"But Global Warming is a HOAX!!!"

[The Atheist]

But I really have tried to do whatever I can to mitigate global warming, but it's nothing in the face of entrenched interest groups who are sticking their fingers in their ears and screaming "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!" and are sailing the good ship Earth full speed head first straight into the rocks while they keep making money hand over fist while others die around them!

Every time the subject is mentioned I recall a board meeting of Trust Bank NZ that I was invited to speak to in 1987.

I covered global warming and was heartened by the directors unanimously guffawing at the idea the ecosphere was in danger from human use of fossil fuels.

They're already all dead.

Nice to see deniers in the thread - it must take a special kind of wlful ignorance to not see the effects happening daily.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

There should be a word for people who uncritically accept any doomsday climate predictions just because they're ways of showing that they're on the right side and "believe" in global warming. Climate credulists, maybe.

...and the OP is BS. What kind of non-scientist would use the facts that Phoenix, AZ "could hit 120 degrees Fahrenheit" and that has only happened "three times since 1929" to posture about global warming?

There is: realists.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

I have difficulty understanding your position.

Yes, quite. You've attributed to me all sort of things I've never said. You also seem to have difficulty understanding the position of the OP, and you seem really riled up about climate change.

I think I'm going with Climate Credulist.

 

[varwoche]

There should be a word for people who uncritically accept any doomsday climate predictions just because they're ways of showing that they're on the right side and "believe" in global warming. Climate credulists, maybe.

...and the OP is BS. What kind of non-scientist would use the facts that Phoenix, AZ "could hit 120 degrees Fahrenheit" and that has only happened "three times since 1929" to posture about global warming?

You're right, in that a single temperature reading doesn't mean anything on the grand scale. But alas, we also know that the hottest years in recorded history are 2010, 2012, 2014, 2015, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2021, and 2022. And 2023 is on track to be the hottest year yet.

 

[Beerina]

You know what? I really don't give a **** anymore about it. I'll be dead before the **** really hits the fan. But I really have tried to do whatever I can to mitigate global warming, but it's nothing in the face of entrenched interest groups who are sticking their fingers in their ears and screaming "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!" and are sailing the good ship Earth full speed head first straight into the rocks while they keep making money hand over fist while others die around them!

The last rich survivors in their redoubts at the poles or deep underground will still be counting their money when they drop dead.

Because technology 300 years in the future is easier to predict than people in 1700 predicting today's.

"Man. Horse **** dust is causing problems. Ban farming!"

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

I just heard a researcher this morning talking about how far along we are in the science of attribution (apologies for the block-o-text)...

So source attribution science really does help us to identify the role of specific emission sources. So this work started back in 2013 with the publication by Richard Heede, which found that nearly 2/3 of industrial carbon emissions from the industrial revolution onward can be traced to just 90 of the largest fossil fuel and cement producers. So Exxon Mobil, BP, Shell just to name a few, right. It’s just 90 companies again that are responsible for these two thirds of carbon emissions. One of the first studies to make the connection with global warming was published in 2017 by some of my colleagues at UCS. And they found that emissions from these 90 major fossil fuel producers and cement manufacturers contributed around 42 to 50% of all global temperature rise. We also now know that upwards of 32% of global sea level rise was tied to the products of these carbon producers and that nearly half of all ocean acidification. So these are incredibly large numbers from really a small number of industry actors. A few weeks ago I published a new study with colleagues at the Union of Concerned Scientists and researchers from UC Merced. And our study takes a look it takes a really significant step forward by connecting emissions from the world's largest carbon producers to fire prone conditions and burned areas. So this really groundbreaking research addresses wildfires for the first time at a regional scale and provides clear and compelling evidence of how the fossil fuel industry emissions have influenced these devastating events. So specifically, our findings revealed that nearly 40% of the total area burned by forest fires in the Western US and Southwestern Canada since 1986 can be attributed to the emissions of these major carbon producers.

So attribution science has been cited in the latest IPCC which is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. And this is a really important moment because the IPCC is a global synthesis of climate science, which has consensus for its publication by 159 nation. So there is a lot of consensus around the science.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

The one small comfort I have with the 'It's a hoax, lets not do anything because economics!' attitude is that the countries and politicians/voters enabling that are the ones that will make their own (grand)children suffer the most.

One the American and European/Chinese agricultural areas dry up due to the heat and all the coastal cities are flooded the economic damage will be of an unprecedented level.

Covid-19 has already shown that slowing down our economies to a level that gives sustainable CO2 emissions was not the total economic disaster predicted. We survived just fine while getting slightly less rich. But the will is not there. So the next generations will get to pay the bill with major interest.

At least I try to do my bit by investing in less energy consuming equipment in my house, using my car less, less holidays by plane, voting for political parties willing to curb economic growth to try and save the environment and I have no children, so there is that too.

 

[bruto]

Yes, quite. You've attributed to me all sort of things I've never said. You also seem to have difficulty understanding the position of the OP, and you seem really riled up about climate change.

I think I'm going with Climate Credulist.

