Historians will look back at these times and cry!

For all of the hot air the left has been spewing for decades about how smart and intelligent they are. So much more brilliant than those knuckle dragging conservatives.

After all of that, I would like to see the left product anyone smarter than me, and I'm a nobody. I'm not an intellectual. I'm just an average guy and I am old. All I see filling the ranks of the left are morons. I'm shocked any of them know how to tie their own shoes. And I'm talking about college graduates with advanced degrees.

Can any of these geniuses explain to me what climate change is WITHOUT mentioning global warming. And if all you can do is mention global warming, let me explain to you that you guys promised that I would no longer have to shovel snow off of my driveway by the year 2005. I'm still waiting.

Upvote for you!

Back at you. That is an awesome meme.

I have an addiction... and my need to get laughs is the crack.

😂😂😂. You vote another laugh and an upvote.

They probably thought you would have retired to Florida by 2005 😄

😂😂😂😂. Don't think that thought hasn't crossed my mind. There's no state income tax and it's a whole lot warmer in the winter than Utah, where I live. I'll never be able to go back to Commifornia, where I grew up. Not until they kick the Gavin Newsom virus out of that state and restore law and order.

There was this 5' 8" blond with a face like an angel, 4 F—king octaves and could dance like Michael Jackson. So, she blinked her baby blues, pouted and said, "No, No, Daddy."

Wow was this ai

What part? I found the picture, the font is SF Slapstick Comic, the PNG clipart was searched under joker and I mixed that color of purple myself. So, like thank you...

Oops... you were talking abut the girls face. Sorry. Thought you were talking about the Joker Meme. LOL. I'm not very smart.

Yeah but u are smart

That's not what Drake is thinking...!

Thx

Oh, sure. Climate change is the long term change in the world's climate, but in the terms you mean it in, climate change is the long term change to the world's climate as being driven by human civilization.

What changes? Given that there is no normal for this planet considering it's 4.5 billion year history, what is considered a normal climate?

How is man changing it? The biggest factor on the global climate is and always has been the sun. There is nothing man can do to have that big of an impact. Volcanos can cause more changes in the earth's climate than all of the green house gases man produces or should I say, reallocate it. We do not produce gases, we just reallocate what is already existing.

What are these changes supposed to be? With increase levels of CO2 we get increased plant life and more crop production. And if CO2 levels actually do cause temperature increases (there is nothing conclusive that shows that it does based on ice core samples) then that means longer growing seasons. I don't see a problem with that. But that is global warming, not climate change.

Climate change is something else. It is a vague description of something that is supposed to happen in the future but it is so horrible that if we don't force everyone into "Smart 15-minute cities" (where all our freedoms are gone) by 2030 then we're all gonna WHAT??? What is supposed to happen?

BTW if you haven't been to the World Economic Forum's a Smart 15-minute city is one where you work, grocery store and everything else that they have decided you need are all within a 15 minute drive or walk. You're only allowed to leave your sector for vacations they allow you to take and where they allow you to go. Cameras are all over the city with facial recognition and gate recognition (your walk) software in the system. There will be a central bank digital currency where they control how you spend your money.

And all of this is supposed to save the planet from some vague event that is supposed to happen at some point in the future. The future, something that no scientist ever has ever done because that is not the job of a scientist. That is the job of fortune tellers and other prognosticators.

That was the 2nd most powerful eruption in the 20th century.
https://www.usgs.gov/programs/VHP/volcanoes-can-affect-climate

Now, according to Forbes, there are 283,400,986 registered vehicles in the US.
https://www.forbes.com/advisor/car-insurance/car-ownership-statistics/

Now, according to the EPA, the typical passenger vehicle produces 4.6 metric tons of CO2 per year. For easy math, let's assume that all 283,400,986 are passenger cars. That's 283,400,986 registered vehicles producing 4.6 metric tons of CO2 per year. What does that come out to?

It's more, btw. A LOT more. And that's just the cars in the US. How many Pinatubo's would we need per year to keep up with just the cars in the US? So many we'd notice them.

So, just based on the lowering sun temps and the lack of volcanic C02, we know that neither of them are the primary drivers in the climate change. And we also know that cars, just one part of human society, produce A LOT of CO2.

But higher temps is a part of climate change. Lemme give you an example from my personal life. I moved to Texas in the 90s. Back then, when it would get into the 90s, everyone would complain about how hot it was. And for a week or two in august, it would get into the 100s.

