oil that will prevent the sky from falling. You just have to convince a LOT of people it IS falling!

[cjrjck]

There is the reality, there is the science, there is the data, and yet there are still deniers.

I asked this same question earlier so I will try again. For the sake of conversation, call me skeptic. Why does that bother you so much? I respect your right to believe anything about any subject, even if I disagree with you on some issues. It's really none of my business otherwise. Yet for some reason I can't understand, when it comes to this issue, bringing skeptics into the "fold" seems to be a paramount concern for many of the "true believers". Why?

[dougjb]

Ever wonder why the deniers cannot provide a single peer review science article supporting their position?

Ever wonder why there are literally thousands and thousands of articles supporting climate change...and how humans are impacting climate change.

The true deniers generally say its a conspiracy. No one will publish their articles. But, maybe because there is absolutely no science backing the denier's claims? Deniers will point to the fact that some will make money...maybe a lot of money on readjusting our way of doing things. But, that is not an argument against the fact that humans are adversely impacting climate change.

When the deniers start coming up with peer reviewed articles, then maybe we should listen to them. Until then, they are merely charlatans. Moreover, the charlatan deniers we have here in The Villages don't even hold degrees in climatology. One is a weatherman (you know...the type that got today's rain forecast wrong...again), another presumably holds a doctorate...in some unidentified field. Yet, these guys continue to give talks and get all irate when asked for even a single peer review article to back their claims. Peer review science articles are the gold standard in science. What these guys do is merely retell their opinion...over and over and over again. Repetition does not provice any basis for adhering to their points of view.

[golfing eagles]

Ever wonder why the deniers cannot provide a single peer review science article supporting their position?

Ever wonder why there are literally thousands and thousands of articles supporting climate change...and how humans are impacting climate change.

The true deniers generally say its a conspiracy. No one will publish their articles. But, maybe because there is absolutely no science backing the denier's claims? Deniers will point to the fact that some will make money...maybe a lot of money on readjusting our way of doing things. But, that is not an argument against the fact that humans are adversely impacting climate change.

When the deniers start coming up with peer reviewed articles, then maybe we should listen to them. Until then, they are merely charlatans. Moreover, the charlatan deniers we have here in The Villages don't even hold degrees in climatology. One is a weatherman (you know...the type that got today's rain forecast wrong...again), another presumably holds a doctorate...in some unidentified field. Yet, these guys continue to give talks and get all irate when asked for even a single peer review article to back their claims. Peer review science articles are the gold standard in science. What these guys do is merely retell their opinion...over and over and over again. Repetition does not provice any basis for adhering to their points of view.

Amazing. This has been explained by myself and others multiple times. I guess some things take longer to sink in than others.

First, the "deniers" are those that ignore the last 4.5 million years of climatology and instead embrace this false narrative of "climate change" being shoved down our throats by the media and government policies, all designed to spend up to 130 trillion on a fool's errand that will enrich very few.

Secondly, it does not require a "conspiracy", it only requires knowing which side your bread is buttered on. If you lived in N Korea and "dear leader" said the sky is yellow, you would also state the sky is yellow. If you are a climatologist at a university or working in government and your livelihood depends on grants and tenure, you know better than to oppose the false climate change agenda.

Third, where did anyone get "irate"?

And lastly, rather than cite a few articles, here is the opinion of 500 respected climatologists and scientists:

"The video above is from Friends of Science, a Canada-based “non-profit organization run by dedicated volunteers comprised mainly of active and retired earth and atmospheric scientists, engineers, and other professionals.” On the same day last week that Greta Thunberg made an impassioned speech to the United Nations about her fears of a climate emergency, a group of 500 prominent scientists and professionals, led by the CLINTEL co-founder Guus Berkhout, sent this registered letter to the United Nations Secretary-General stating that there is no climate emergency and climate policies should be designed to benefit the lives of people. Here’s the press release, here’ the list of 500 signees, and here’s the opening of the letter:

A global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have the honor to address to Your Excellencies the attached European Climate Declaration, for which the signatories to this letter are the national ambassadors. The general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is at present founded are unfit for their purpose.

Therefore, it is cruel as well as imprudent to advocate the squandering of trillions of dollars on the basis of results from such immature models. Current climate policies pointlessly and grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, reliable electrical energy. We urge you to follow a climate policy based on sound science, realistic economics and genuine concern for those harmed by costly but unnecessary attempts at mitigation

Here are the specific points about climate change highlighted in the letter:

1 Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming.
2. Warming is far slower than predicted.
3. Climate policy relies on inadequate models.
4. CO2 is not a pollutant. It is a plant food that is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.
5. Global warming has not increased natural disasters.
6. Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities.
7. There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic.


MP: What about that “consensus” and “settled science” about climate change we always hear about? How can there be a consensus when there’s a global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields who challenge the “settled science”?

Actually, challenging the consensus among the scientific community is nothing new, but those the voices of those challenging the consensus are always drowned out by the tsunami of climate hysteria from the climate alarmists. For example, in 2012 a group of more than 125 scientists sent an open letter to the United Nations warning that scientific evidence refuted UN Secretary-General’s Ban Ki-Moon repeated assertions on weather and climate. Those warnings of climate hysteria unsupported by the scientific evidence were ignored in 2012, just like the letter from the 500 prominent scientists and professionals will be ignored in 2019. In other words, it’s “deja vu all over again.”

[sounding]

This graph (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/05/gobsmackingly-bananas-scientists-stunned-by-planets-record-september-heat?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQvoT18a7BtLfEARiHkZvZ7ve4joYBKhAIA CoHCAowwo6qCzDCmcID&utm_content=rundown) uses as a zero point the temperature average over a 30 year period from 1991 to 2020. Of course this was a period when temps were already moving upward as you can see looking at how no years prior to 2002 were warmer than that average. So when a person who regularly posts that we are in a cooling trend selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline, know you are being manipulated and lied to.

ERA5 is modeled data which contains uncertainties and huge gaps in data void areas - which are filled in as fabricated data. On the other hand, here is the raw (observed) unaltered U.S. data, clearly showing no climate crisis - just an alarmism crisis.

[sounding]

Certainly matches my personal experience. I remember snowmobiling most weekends in the 70s, maybe one year in the early 80s, and rarely enough snow to cover the ground now. I also remember not even considering AC in the early 80s but now you can barely live without it.

Good luck with the deniers.

The AMO Index (see atch image) explains most of the climate felt in eastern U.S. - and explains why it snowed in Miami in 1977 and not today. This and more was discussed in detail in the Weather Club's "How the Oceans Influence Our Weather." CO2 just makes plants grow better.

[sounding]

Amazing. This has been explained by myself and others multiple times. I guess some things take longer to sink in than others.

First, the "deniers" are those that ignore the last 4.5 million years of climatology and instead embrace this false narrative of "climate change" being shoved down our throats by the media and government policies, all designed to spend up to 130 trillion on a fool's errand that will enrich very few.

Secondly, it does not require a "conspiracy", it only requires knowing which side your bread is buttered on. If you lived in N Korea and "dear leader" said the sky is yellow, you would also state the sky is yellow. If you are a climatologist at a university or working in government and your livelihood depends on grants and tenure, you know better than to oppose the false climate change agenda.

Third, where did anyone get "irate"?

And lastly, rather than cite a few articles, here is the opinion of 500 respected climatologists and scientists:

"The video above is from Friends of Science, a Canada-based “non-profit organization run by dedicated volunteers comprised mainly of active and retired earth and atmospheric scientists, engineers, and other professionals.” On the same day last week that Greta Thunberg made an impassioned speech to the United Nations about her fears of a climate emergency, a group of 500 prominent scientists and professionals, led by the CLINTEL co-founder Guus Berkhout, sent this registered letter to the United Nations Secretary-General stating that there is no climate emergency and climate policies should be designed to benefit the lives of people. Here’s the press release, here’ the list of 500 signees, and here’s the opening of the letter:

A global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have the honor to address to Your Excellencies the attached European Climate Declaration, for which the signatories to this letter are the national ambassadors. The general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is at present founded are unfit for their purpose.

Therefore, it is cruel as well as imprudent to advocate the squandering of trillions of dollars on the basis of results from such immature models. Current climate policies pointlessly and grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, reliable electrical energy. We urge you to follow a climate policy based on sound science, realistic economics and genuine concern for those harmed by costly but unnecessary attempts at mitigation

Here are the specific points about climate change highlighted in the letter:

1 Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming.
2. Warming is far slower than predicted.
3. Climate policy relies on inadequate models.
4. CO2 is not a pollutant. It is a plant food that is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.
5. Global warming has not increased natural disasters.
6. Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities.
7. There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic.


MP: What about that “consensus” and “settled science” about climate change we always hear about? How can there be a consensus when there’s a global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields who challenge the “settled science”?

Actually, challenging the consensus among the scientific community is nothing new, but those the voices of those challenging the consensus are always drowned out by the tsunami of climate hysteria from the climate alarmists. For example, in 2012 a group of more than 125 scientists sent an open letter to the United Nations warning that scientific evidence refuted UN Secretary-General’s Ban Ki-Moon repeated assertions on weather and climate. Those warnings of climate hysteria unsupported by the scientific evidence were ignored in 2012, just like the letter from the 500 prominent scientists and professionals will be ignored in 2019. In other words, it’s “deja vu all over again.”

Excellent post. CLINTEL's Declaration now has 1608 signatures (where 2 are Nobel Prize winners in Physics). I encourage others to also sign - stating there is no climate emergency. Here is the CLINTEL signatory application ... World Climate Declaration Form - Clintel (https://clintel.org/world-climate-declaration-form/)

[golfing eagles]

Excellent post. CLINTEL's Declaration now has 1608 signatures (where 2 are Nobel Prize winners in Physics). I encourage others to also sign - stating there is no climate emergency. Here is the CLINTEL signatory application ... World Climate Declaration Form - Clintel (https://clintel.org/world-climate-declaration-form/)

But don't Greta, Al and Leonardo also have Nobel prizes in a scientific discipline???:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[sounding]

Ever wonder why the deniers cannot provide a single peer review science article supporting their position?

Ever wonder why there are literally thousands and thousands of articles supporting climate change...and how humans are impacting climate change.

The true deniers generally say its a conspiracy. No one will publish their articles. But, maybe because there is absolutely no science backing the denier's claims? Deniers will point to the fact that some will make money...maybe a lot of money on readjusting our way of doing things. But, that is not an argument against the fact that humans are adversely impacting climate change.

When the deniers start coming up with peer reviewed articles, then maybe we should listen to them. Until then, they are merely charlatans. Moreover, the charlatan deniers we have here in The Villages don't even hold degrees in climatology. One is a weatherman (you know...the type that got today's rain forecast wrong...again), another presumably holds a doctorate...in some unidentified field. Yet, these guys continue to give talks and get all irate when asked for even a single peer review article to back their claims. Peer review science articles are the gold standard in science. What these guys do is merely retell their opinion...over and over and over again. Repetition does not provice any basis for adhering to their points of view.

Deniers don't have to prove anything. In a civil society, the accuser has the burden of proof. Those who believe man is causing global warming must be able to say how much man-made CO2 has warmed the earth last year ... and -- prove it with your peer-reviewed study.

[twoplanekid]

To fulfill our pubic duty to protect our customers, staff was asked about Potential Impact of Climate Change on Water Utilities

Bruce Brown responded ->

The following is being forwarded to the Board at the request of Bruce Brown…



Board of Supervisors,

At a recent board meeting, a Board Supervisor asked if our Utility Engineers are engaged with our local and national partners in regard to the evaluation of the potential impacts of Climate Change on our Utility Systems/Operations, and if we had completed any internal assessments. Vikus Water monitors the climate change issue, studies, and literature on our behalf; however, they have only minor concerns about utility impacts within our capital planning periods. A summary from Vikus Water is outlined below:

Sea Level Rise/Storm Surge: Because of our location, the utilities will not have issues with sea rise for the foreseeable future.


Water Source: Municipalities most concerned about climate change are those that use surface water. NSCUDD system uses Lower Florida wells (old aquifers) ground water that won’t be affected by seasonal drought conditions.


Severe Weather (Flooding or Droughts):


o Hurricanes: Additional storms could cause electrical outages. However, the treatment plants have onsite backup power, meet class I reliability and most of the electrical grid is below ground, making it more robust. The storm systems have proven reliability to handle intense storm events.



o Drought: If drought conditions were experienced, the water conservation (irrigation systems) would lose much of the source water (stormwater) and would require more use of the wells and groundwater.



Temperature: Moderate temperature increases should not have an impact on ability to treat water or wastewater.


In discussion with SWFWMD, their primary focus on climate change initiatives appears to be concentrated on coastal regions, which is a rational approach, given the pressing issue of rising sea levels and the potential repercussions for coastal communities. The increased risk of intensified storms also holds greater relevance for coastal areas. See link Sea Level Rise and Resiliency | WaterMatters.org (https://www.swfwmd.state.fl.us/projects/sea-level-rise-and-resiliency). Vikus Water are members of AWWA and FWRC, they have published recent articles primarily deal with rising sea levels and source water issues, which are attached.