But now? The 100s start before summer does, and they last into September. It's only a few degrees change, but it's a really important change.

You said you're smart, and in that case, I recommend you spend time reading the studies on climate change and take the time to understand the evidence thy're putting forward rather than begin with the conclusion that it's all false.

... About a decade or so ago, infrared images of the edge of the Earth as that side turns towards night taken by orbiting satellites show that the atmosphere is leaking A LOT of CO2 into space.
Not sure if that could account for the lowering amounts the carbon dioxide and whatnot in the air in the last 33 million years, but they estimate that in a billion years Earth will be stripped of its atmosphere.

Lot of great questions. 'm surprised you haven't gone looking for answers based on empirical evidence and facts. Things that are objectively verifiable. Because there are verifiable and objective answers to your questions.

Let's start with the sun. Because, yeah, the sun is the great big light in the sky. It warms the planet, so it does seem reasonable that it woulld be the primary driver for how hot things are now. Lucky for us, humanity has been tracking how much energy the sun is pumping out since the 1800s. If the sun is the primary driver of climate change, then we should expect to see as the sun's output goes up, the temp goes up.

As you can see, the sun started into a solar minimum, a natural part of its cycle. It has been producing less energy. So, if the sun were the primary driver, the earth should be cooling. And, clearly, it's not. That red line keeps going up.

The sun is not the primary driver of climate change.

And that event of the sun producing less energy, is the exact reason why the global climate "emergency" changed from "global warming" to "climate change". Global warming was too specific and stopped happening in the mid 2000's. They first called it a "pause" but that wasn't good enough.

So they did what all socialists and fascists do. They changed from something more specific to something completely vague. Oh but it's an emergency and if we don't forfeit all our freedoms right this minute we're all gonna die. Of what, we have no idea. Are we going to bypass spring and fall and go directly from summer to winter? Is that the change the climate is supposed to make?

What's going to happen that is of such dire concern???? Is is "dogs and cats sleeping together, mass hysteria" (to quote Bill Murray in Ghostbusters)?

At least with global warming we can expect the temperature to rise. The same with global cooling back in the 70's. Actually, global cooling would be much more devastating than warming.

But neither happened so they had to change its name.

BTW the records we've been keeping on global temps since the 1800's is grossly inaccurate. There are thermometers place all around the world. Some are out in the open, some are in shady spots, some are in the country, some in the city. Some of them are on exterior walls of buildings. Most of them are in need of repair. There are just too many factors that can throw temperatures off. We cannot with any degree of accuracy say anything about global temperatures going back in history.

But the number 1 question I have is why is it that the only solution to "climate change" is enslaving the planet, reducing the population and destroying capitalism? I've not heard anything else being offered as a solution.

Why is the U.S. in the crosshairs when China, by far, are the greatest polluters on the planet? And China doesn't care about their carbon footprint or climate change.

Do you see how you've gone from "no one has been able to explain it to me" to "I refuse to engage with the facts because of my personal political beliefs." It's fine to not like that they changed how this problem is referred to from global warming to climate change.

Climate change is real. It is happening. We are making it happen.

And having thermometers in all sorts of places is not too difficult or too complex. How else would you arrive at an accurate measure of the global temps if you don't measure the shady spots, the sides of buildings, the tops of the mountains and the bottoms of the seas?

Here's a report on climate change that was funded by the very conservative Koch brothers. It concludes that climate change is very real and we are driving it. https://berkeleyearth.org/

I don't understand why you think living responsibly and sustainably is somehow "enslaving the planet." It sounds like you've been told some very reactionary things by some very uniformed people.

Capitalism is how we got into this mess. We can't keep doing things the same way and expect the problem to go away.

And why is the US in the crosshairs? Because we live here. We can't control what China does. We can control what we do. We consume most of the world's resources. We generate huge amounts of pollution.

Climate change is real. It's a problem that needs to be resolved. It's a thing we can do, but it will require us to change. If we don't change, we will go extinct because the planet will be too hot for us to live here.

"I don't understand why you think living responsibly and sustainably is somehow 'enslaving the planet.' It sounds like you've been told some very reactionary things by some very uniformed people."

If you want to live as if the earth is going to do whatever in the future then knock yourself out. Go for it. You can save the planet until your heart is content.

But that isn't the plan is it? The plan involved forcing the world to live where they are told to live and allowing them to go where they are told to go. There is NOTHING "responsible" or "sustainable" about that.

Most people (in the U.S. anyway) don't want pollution in the environment. I grew up on L.A. in the 60's and 70's. I remember walking to school with my lungs burning and eyes tearing from the smog. That's gotten a whole lot better now. I remember being freaked out when I was in Boy Scouts on a canoe trip to Wyoming that I could actually drink the water that I was canoeing in. Because drinking the water in the L.A. river would be death.

I get all that. I like camping without seeing trash everywhere.

But this climate change nonsense is NOT about a pollution free environment. They've even classified CO2 as air pollution for goodness sakes. In relation to the earth's history we're in a CO2 deficit.

"Capitalism is how we got into this mess. We can't keep doing things the same way and expect the problem to go away."

Capitalism IS freedom. Are you are saying individual freedom and personal responsibility is what got us into some imaginary mess?

"And why is the US in the crosshairs? Because we live here. We can't control what China does."

So you beat up the one country that has done more for the environment than any other country on the planet and turn your back on the biggest polluter in the world?

"We consume most of the world's resources. We generate huge amounts of pollution."

Wrong and wrong... That's China. China consumes most of the world's resources and they generate the most pollution. After them, there is Indonesia and then Africa for pollution. China has been buying up most of Africa's natural resources.

Go beat up China because you're pissing everyone off who has worked their butts off trying to make the US more livable.

"Climate change is real."

You can't even define it so how do you know it is real?

"Do you see how you've gone from 'no one has been able to explain it to me' to 'I refuse to engage with the facts because of my personal political beliefs.'"

No, that is not correct. I am hoping that someone will actually explain what "climate change" actually means. It is NOT the same thing as "global warming". What is supposed to happen with climate change.

Global warming is something different and it is not happening.

"And having thermometers in all sorts of places is not too difficult or too complex. How else would you arrive at an accurate measure of the global temps if you don't measure the shady spots, the sides of buildings, the tops of the mountains and the bottoms of the seas?"

Do you understand why a thermometer on the side of a building is the wrong place to put a thermometer? Do you understand why putting a thermometer in a particularly sunny spot is the wrong place? You are going to get higher temps than what it actually is if you were in a slightly different location. If they put a thermometer on the side of a building and one on the side of a tree you in the same location they will produce different readings. They're not doing that to find an average. They're relying on thermometers that represent temperatures 100's or 1000's of miles apart from each other.

This is highly unreliable and is NOT what you want to use for basing a life altering change on.

The accurate way to measure temps is through satellites and they are doing that but they haven't been doing that long enough to say that the earth is warming or cooling.

Berkeley Earth's website main page says the earth has warmed 1.3°C. Since when? What is the starting point? Yesterday? A year ago?

BTW the Koch Brothers (and now just Charles Koch because David died in 2019) do NOT believe in global warming or climate change. Berkely Earth is not affiliated with them.

Global warming is a part of climate change, and it is real.

Are you an expert in thermometers? And have you accurately tracked when and where the various science experiments have placed them? What have you done to verify your assumptions on how they are tracking the temps?

If you had done some more reading on their website, specifically: https://berkeleyearth.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/skeptics-guide-to-climate-change.pdf

You would have seen that they collated the data on temprurature going back 250 years.

If you convert that Celsius to freedom units, how many degrees is that? (hint: it's more than 20).

And if you had gone to their financial support page, you would have found the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation. According to the Guardian, the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation gave the study $150K.

"If you had done some more reading on their website, specifically: https://berkeleyearth.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/skeptics-guide-to-climate-change.pdf"

I saw the link but I never clicked on it. Why? Think of it this way. When has any science in the past ever had to have answers to skeptics? There has been many times another scientist has found data that has not corroborated previously believed science. That's how the big bang theory came into existence. And the big bang was met with resistance but atheist scientists who believed it was being promoted by Christians. But after enough data has been shown it is now the generally accepted theory. But it is just a theory. It may get challenged in the future and disproved but we'll have to wait and see.

This all happened in the science community, not the general public. There were no papers published to the general public trying to prove a theory to skeptics who were not scientists. No one was called a "big bang denier".

But with global warming/climate change people are labeled. Some of our politicians would like to impose fines on people for not believing in global warming. Why? Global warming is just a theory, not a proven fact. Yes, they can show past temps but that has no bearing on the future.