We (District Utilities, Vikus Water & Jacobs) do exchange both data and information with SWFMWD and SJWMD. They are actively engaged in conducting research and computer modeling to better predict and reduce uncertainties, analyze vulnerabilities in the current water management system and develop effective adaption strategies for the future; which are shared amongst all Utilities in the State of Florida.



Likewise, numerous studies of the potential impact of Climate Change on Water Utilities have been completed by United States Environmental Protection Agency, & Environmental Defense Fund.
Links are below:



Climate Impacts on Water Utilities | US EPA
Climate Impacts on Water Utilities | US EPA (https://www.epa.gov/arc-x/climate-impacts-water-utilities)



Ch03-Obey.pdf (floridaclimateinstitute.org)
https://floridaclimateinstitute.org/docs/climatebook/Ch03-Obey.pdf



water_managment.pdf (fau.edu)
https://www.ces.fau.edu/publications/pdfs/water_managment.pdf


Climate Adaptation and Water Utility Operations | US EPA
Climate Adaptation and Water Utility Operations | US EPA (https://www.epa.gov/arc-x/climate-adaptation-and-water-utility-operations)


Our next NSCUDD board meeting will be this coming Monday at 3PM at SeaBreeze Rec Center and I will be the chair for this meeting.

[blueash]

Amazing. This has been explained by myself and others multiple times. I guess some things take longer to sink in than others.

First, the "deniers" are those that ignore the last 4.5 million years of climatology and instead embrace this false narrative of "climate change" being shoved down our throats by the media and government policies, all designed to spend up to 130 trillion on a fool's errand that will enrich very few.

Secondly, it does not require a "conspiracy", it only requires knowing which side your bread is buttered on. If you lived in N Korea and "dear leader" said the sky is yellow, you would also state the sky is yellow. If you are a climatologist at a university or working in government and your livelihood depends on grants and tenure, you know better than to oppose the false climate change agenda.

Third, where did anyone get "irate"?

And lastly, rather than cite a few articles, here is the opinion of 500 respected climatologists and scientists:

"The video above is from Friends of Science, a Canada-based “non-profit organization run by dedicated volunteers comprised mainly of active and retired earth and atmospheric scientists, engineers, and other professionals.” On the same day last week that Greta Thunberg made an impassioned speech to the United Nations about her fears of a climate emergency, a group of 500 prominent scientists and professionals, led by the CLINTEL co-founder Guus Berkhout, sent this registered letter to the United Nations Secretary-General stating that there is no climate emergency and climate policies should be designed to benefit the lives of people. Here’s the press release, here’ the list of 500 signees, and here’s the opening of the letter:

A global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have the honor to address to Your Excellencies the attached European Climate Declaration, for which the signatories to this letter are the national ambassadors. The general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is at present founded are unfit for their purpose.

Therefore, it is cruel as well as imprudent to advocate the squandering of trillions of dollars on the basis of results from such immature models. Current climate policies pointlessly and grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, reliable electrical energy. We urge you to follow a climate policy based on sound science, realistic economics and genuine concern for those harmed by costly but unnecessary attempts at mitigation

Here are the specific points about climate change highlighted in the letter:

1 Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming.
2. Warming is far slower than predicted.
3. Climate policy relies on inadequate models.
4. CO2 is not a pollutant. It is a plant food that is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.
5. Global warming has not increased natural disasters.
6. Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities.
7. There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic.


Would you like me to find 500 vaccine Covid deniers who are active or retired doctors? Would you find their videos convincing and say that the science is not well founded and that the vaccines were not well designed? Were the models "inadequate" Is Covid a "blessing" I cannot imagine any scientist citing "blessing" as an explanation for a science opinion.

The overwhelming number of people working on climate are on one side of the divide. A few are on the other. You get so upset and get very snarky about non MD on this thread claiming any expertise in medicine yet here you are, no background in climate yet you have the gall to do exactly what the Covid vaccine skeptics did and you soundly condemned them.

You have your mind made up, use the "shoving it down our throats" image, claim it is all a conspiracy of brain washed fools in it for the money. Their Big Pharma is your Big Climate.

And no, another lecture from you about the Pleistocene era does not ring any useful bells here. At least you have finally admitted that global warming is real. And that humans have an affect on what is happening.

The above statement that C02 is not a concern according to your experts is so bizarre that you should have immediately discarded their letter as junk science. Ask the planet Venus about C02. I certainly would call a byproduct of burning fossil fuels a pollutant.

If anyone wants to read the truth about C02 here is a useful website debunking t (https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/02/25/carbon-dioxide-cause-global-warming/)he bunk being spread above.

As to whether climate models have been accurate in their prediction of future temperatures.. just google that question. NASA has a lovely set of graphs you can see (https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2943/study-confirms-climate-models-are-getting-future-warming-projections-right/#:~:text=How%20reliable%20have%20they%20been,model s%20have%20been%20quite%20accurate.) Or maybe NASA and Columbia and Harvard and Japan and England and Australia etc etc are all part of the climate cabal that taught the Covid cabal everything about righteous argle bargle

[golfing eagles]

Would you like me to find 500 vaccine Covid deniers who are active or retired doctors? Would you find their videos convincing and say that the science is not well founded and that the vaccines were not well designed? Were the models "inadequate" Is Covid a "blessing" I cannot imagine any scientist citing "blessing" as an explanation for a science opinion.

The overwhelming number of people working on climate are on one side of the divide. A few are on the other. You get so upset and get very snarky about non MD on this thread claiming any expertise in medicine yet here you are, no background in climate yet you have the gall to do exactly what the Covid vaccine skeptics did and you soundly condemned them.

You have your mind made up, use the "shoving it down our throats" image, claim it is all a conspiracy of brain washed fools in it for the money. Their Big Pharma is your Big Climate.

And no, another lecture from you about the Pleistocene era does not ring any useful bells here. At least you have finally admitted that global warming is real. And that humans have an affect on what is happening.

The above statement that C02 is not a concern according to your experts is so bizarre that you should have immediately discarded their letter as junk science. Ask the planet Venus about C02. I certainly would call a byproduct of burning fossil fuels a pollutant.

If anyone wants to read the truth about C02 here is a useful website debunking t (https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/02/25/carbon-dioxide-cause-global-warming/)he bunk being spread above.