I really don't know what they are predicting for the future except for a slight temperature increase within the next century. That temp increase is less than the 1.3° C that Berkeley Earth is saying has already happened. And like I said, if it includes more CO2 then a slight increase within the next century then we can end world hunger. Plants seem to really love CO2 and they grow stronger, bigger and produce more food. With more plants it should solve the bee problem that we are seeing. Hopefully it will end colony collapse disorder or at least slow it down. More plants means more animal life as well.

So I very much hope there is global warming because life will be much better for the entire planet.

If you look up Charles Koch or the Koch brothers and global warming in a search you will see tons of links that call them "deniers".

Temps vs freedom units mean nothing to me . Giving up any or all freedom for a vague prognostication is not just foolish it is idiotic. I don't like living in cities. Been there, done that. I won't be herded into Smart Cities where every action I take is monitored through cameras and facial, gate or any other recognition software.

When has science had to answer to skeptics? Always. It's literally the point of science. You have to prove what you claim. And that proof has to stand up to intense inspection and criticism. That's the peer review process. If any flaw, any flaw, is found in your work, it's tossed out.

There are big bang deniers. They're called fundamentalists who insists that their religions story for the origin of the world is the factual one.

The rising temps are a big deal. While 1.3 C doesn't sound that much, translate that in to the units your familiar with. That's 34.34 Fahrenheit. That's not a slight increase, it's a hell of a swing. The higher temps means that plants we eat will struggle to grow because they can't handle the heat. The livestock we eat will struggle to survive out in the heat. It's not like everything will be the same, just hotter.

Because it's hotter, there will be less water for us to drink and water the crops & livestock.

"When has science had to answer to skeptics? Always. It's literally the point of science. You have to prove what you claim. And that proof has to stand up to intense inspection and criticism. That's the peer review process. If any flaw, any flaw, is found in your work, it's tossed out."

Yes, I essentially said that. That's not what I was talking about. Of course scientists always have to address skepticism from other scientists. That is normal. No other science has websites dedicated to trying to convince the skeptical public. No other science attack skeptics by calling them "science deniers". There aren't politicians trying to figure out how to punish people for not believing in the science.

I mean, flat earthers are treated better than those who can see that climate change is just an excuse to dominate mankind. And you gotta be nuts to think the earth is flat.

"There are big bang deniers."

Are they under the same kind of scrutiny as those who wonder what changes in the climate do we need to fear?

"While 1.3 C doesn't sound that much, translate that in to the units your familiar with. That's 34.34 Fahrenheit."

Um... I think you need to rethink your math. That is a 1.3C INCREASE, it is not the global temperature of the earth. That is NOT a 34° F increase, it's about a 2° F increase. If the increase was 34° F do you think we would be having this conversation? NO!!!! No one would be denying a change that massive.

Plus you never answered the question of when that increase took place. What is the starting point? To say the temperature just randomly increase by 1.3° is not telling me anything. At the same time I could just throw out the statement that the earth decreased in global temps by 5°C. It depends on what period of time I am speaking about.

Is that the increase from 500 years ago or 5 minutes ago?

"Because it's hotter, there will be less water for us to drink and water the crops & livestock."

Do you mean we've never experienced droughts before?

How would there be less water? Aren't the polar ice caps supposed to disappear? That means more water. If it evaporates into the atmosphere it eventually accumulates into drops that fall from the sky which would mean more rain. Even if it just mean more humidity, plants can still use that water. That is exactly why the East coast is green and the West coast is a desert.

"Global warming is a part of climate change, and it is real."

Yes I understand that but what is climate change. Is it JUST global warming? If so they why the rename to something that is so vague?

I know why but I want to know what additional things are we supposed to be seeing with it now being called climate change? Climate is not temperature. Temperature is part of climate but it is not everything about climate. Climate has to do with weather conditions. What weather conditions are changing that is supposed to kill us all? I really want to know.

I haven't seen any more or less tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes, winter freezes, droughts, and everything else that are parts of climate do anything different. They aren't any worse, they aren't any more frequent. It's the same as it has always been in weather related history.

In addition, every single prediction that any global warming or climate change "scientist" has made where they put a date when events were supposed to happen have all failed. And I don't mean by a year or two, they have never happened. Every single one of them. Nothing they have predicted that was supposed to occur by a specific year has come close to happening.

This global warming stuff has been going on before you were listening to Nevermind on a cassette tape player but just hasn't happened. Temps peaked in 1997 and have slightly cooled since then. Yes, it is warmer than the average in the 70's and 80's but not by much. But it is cooler than 1997.

The only ones saying that the temps are getting hotter are government agencies and the "scientists" they have bought.

You do know that twice about 20 years ago the Climate Research Unit at Cambridge University (one of the 3 organizations proving all global warming data to the world) was exposed for using a random number generator to get the data they wanted to show temps rising. Twice this happened. Both times 100's of emails had been released showing what they did from inside the CRU. I guess there were some honest people working at the CRU. Nothing ever came of it. They're still providing the "science" behind global warming. For all anyone knows they are still using custom software to make up numbers to match their what they want.

You do know that science, true science NEVER starts with the conclusion first and then tries to fill in the data to make that conclusion true.

Climate change is the knock-on effects of the rising temperatures.

So, what are some of those changes? the droughts we're going through. The lack of snowfall in the mountains, (which in turn means less water flowing down the mountains because the snow melts).

For example, the Colorado river no longer flows to the ocean. All the water is consumed before it gets there. Here's some actual science on it: https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01291-0

Because there is more evaporated water in the air, the storms that happen are more frequent and more powerful. You haven't seen an increase in tornadoes or hurricanes? You haven't gone looking for that information then.

USA Today has a list of the tornadoes from 1950 to this year. From 1950 to 1953 there were 1256 tracked tornadoes. We've exceeded that number almost every year since 1996. We haven't dropped below 1,000 tornadoes since 1996.

But if the storms are more frequent and more powerful, how can we be in a drought? Because it's not a universal rain coverage. All rain doesn't fall in all places equally. And when the ground is dry, it doesn't absorb water as well, and that water runs off. Carrying with it top soil.

While it is true that Cambridge was hacked, and their emails released, they were not making numbers up. Were they being rude jackasses to each other (and their work)? Yes, they were. Scientists at CRU use tree-ring data and other “proxy” measurements to estimate temperatures from times before instrumental temperature data began to be collected. However, since about 1960, tree-ring data have diverged from actual measured temperatures. Far from covering it up, CRU scientists and others have published reports of this divergence many times. The “trick” that Jones was writing about in his 1999 e-mail was simply adding the actual, measured instrumental data into a graph of historic temperatures. Jones says it’s a “trick” in the colloquial sense of an adroit feat — “a clever thing to do,” as he put it — not a deception. What’s hidden is the fact that tree-ring data in recent decades doesn’t track with thermometer measurements.

"So, what are some of those changes? the droughts we're going through. The lack of snowfall in the mountains, (which in turn means less water flowing down the mountains because the snow melts)."

So then I didn't wake up this morning with 3" of snow on the ground? IN MAY!!!! I'm not making this up. It started snowing yesterday and it snowed all night long. It was a wet slushy snow but it was still snow and it was in MAY!

I live in Utah. Utah is one of the states that is very drought prone. I can tell you for a fact that this last winter and the previous winter we got more snow in our mountains than what we have gotten in long time. It still wasn't enough to pull us out of the drought that we are in but it did make things better. The Great Salt Lake is still getting smaller but after last spring run off, the depth increased by something like 3 inches (which is a massive amount of water).

"For example, the Colorado river no longer flows to the ocean. All the water is consumed before it gets there. Here's some actual science on it:"

Yes, I know that. We have siphoned off so much water that it stopped reaching the oceans decades ago. California is the cause. They pull millions and millions of gallons of water from the Colorado river for agriculture and to supply Los Angeles with some of it's drinking water. Mexico is pretty pissed at us for that.

Evaporation is not the cause of it no longer reaching the ocean. In case you didn't know this, from Colorado to the Gulf of Mexico has always been a desert. It has always been hot in the summer and by hot I mean 100+ degrees or more. Evaporation has always happened but still the river used to flow to the ocean.

In addition to that the underground water table in Arizona is shrinking. It is NOT evaporating, it is being pulled out because of all of the people that have moved there.

"While it is true that Cambridge was hacked, and their emails released, they were not making numbers up."

They weren't hacked. At least they weren't hacked when those emails got released. It was people on the inside who apparently had a conscience. But oh my goodness. They were just making up numbers. I read some of the emails. And then maybe about a year later more emails were leaked and they were still just making up numbers.

The fact that they were making up numbers is not in question. It actually happened. It happened in the mid to late 2000's, not 1999. It had nothing to do with tree-ring data.