As to whether climate models have been accurate in their prediction of future temperatures.. just google that question. NASA has a lovely set of graphs you can see (https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2943/study-confirms-climate-models-are-getting-future-warming-projections-right/#:~:text=How%20reliable%20have%20they%20been,model s%20have%20been%20quite%20accurate.) Or maybe NASA and Columbia and Harvard and Japan and England and Australia etc etc are all part of the climate cabal that taught the Covid cabal everything about righteous argle bargle

Please tell me you are not serious about comparing Earth with Venus. Apples and oranges. And I'm sorry that the climatological history of the past 4.5 million years, which explains why we are currently warming doesn't "ring your bell" And you know damn well about amateur physicians spouting out garbage---I don't think you identify with them. And "big pharma" was not something I ever embraced, and I suspect you didn't either. And I never claimed to be a climate expert, although I do have more background in paleoclimatology than most on this site.

As fat as the "graphs" go, as a scientist, you know 80 years is nowhere near enough data to extrapolate to 100,00 years. All along this has been my point----that NOBODY knows if and to what extent human activity is altering the trajectory of an already established natural climate cycle. The data has not been collected for long enough. Yes, the alarmists may be right, the so-called "deniers" may be right, or the truth most likely is somewhere in the middle. And just switching to EVs is unlikely to have any impact whatsoever.

I know we have been on opposite sides of some issues, but why the hostility??

[sounding]

Would you like me to find 500 vaccine Covid deniers who are active or retired doctors? Would you find their videos convincing and say that the science is not well founded and that the vaccines were not well designed? Were the models "inadequate" Is Covid a "blessing" I cannot imagine any scientist citing "blessing" as an explanation for a science opinion.

The overwhelming number of people working on climate are on one side of the divide. A few are on the other. You get so upset and get very snarky about non MD on this thread claiming any expertise in medicine yet here you are, no background in climate yet you have the gall to do exactly what the Covid vaccine skeptics did and you soundly condemned them.

You have your mind made up, use the "shoving it down our throats" image, claim it is all a conspiracy of brain washed fools in it for the money. Their Big Pharma is your Big Climate.

And no, another lecture from you about the Pleistocene era does not ring any useful bells here. At least you have finally admitted that global warming is real. And that humans have an affect on what is happening.

The above statement that C02 is not a concern according to your experts is so bizarre that you should have immediately discarded their letter as junk science. Ask the planet Venus about C02. I certainly would call a byproduct of burning fossil fuels a pollutant.

If anyone wants to read the truth about C02 here is a useful website debunking t (https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/02/25/carbon-dioxide-cause-global-warming/)he bunk being spread above.

As to whether climate models have been accurate in their prediction of future temperatures.. just google that question. NASA has a lovely set of graphs you can see (https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2943/study-confirms-climate-models-are-getting-future-warming-projections-right/#:~:text=How%20reliable%20have%20they%20been,model s%20have%20been%20quite%20accurate.) Or maybe NASA and Columbia and Harvard and Japan and England and Australia etc etc are all part of the climate cabal that taught the Covid cabal everything about righteous argle bargle

Those that go down the Venus/CO2 rabbit hole are unaware of the ideal gas law (PV=nRT) which applies to all planets - except Carl Sagan's brain. This was explained in detail at the Weather Club's talk call "Carl Sagan and his Runaway Greenhouse Theory" which fails the laws of basic atmospheric science.

[sounding]

This graph (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/05/gobsmackingly-bananas-scientists-stunned-by-planets-record-september-heat?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQvoT18a7BtLfEARiHkZvZ7ve4joYBKhAIA CoHCAowwo6qCzDCmcID&utm_content=rundown) uses as a zero point the temperature average over a 30 year period from 1991 to 2020. Of course this was a period when temps were already moving upward as you can see looking at how no years prior to 2002 were warmer than that average. So when a person who regularly posts that we are in a cooling trend selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline, know you are being manipulated and lied to.

Diligence is required when using modeled data similar to that shown here, because here is how computer modeling fills in the no-data gaps with "fabricated" data. No wonder everyone sees red - where there's none.

[Eclas]

quit watching cnn. you'll sleep better

[ithos]

I am sure you apply the same decision making to your view of religion. It is a very rare person who spouts their faith actually lives the tenets of that faith in each action they take. It is a very rare doctor who takes their own advice, it is a very rare cop who follows the law, it is a very rare politician who has ethics...

So your "believe in Global Warming" argument rejection must mean you reject medicine, religion, law enforcement.... or your argument is bogus.

Not even the most ardent rejectionist are now arguing there is no global warming event like they did a few years ago. Now the goalposts have moved and they accept that the planet is rapidly warming as there is now irrefutable evidence of that fact.

Instead it is now that humans play no role in that event or that it doesn't matter because it sure will be nice when it is warmer. You can see both of these arguments presented in this very thread. One person telling us that climate always changes, but ignoring that it does not change as rapidly as it is now without some major shift in the factors that control climate none of which have occurred other than humans burning fossil fuels and changing the amount of greenhouses gases.

Another poster telling us how wonderful hot earth will be because we will have such a nice diverse number of species.

Follow the money others pontificate... Yes, I am sure that those university adjuncts are rolling in cash now, way more that the profits of Exxon and Shell and BP an others, almost none of which is going to cleaning up or new investment or employee benefits. No those obscene profits are going into stock buy backs to increase the net worth of the CEOs and the 1% That is the money you need to be following. That is where the big bucks are.

I will await somebody posting how much those working on fixing the problem profited in 2022. And this is PROFIT not income.

One way or the other there will be winners and losers with regard to corporate profits. The only difference is that if the climate scaremongers succeed it will result in a significant reduction of the standard of living for first world countries and much worse for underdeveloped populations.

[Bill14564]

I asked this same question earlier so I will try again. For the sake of conversation, call me skeptic. Why does that bother you so much? I respect your right to believe anything about any subject, even if I disagree with you on some issues. It's really none of my business otherwise. Yet for some reason I can't understand, when it comes to this issue, bringing skeptics into the "fold" seems to be a paramount concern for many of the "true believers". Why?

To me, there is a difference between skeptic and denier. A skeptic acknowledges the data but still has questions or doubts. I am a bit of a skeptic myself on this subject. I see the correlation between CO2 and an increased rate of temperature rise and I have an understanding of how CO2 is able to cause temperature rise but I don't feel 100% confident that CO2 *is* the cause of that increase.

I would welcome a discussion with a skeptic. I enjoyed pondering why sea levels rose so quickly in the past compared to today. It was interesting to research sea level change in the Med and to think about how it could appear that the levels were 20ft higher on one side of the island in Roman times while also being 13ft *lower* on the other side. Asking questions about the data and sincerely looking for answers is interesting.

What is more common on this topic are deniers. Some are simply say "there ain't no climate change." Others point to gross estimations of the climate millions of years ago to ignore instrumented measurements from the last 100 years. And others attempt to mislead by posting data from denier websites or cherry-picking data until a graph looks the way they want or discussing the wardrobe choices of coral.

[golfing eagles]

.....
What is more common on this topic are deniers. Some are simply say "there ain't no climate change." Others point to gross estimations of the climate millions of years ago to ignore instrumented measurements from the last 100 years. And others attempt to mislead by posting data from denier websites or cherry-picking data until a graph looks the way they want or discussing the wardrobe choices of coral.

Not "ignoring" the last 100 years of data. Opining that it is nowhere near long enough to draw any conclusions. It's looking at a 100-year snippet out of a 100,000+ year cycle with no idea whatsoever what the data from the other 1000-hundred-year snippets were. Here's an analogy most will understand. A pro football game lasts 3600 seconds. So, what the climate change alarmists are stating is that by seeing team A holding the ball for 3.6 seconds, they know that team will hold the ball until the world ends. and if they happen to kick a field goal during that brief time, they are extrapolating a final score of 3,000,000 to 0. It simply makes no sense.

[Bill14564]

Not "ignoring" the last 100 years of data. Opining that it is nowhere near long enough to draw any conclusions. It's looking at a 100-year snippet out of a 100,000+ year cycle with no idea whatsoever what the data from the other 1000-hundred-year snippets were. Here's an analogy most will understand. A pro football game lasts 3600 seconds. So, what the climate change alarmists are stating is that by seeing team A holding the ball for 3.6 seconds, they know that team will hold the ball until the world ends. and if they happen to kick a field goal during that brief time, they are extrapolating a final score of 3,000,000 to 0. It simply makes no sense.

When a team has had its ups and downs over many seasons then you expect that team to win a few and lose a few this season as well. If you start to notice that the team is now winning a lot more than it is losing and that this started when Tom Brady was added then it would be foolish not to take notice of that. Maybe it isn't Brady, maybe it is Gronkoski, but something out of the ordinary is happening.

The rate of warming was fairly stable for a long time before beginning to increase (warm faster) around 1850. The increase in the rate of warming may not be related to the increase of CO2. However, the strong correlation between the timing of the two and the known effect of CO2 as a greenhouse gas make it worth paying attention to.

[golfing eagles]

When a team has had its ups and downs over many seasons then you expect that team to win a few and lose a few this season as well. If you start to notice that the team is now winning a lot more than it is losing and that this started when Tom Brady was added then it would be foolish not to take notice of that. Maybe it isn't Brady, maybe it is Gronkoski, but something out of the ordinary is happening.

The rate of warming was fairly stable for a long time before beginning to increase (warm faster) around 1850. The increase in the rate of warming may not be related to the increase of CO2. However, the strong correlation between the timing of the two and the known effect of CO2 as a greenhouse gas make it worth paying attention to.

Maybe. Or maybe it's just coincidence. Again, we have no other 150 year snippets to compare it with. What if the global temp and CO2 levels both rose from 7950-7800 BC twice as high as since 1850???? Does anyone know whether it did or didn't??? NOBODY does. Which is why claims of imminent disaster by zealots are unfounded.

And to use your Brady analogy (full disclosure, I am NOT a Patriots fan :1rotfl:), yes , they started on a streak with many more wins and losses back then. Would you have bet your life savings on the next game? So why bet $130 TRILLION on the next global warming game????

[Blueblaze]

This thread now has over 100 posts. I believe roughly 90% of them are arguments over whether climate change exists or is it a serious global problem. But I don’t believe anyone on this thread or anywhere else has offered a **practical** solution to ‘fix’ climate change in a democratic way. Almost none of us want a totalitarian state like China to require us to follow draconian actions such as only one natural child per couple or preventing a person from flying more than 4 times over their life.

A practical fix is not ‘we can start by [eating bugs or whatever]’. That is not a serious proposal. For those believing that climate change is a serious global problem and needs to be fixed, what is the **practical** fix that moves the needle rather than only good intentions or an action without serious negative consequences? Anyone with a serious fix?

The "practical fix" is exactly the same as the one that raised 5 billion people from the standard human condition of starvation and poverty under the heel of a tyrant -- in a mere 30 years since the fall of the Soviet Union -- CAPITALISM.

A two degree rise in temperature 100 years from now will barely be noticed by us rich folks in America -- we have air conditioning. Therefore, the solution is for EVERYONE to get rich.

The "crises" of a microscopic rise in CO2 levels in the atmosphere can be solved by WEALTH. Wealth = Matter x Energy x Human Ingenuity. W=MEH. And the only system that has ever been devised to increase wealth is CAPITALISM.

But capitalism needs energy and liberty to exist -- which are EXACTLY the two things that the "climate change" fanatics seek to end. This should not be a surprise, since the leaders of this movement are also avowed Marxists. And as countless Marxist experiments have demonstrated in the last 150 years since Marx published Das Capital, the Marxist solution to every Human complaint is -- kill more humans.

[sounding]

quit watching cnn. you'll sleep better

Agree. Even the billboards in South Africa are smarter than CNN.

[donfey]

And now they are calling for a record "COLDEST" winter due to El Nino. I moved to Florida to get away from cold weather and so far I have been surprised by some pretty cold nights during the "winter" months.

We used to call that WEATHER.
The hottest temperature EVER recorded in Florida was 109 on June 29, 1931 in Monticello. Must have been plenty of cow flatulence back then.

[Bill14564]

Maybe. Or maybe it's just coincidence. Again, we have no other 150 year snippets to compare it with. What if the global temp and CO2 levels both rose from 7950-7800 BC twice as high as since 1850???? Does anyone know whether it did or didn't??? NOBODY does. Which is why claims of imminent disaster by zealots are unfounded.

And to use your Brady analogy (full disclosure, I am NOT a Patriots fan :1rotfl:), yes , they started on a streak with many more wins and losses back then. Would you have bet your life savings on the next game? So why bet $130 TRILLION on the next global warming game????

Fear of imminent disaster is unfounded just as the fear of a $130T expenditure is unfounded. Both have been mentioned, both appear to be sensationalized.