Is it not possible that you can post a statement without going into the same old stuff about socialism and fascism?

Goodness, I got images and maps and graphs in my Politics_Templates stream to display what you're almost trying to say but would rather opt instead for another excuse to go into Marx bad, but why bother?
I did last year, 2 separate discussions on 2 separate memes 3 days apart, and the Righties kept downloading and arguing AGAINST me while I was posting actual facts to SUPPORT what they were claiming!

"Is it not possible that you can post a statement without going into the same old stuff about socialism and fascism?"

With anyone else, yes. With you, no.

Socialism and fascism are destroying our freedom.
Socialism and fascism are destroying our freedom.
Socialism and fascism are destroying our freedom.
Socialism and fascism are destroying our freedom.
Socialism and fascism are destroying our freedom.
Socialism and fascism are destroying our freedom.
Socialism and fascism are destroying our freedom.

Oops I almost forgot
Communism and nazism are also destroying our freedom.

Socialism, fascism, communism and nazism are destroying our freedom.
Socialism, fascism, communism and nazism are destroying our freedom.
Socialism, fascism, communism and nazism are destroying our freedom.
Socialism, fascism, communism and nazism are destroying our freedom.
Socialism, fascism, communism and nazism are destroying our freedom.
Socialism, fascism, communism and nazism are destroying our freedom.
Socialism, fascism, communism and nazism are destroying our freedom.

Oh yeah, there's one other...
Socialism, fascism, communism, nazism and Democrats are destroying our freedom.
Socialism, fascism, communism, nazism and Democrats are destroying our freedom.
Socialism, fascism, communism, nazism and Democrats are destroying our freedom.
Socialism, fascism, communism, nazism and Democrats are destroying our freedom.

Well... actually I can just sum it all up with:
Democrats are destroying our freedom.
Democrats are destroying our freedom.

I should add, that the "there's only so much co2, so we're not really producing more, we're re-allocating it" is the same argument that car manufacturers used for leaded gasoline. They argued that the amount of lead on earth was unchanged, which while technically true, is a lie.

The amount of lead we were ingesting, breathing, and just living with had increased dramatically due to leaded gasoline.

So, this "total amount is unchanged" is a fallacy. The total amount of co2 in the world has not changed, however, the amount of it circulating in the atmosphere most certainly has.

That is true. CO2 is just being reallocated. But some of it is trapped in other compounds that based on conditions get released or trapped. That is why CO2 levels rise and fall over a given period of time.

Just like in the early history of the planet O2 levels were lower than now. When they increased to about 16% of the atmosphere the Cambrian explosion of life happened. Now we're at 18% and any lower and mankind is history.

And you claim based on ice cores that co2 is not a driver in climate change. Can you show me this evidence?

No. Because I read about it over 20 years ago and I have no idea where to find what I read. However, I am sure that data is out there. It will be excruciatingly hard to find on the internet and may have been scrubbed. There are extremely well funded forces who work overtime hiding and eliminating any factual data that disagrees with the narrative promoted by the UN and the WEF.

Then how do you know what you remember is accurate? I'm old enough that I played the Nevermind cassette in the car I'd just bought a few months earlier. So, I too have a long span of memory to work with. And I know that things get forgotten and details get fuzzy.

So, what you remember about that study might not be what that study was about. Even if you remember with perfect clarity, you could have been wrong in your understanding of what they were saying.

Making something disappear from the internet is next to impossible. Once it's there, it's always there. Just ask Elon Musk about the Emo Husk picture. He's tried to have it removed several times. Wanna blast from the past? Bob Dole's campaign website... you can still look at it. http://www.dolekemp96.org/

there is no vast shadow conspiracy scrubbing climate data from the internet. And the great thing about science, is all you need to do to disprove science is better science.

So, if climate change is a farce, it should be easy to disprove. Although, as I linked before, the very conservative Koch brothers tried, and they ended up proving that its real.

"Then how do you know what you remember is accurate? I'm old enough that I played the Nevermind cassette in the car I'd just bought a few months earlier. So, I too have a long span of memory to work with. And I know that things get forgotten and details get fuzzy."

Well, I don't remember everything from that article but apparently I remember enough to explain it to you.

BTW I'm just a wee bit older than listening to Nevermind on cassette. I was listening to music on an 8-track in my car.

"So, what you remember about that study might not be what that study was about. Even if you remember with perfect clarity, you could have been wrong in your understanding of what they were saying."