This could turn out to be a case of not letting a crisis go to waste. Even if it turns out not to be a crisis, climate change concern is driving advances in some useful technologies that will benefit some today and many in the future. A blank check is certainly uncalled for but directed funding used wisely could have a lot of return on investment.

[The Chipster]

I have learned NOT to use reason with climate deniers. No matter what reliable, scientific, reasonable data you share with them, they are in a cult and will not believe anything except for their conspiracy-laden anti-government/media beliefs. Better to just nod your head and smile.

Note to OP: this is not political.

[JMintzer]

Well, that's just great. Can't resist a possibly interesting rabbit hole, so wasted some googling time down this one. That "sinking" thing coulda been *really* interesting to learn about, but all I got was this article where "sinking" is merely a euphemism for alarmist levels of sea level rise in a ridiculously short period of time. RISING TIDES – Stevenson Villager (https://stevensonvillager.com/28165/features/rising-tides/)

And *now* learn that "Bill" isn't even currently living in Stevenson! :-) Also, it appears that I still have a bit to figure out about those "signature" listings of former places residence. Guess the lower the listing, the more recent - at least sometimes. I do now know that Victor, NY, apparently has nothing to do with any Kent Island. :-)

Try this article...

Rising seas, sinking land put Maryland’s waterfront communities at risk | Maryland | fredericknewspost.com (https://www.fredericknewspost.com/places/state_region/maryland/rising-seas-sinking-land-put-maryland-s-waterfront-communities-at-risk/article_6ea85736-e019-11e2-bf1c-001a4bcf6878.html)

But even that article make little sense. It states that the Chesapeake Bay is rising at 2-3Xs the rate of worldwide sea levels...

How is that possible since it empties into the Atlantic, just a few miles away?

[JMintzer]

Might the term "denier" have picked up certain connotations within this realm? Bet you knew that. :-)

It's most certainly meant as an insult...

Of course, that's not allowed on ToTV...

[JMintzer]

But we could have prevented the tornado if we had gone out and bought all new energy efficient appliances.

https://media.tenor.com/KHG9IAkXU-AAAAAM/thumbs-up-jim-carrey.gif

[JMintzer]

I think it's called Climate Change. Global warming will cause changes in the yearly climate. Do some legitimate fact checking and research and stop believing the propaganda noise networks!

That's because calling it "Global Warming" wasn't convincing enough...

[BlueStarAirlines]

You don't seem to be paying attention. Perhaps I used too many words.


Ad Hominem
(Attacking the person): This fallacy occurs when, instead of addressing someone's argument or position, you irrelevantly attack the person or some aspect of the person who is making the argument.

[JMintzer]

After all, 50,000 years ago we were Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons.

Some still are...

[sounding]

We used to call that WEATHER.
The hottest temperature EVER recorded in Florida was 109 on June 29, 1931 in Monticello. Must have been plenty of cow flatulence back then.

Correct. All data shows it was hotter during the Dust Bowl years - the 1930s. A primary driver was and is the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation) - which shows it was hottest in the 30s and coolest in the 70s (when it snowed in Miami in '77). This year is warm due to the AMO, Tonga volcano, peaking sunspots, and increasing El Nino -- and yet we are still in a 9-year cooling trend.

[Topspinmo]

That's because calling it "Global Warming" wasn't convincing enough...

IMO no, you can argue about global warming, but climate change you can’t cause the climate always changing. :read: and always will.

[Warcats]

This graph (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/05/gobsmackingly-bananas-scientists-stunned-by-planets-record-september-heat?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQvoT18a7BtLfEARiHkZvZ7ve4joYBKhAIA CoHCAowwo6qCzDCmcID&utm_content=rundown) uses as a zero point the temperature average over a 30 year period from 1991 to 2020. Of course this was a period when temps were already moving upward as you can see looking at how no years prior to 2002 were warmer than that average. So when a person who regularly posts that we are in a cooling trend selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline, know you are being manipulated and lied to.
Those that deny are uneducated in the sciences or even worse religious aieeee

[Driller703]

This graph (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/05/gobsmackingly-bananas-scientists-stunned-by-planets-record-september-heat?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQvoT18a7BtLfEARiHkZvZ7ve4joYBKhAIA CoHCAowwo6qCzDCmcID&utm_content=rundown) uses as a zero point the temperature average over a 30 year period from 1991 to 2020. Of course this was a period when temps were already moving upward as you can see looking at how no years prior to 2002 were warmer than that average. So when a person who regularly posts that we are in a cooling trend selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline, know you are being manipulated and lied to.

Terrible! I’m so amazed that they can tell all this, and they can’t predict the weather next week! It would be so easy to fix this if we just paid more taxes!! I feel bad for the people who live where the power grid will be so over loaded because of all the electric cars that they won’t be able to run their A/C in the 120 degree heat!! And then, the thermal shock of the following freezing winter! Lucky we weren’t around 15,000 years ago when this happened before.

[golfing eagles]

Those that deny are uneducated in the sciences or even worse religious aieeee

Interesting. I'm not particularly religious and I have a doctorate in a science. You????

[sounding]

This graph (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/05/gobsmackingly-bananas-scientists-stunned-by-planets-record-september-heat?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQvoT18a7BtLfEARiHkZvZ7ve4joYBKhAIA CoHCAowwo6qCzDCmcID&utm_content=rundown) uses as a zero point the temperature average over a 30 year period from 1991 to 2020. Of course this was a period when temps were already moving upward as you can see looking at how no years prior to 2002 were warmer than that average. So when a person who regularly posts that we are in a cooling trend selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline, know you are being manipulated and lied to.

"... selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline ...? When does a "tipping point" begin? Is this not what Al Gore was warning us about?

[cjrjck]

I would welcome a discussion with a skeptic. I enjoyed pondering why sea levels rose so quickly in the past compared to today. It was interesting to research sea level change in the Med and to think about how it could appear that the levels were 20ft higher on one side of the island in Roman times while also being 13ft *lower* on the other side. Asking questions about the data and sincerely looking for answers is interesting.

What is more common on this topic are deniers. Some are simply say "there ain't no climate change." Others point to gross estimations of the climate millions of years ago to ignore instrumented measurements from the last 100 years. And others attempt to mislead by posting data from denier websites or cherry-picking data until a graph looks the way they want or discussing the wardrobe choices of coral.

Good points but I am still confused why it matters that some people don't believe in climate change. How is it important what someone else thinks or believes?

[Escape Artist]

this graph (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/05/gobsmackingly-bananas-scientists-stunned-by-planets-record-september-heat?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=cdaqvot18a7btlfearihkzvz7ve4joybkhaia cohcaowwo6qczdcmcid&utm_content=rundown) uses as a zero point the temperature average over a 30 year period from 1991 to 2020. Of course this was a period when temps were already moving upward as you can see looking at how no years prior to 2002 were warmer than that average. So when a person who regularly posts that we are in a cooling trend selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline, know you are being manipulated and lied to.

lol

[sounding]

Good points but I am still confused why it matters that some people don't believe in climate change. How is it important what someone else thinks or believes?

Believing in climate change is not the issue. It's whether man-made CO2 harms the climate - which it doesn't - and in fact it makes our climate better. Just look outside - and see all the folks escaping the cold to come to Florida. Listen to your eyes - not the narrative.

[Pugchief]

I have learned NOT to use reason with climate deniers. No matter what reliable, scientific, reasonable data you share with them, they are in a cult and will not believe anything except for their conspiracy-laden anti-government/media beliefs. Better to just nod your head and smile.

Note to OP: this is not political.

There is certainly a cult involved, but it's not the "deniers". Pot, meet kettle.

[Pugchief]

When a team has had its ups and downs over many seasons then you expect that team to win a few and lose a few this season as well. If you start to notice that the team is now winning a lot more than it is losing and that this started when Tom Brady was added then it would be foolish not to take notice of that. Maybe it isn't Brady, maybe it is Gronkoski, but something out of the ordinary is happening.



You disproved your own point. The Patriots stink once again as the cycle reverts.

[Bill14564]

You disproved your own point. The Patriots stink once again as the cycle reverts.

Do you mean the system recovered when the abnormal influence was removed? That is exactly what those concerned about climate change would like to see happen: remove/limit/lessen the CO2 so that the cycle can revert.

[Bill14564]

Good points but I am still confused why it matters that some people don't believe in climate change. How is it important what someone else thinks or believes?

It is not terribly important what any of us believe - we are past the point of directing major efforts.

You seem to care about the motivation of others (why it matters), that's your thing. My thing is to care about misleading (or just plain wrong) statements, especially when based on junk science and bad analysis.

[Pugchief]

Do you mean the system recovered when the abnormal influence was removed? That is exactly what those concerned about climate change would like to see happen: remove/limit/lessen the CO2 so that the cycle can revert.

You said maybe it was Brady, maybe it was Gronk. Maybe it was something else. Maybe the other teams were just not as good, and now they are better.

[mtdjed]

No idea, but logically if the Eurasian and African plates were moving closer to each other, the width of the Mediterranean would narrow and raise the water level. Of course, plates move quite slowly (except in earthquakes, but that is a release of tension and not continental drift), and can be measure in millions of years, so 2,000 years, appears, at least empirically, to be too short a time frame.

Not taking sides but remember that the Mediterranean is not self-contained.

[mickey100]

This graph (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/05/gobsmackingly-bananas-scientists-stunned-by-planets-record-september-heat?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQvoT18a7BtLfEARiHkZvZ7ve4joYBKhAIA CoHCAowwo6qCzDCmcID&utm_content=rundown) uses as a zero point the temperature average over a 30 year period from 1991 to 2020. Of course this was a period when temps were already moving upward as you can see looking at how no years prior to 2002 were warmer than that average. So when a person who regularly posts that we are in a cooling trend selectively uses a single hot year as a baseline, know you are being manipulated and lied to.

People obviously cannot interpret data and facts or make distinctions between good data and and unbiased sources of data. Any old Joe Schmo on the internet is a good source for them, as long as it matches what their opinion already is.

[Byte1]

Amazing. This has been explained by myself and others multiple times. I guess some things take longer to sink in than others.

First, the "deniers" are those that ignore the last 4.5 million years of climatology and instead embrace this false narrative of "climate change" being shoved down our throats by the media and government policies, all designed to spend up to 130 trillion on a fool's errand that will enrich very few.

Secondly, it does not require a "conspiracy", it only requires knowing which side your bread is buttered on. If you lived in N Korea and "dear leader" said the sky is yellow, you would also state the sky is yellow. If you are a climatologist at a university or working in government and your livelihood depends on grants and tenure, you know better than to oppose the false climate change agenda.

Third, where did anyone get "irate"?

And lastly, rather than cite a few articles, here is the opinion of 500 respected climatologists and scientists:

"The video above is from Friends of Science, a Canada-based “non-profit organization run by dedicated volunteers comprised mainly of active and retired earth and atmospheric scientists, engineers, and other professionals.” On the same day last week that Greta Thunberg made an impassioned speech to the United Nations about her fears of a climate emergency, a group of 500 prominent scientists and professionals, led by the CLINTEL co-founder Guus Berkhout, sent this registered letter to the United Nations Secretary-General stating that there is no climate emergency and climate policies should be designed to benefit the lives of people. Here’s the press release, here’ the list of 500 signees, and here’s the opening of the letter:

A global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have the honor to address to Your Excellencies the attached European Climate Declaration, for which the signatories to this letter are the national ambassadors. The general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is at present founded are unfit for their purpose.

Therefore, it is cruel as well as imprudent to advocate the squandering of trillions of dollars on the basis of results from such immature models. Current climate policies pointlessly and grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, reliable electrical energy. We urge you to follow a climate policy based on sound science, realistic economics and genuine concern for those harmed by costly but unnecessary attempts at mitigation

Here are the specific points about climate change highlighted in the letter:

1 Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming.
2. Warming is far slower than predicted.
3. Climate policy relies on inadequate models.
4. CO2 is not a pollutant. It is a plant food that is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.
5. Global warming has not increased natural disasters.
6. Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities.
7. There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic.


MP: What about that “consensus” and “settled science” about climate change we always hear about? How can there be a consensus when there’s a global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields who challenge the “settled science”?

Actually, challenging the consensus among the scientific community is nothing new, but those the voices of those challenging the consensus are always drowned out by the tsunami of climate hysteria from the climate alarmists. For example, in 2012 a group of more than 125 scientists sent an open letter to the United Nations warning that scientific evidence refuted UN Secretary-General’s Ban Ki-Moon repeated assertions on weather and climate. Those warnings of climate hysteria unsupported by the scientific evidence were ignored in 2012, just like the letter from the 500 prominent scientists and professionals will be ignored in 2019. In other words, it’s “deja vu all over again.”

:thumbup::thumbup::BigApplause::BigApplause: :eclipsee_gold_cup:

[Byte1]

Terrible! I’m so amazed that they can tell all this, and they can’t predict the weather next week! It would be so easy to fix this if we just paid more taxes!! I feel bad for the people who live where the power grid will be so over loaded because of all the electric cars that they won’t be able to run their A/C in the 120 degree heat!! And then, the thermal shock of the following freezing winter! Lucky we weren’t around 15,000 years ago when this happened before.