Yep. You got me there. You just shut down my argument. OR............ You could be wrong instead.

"Making something disappear from the internet is next to impossible."

Welcome to the world of those of us on the right. Um... yes it is true. You don't see it because they had over all of that liberal nonsense on a gold platter to you on the internet. Most of the time the search engines just make it impossible to find conservative stuff. YouTube is notorious for deleting conservative videos. There was a search engine that was created a couple of years ago called FreeSpoke. They said that they were going to be fair and treat all sides equal. And for about a year they were great. I could actually find stuff on that search engine. Then one day they became exactly like Google, DuckDuckGo, Yahoo and all of the others. I have no idea what happened. Someone on the left got to them and shut down that fairness stuff real fast.

Now what I do is include Fox News, Newmax or one of the other conservative side in the search. I don't like doing that but what choice do I have. And even that doesn't work sometimes. What I always get in the result are links to Snopes and FactCheck, both of whom are schills for the Democrat party. They are typically flat out wrong. I try to find less biased sources and when possible I always go to the original source of the information. Up until Biden was put in office I used to be able to trust the Bureau of Labor Statistics but recently I've been on that site looking up the labor participation rate and all the data has changed. It now favors Democrats. They used show actual facts but all that has been changed to show Obama and Biden responsible for a better labor participation rate and that does jive with so many businesses closing.

▶️ "The biggest factor on the global climate is and always has been the sun. There is nothing man can do to have that big of an impact. Volcanos can cause more changes in the earth's climate than all of the green house gases man produces or should I say, reallocate it. We do not produce gases, we just reallocate what is already existing.

What are these changes supposed to be? With increase levels of CO2 we get increased plant life and more crop production. And if CO2 levels actually do cause temperature increases (there is nothing conclusive that shows that it does based on ice core samples) then that means longer growing seasons. I don't see a problem with that. But that is global warming, not climate change."

⬛ You're all over the place, it's not happening but even if it was a good thing, etc etc,,,

▶️ "There is nothing man can do to have that big of an impact."

⬛ Yes, there is, you refer to eat another comment, somewhat but then you veered off and actually allowed for you will comment to be disputed.

I don't know if you know about Zones in terms of gardening, but most of New York City is Zone 7. It should be a Zone 6, the same as Pennsylvania in the same latitude. Zones are 10 to 15° difference between each. That means NYC is 10 to 15° warmer than it should be. So why is it warmer than PA? Well, the forest that naturally existed here was mostly cut down and replaced with concrete and tar. You walk on the sidewalk past buildings and then come near a park, you feel the difference. It feels like you walked into a room with the air conditioner on full blast.

Tokyo used to be a Zone 7, until it became a behemoth of a city. Unlike many other modern cities, they just built and built and forgot to leave in some green space. Tokyo is very short on parkland and street trees. Now in Tokyo, a place they used to get as cold as NYC in the winter, you can actually grow bananas. In the yard.

▶️ "And if CO2 levels actually do cause temperature increases (there is nothing conclusive that shows that it does based on ice core samps)"

False.
Ice core samples in Antarctica show that starting about 33 million years ago Earth has been losing lots of CO2. The whole planet was a humid tropical place then, the cooler more arid places like we see in North America now are more recent advent. There was a spike of CO2 25mya, and things got really tropical again, but have been cooling again since.
No one is sure why this is happening...

"You're all over the place, it's not happening but even if it was a good thing, etc etc,,,"

Exactly. You're finally getting it. Thanks for coming over to the correct side. The earth is NOT warming but if it did that would be a good thing ESPECIALLY if that meant higher CO2 levels.

Plants love warmth and CO2. We could solve world hunger if global warming was real.

There are two prognostications about the earth warming globally and I believe both of them.

Prognostication 1

Malachi 4:1
"For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch."

Prognostication 2

Science tells us that at some point the sun will go supernova and consume the earth as the sun expands. The earth will burn up before the sun even gets close to consuming the earth.

After that anything else that the government and their trained monkey...oops I mean "scientists", tell you is nothing more than the sky is falling.

BTW it snowed at my house today (May 5th, 2024). How's that global warming working for you?

Leftists when the road sign tells them to go right:

😄👍

Funny, but RIGHT!

If you want free speech, refuse to be cajoled into using woke terminology.

If their opinions were based on superior intellect they would be called the "right" 🤭

The socialist leftists