It all started to go down hill when man first learned how to start a fire to cook their meals. :1rotfl:

[Byte1]

Correct. All data shows it was hotter during the Dust Bowl years - the 1930s. A primary driver was and is the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation) - which shows it was hottest in the 30s and coolest in the 70s (when it snowed in Miami in '77). This year is warm due to the AMO, Tonga volcano, peaking sunspots, and increasing El Nino -- and yet we are still in a 9-year cooling trend.

Wait, your facts can't be valid, because they don't fit the narrative of "man made climate change that can be remedied by throwing trillions of bucks into the air.

[Byte1]

I can't be charged with being a "denier" since I don't deny that the climate changes. It always has and it always will. I have doubts that anything that we do can change our climate from changing. Perhaps a giant bubble (like the one over the Villages?) situated over each populated area in the world, with a giant climate control like my car has, will make it all better?
First off, why should I agree that we should throw trillions of bucks into studies on how to fix the weather patterns; ie, man made climate control? When someone suggests that anyone that does not agree with them is ignorant and uneducated, it makes me wonder how idiotic some folks are to waste trillions on studies to find solutions for something that would take hundreds or thousands of years to prove and initiate. I doubt that man will exist in a thousand years, so I really don't care about the weather changes. Even if I was concerned about the weather, no matter what I do, I could not make any difference in my lifetime. If the younger generation feels it can improve it's future, let them handle it. Personally, I am retired and enjoy the hot weather. The only problem I have is the rising cost of utilities and insurance; oh, and the cost of food, and .....inflation. Take for instance, the great fuel tax holiday this month. Did anyone notice the lower price of gasoline at the pumps? Neither did I. The price went up so that they could discount it by 25 cents a gallon. Same price I paid for it the last fill up. Then, they have an excuse to have a high price after the tax holiday is over. But, I digress again.
Like I said, I am not a denier. I believe in climate change. But, I don't get all hysterical like a school girl (oops) and believe that by running out and purchasing a EV or stop eating beef and switching to mystery meat, that I am going to change the temperature in my lifetime. Sorry, if that hurts anyone's feelings. And by the way, if being a believer in the Almighty and His Son for salvation makes me a "denier" then, just add that to my other label if being a "deplorable."
That said, I have no problem with lowering my contribution to air pollution....IF it's a reasonable request. I like clean air as much as anyone else. I am very happy with how much cleaner our air has become, compared to what it was like when I was a kid.

[sounding]

I can't be charged with being a "denier" since I don't deny that the climate changes. It always has and it always will. I have doubts that anything that we do can change our climate from changing. Perhaps a giant bubble (like the one over the Villages?) situated over each populated area in the world, with a giant climate control like my car has, will make it all better?
First off, why should I agree that we should throw trillions of bucks into studies on how to fix the weather patterns; ie, man made climate control? When someone suggests that anyone that does not agree with them is ignorant and uneducated, it makes me wonder how idiotic some folks are to waste trillions on studies to find solutions for something that would take hundreds or thousands of years to prove and initiate. I doubt that man will exist in a thousand years, so I really don't care about the weather changes. Even if I was concerned about the weather, no matter what I do, I could not make any difference in my lifetime. If the younger generation feels it can improve it's future, let them handle it. Personally, I am retired and enjoy the hot weather. The only problem I have is the rising cost of utilities and insurance; oh, and the cost of food, and .....inflation. Take for instance, the great fuel tax holiday this month. Did anyone notice the lower price of gasoline at the pumps? Neither did I. The price went up so that they could discount it by 25 cents a gallon. Same price I paid for it the last fill up. Then, they have an excuse to have a high price after the tax holiday is over. But, I digress again.
Like I said, I am not a denier. I believe in climate change. But, I don't get all hysterical like a school girl (oops) and believe that by running out and purchasing a EV or stop eating beef and switching to mystery meat, that I am going to change the temperature in my lifetime. Sorry, if that hurts anyone's feelings. And by the way, if being a believer in the Almighty and His Son for salvation makes me a "denier" then, just add that to my other label if being a "deplorable."
That said, I have no problem with lowering my contribution to air pollution....IF it's a reasonable request. I like clean air as much as anyone else. I am very happy with how much cleaner our air has become, compared to what it was like when I was a kid.

Dittos. Spoken like a true climate realist. There is no climate emergency - plus the tiny warming and extra CO2 is actually benefiting our climate because all measures of severe weather are decreasing - or at a minimum non-changing. In other words - today's climate change is good news.

[JSRusso]

I’ve always been amazed at how important humans in general feel they are. To think that we are the ones to cause the earth to warm or cool is comical. The earth is a living planet and we are but microorganisms in comparison. There are under sea volcanoes with unprecedented activity that is naturally warming the oceans, the planet is doing its thing until it eventually will expire like the rest of the universe. Don’t pretend to know more than nature. We as a species can’t stop the forces of Mother Nature. We have all put faith in the science, and over the years science discovers something that it wasn’t previously aware of and we all realize how wrong we or the previous generations were. Don’t be so gullible as to believe with unshaken conviction that you are right. Live the best way that you currently believe and don’t force your beliefs on others. We are all a blip in the grand scheme of the universe. We can just as easily be taken out by an asteroid. Take care of yourself, those around you, and the wonderful planet we enjoy today. Stop worrying about what may or may not happen in a thousand years.

[Topspinmo]

Not taking sides but remember that the Mediterranean is not self-contained.

Yet. Plates still moving north.

[oldtimes]

The real problem is conspicuous consumption. The earth’s resources are being depleted creating ever new cars and boats and private jets and huge mansions that are lived in sometimes for only weeks in a year. Pushing EVs and more efficient appliances is nothing but a bandaid. Instead of trying to change climate change we should be learning how to deal with it, like not building right on the water. The only thing I am denying is the proposed “solutions” which are not solving anything but just shifting it to different problem.

[sounding]

The real problem is conspicuous consumption. The earth’s resources are being depleted creating ever new cars and boats and private jets and huge mansions that are lived in sometimes for only weeks in a year. Pushing EVs and more efficient appliances is nothing but a bandaid. Instead of trying to change climate change we should be learning how to deal with it, like not building right on the water. The only thing I am denying is the proposed “solutions” which are not solving anything but just shifting it to different problem.

Ditto. Conspicuous consumption - right on the water.