So enlighten me. What have I attributed to you that you have not said? "All sort" suggests a multiplicity of misattributions.

Have you made clear to anyone whether you believe climate change exists at all? It is not clear to me. The answer to that would be simple, I think.

One might start, I think, with the question of whether reported rises in the average temperature across the entire world constitute what might be called global warming, and if not, what term might be applied to the phenomenon whereby the average temperature of the entire earth increases.

I don't think I have any difficulty understanding the position of the OP. It should be fairly obvious that I tend to agree with it. My difficulty is in the presumption that it is uncritical, and that a doomsday scenario is inherent in it.

 

[Hercules56]

Its interesting how 1929 became synonymous with "like, forever!!!".

If it didn't happen after 1929, it never happened!!!!

 

[Hercules56]

I think this is all the evidence I need.

We’re experiencing Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years, and it’s just getting started

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/76064a9ea8977dc2.jpg[/qimg]

So temperatures before 120,000 years don't matter?

Will folks lose their worry if we discover that 5 million years ago, temps were much warmer than today?

 

[The Great Zaganza]

I'll start doing something when the earth gets as hot as 5 billion years ago.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

So temperatures before 120,000 years don't matter?

Will folks lose their worry if we discover that 5 million years ago, temps were much warmer than today?

[qimg]https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/358110203_10158793298390738_60746118866908406_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&cb=99be929b-3346023f&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=dbeb18&_nc_ohc=k30WIgcu11AAX9RZEA6&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-1.xx&oh=00_AfB_f4bvRJW9nTXhLSK8D_imF41BfrfP-0oBKPPCTUUojQ&oe=64B053EC[/qimg]

I guess that depends on the worry.

Do I worry life on Earth is in danger if we raise the temperature back to those of 400 million years ago?
No I don't. In a measely 100k years or so nature will have adapted.

If I worry about our ability to cope with the usable land shifting north into Canada and Russis while losing all coastal cities? Yes I do

 

[bruto]

Five million years ago, mankind was still a couple of million in the future, and I suspect the world was, in may ways, different from what it is now, and suspect that some of those ways it has changed have not been cyclical. I am not quite sure why the temperature of earth long before the evolution of mankind should be more relevant than the question of whether the earth is getting warmer by the year even if the reasons some people cite for this should turn out to be false. It is possible to argue that we are not the cause of various trends in climate change, but it does not seem equally possible to argue that our effect on the world's resources, populations, pollutants and atmospheric conditions is simply nonexistent or invisible.

Saying the earth does not care what we do is not the same thing as saying we're not doing it. Saying what you see is not what you think it is is not the same thing as saying there's nothing to see.

 

[Pixel42]

So temperatures before 120,000 years don't matter?

Will folks lose their worry if we discover that 5 million years ago, temps were much warmer than today?

Of course not.

If the combination of natural climate forcings which led to much warmer temperatures millions of years ago were causing the current rapid warming it would be just as big a problem for us. Bigger, actually, because there would be nothing we could do about it. Fortunately there is something we can do about the rapid climate change which is in the process of creating so many problems for us, and that's to stop causing it.

 

[Myriad]

So temperatures before 120,000 years don't matter?

Why would temperatures 120 millennia ago matter?

Will folks lose their worry if we discover that 5 million years ago, temps were much warmer than today?

[qimg]https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/358110203_10158793298390738_60746118866908406_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&cb=99be929b-3346023f&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=dbeb18&_nc_ohc=k30WIgcu11AAX9RZEA6&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-1.xx&oh=00_AfB_f4bvRJW9nTXhLSK8D_imF41BfrfP-0oBKPPCTUUojQ&oe=64B053EC[/qimg]

That depends. Where were the coastlines 5 million years ago? Where was there sufficient rainfall for agriculture 5 million years ago?

 

[Mike!]

So temperatures before 120,000 years don't matter?

Will folks lose their worry if we discover that 5 million years ago, temps were much warmer than today?

[qimg]https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/358110203_10158793298390738_60746118866908406_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&cb=99be929b-3346023f&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=dbeb18&_nc_ohc=k30WIgcu11AAX9RZEA6&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-1.xx&oh=00_AfB_f4bvRJW9nTXhLSK8D_imF41BfrfP-0oBKPPCTUUojQ&oe=64B053EC[/qimg]

Do you think The Flintstones was a documentary?

 

[newyorkguy]

This reminds me of what one of these idiots said -- apparently seriously, and it might have been emptyg -- that people lived five million years ago in much hotter climates and they got along just fine.

Reality check from Time Magazine:

The last time the Earth was hotter than it is today was at least 125,000 years ago, long before anything that resembled human civilization appeared...The truth is, extreme heat is remaking our planet into one in which large swaths may become inhospitable to human life. One recent study projected that over the next fifty years, one to three billion people will be left outside the climate conditions that gave rise to civilization over the last six thousand years. Even if we transition fairly quickly to clean energy, half of the world’s human population will be exposed to life-threatening combinations of heat and humidity by 2100. Time news link

As I posted in another thread, below is a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration chart. Despite all the studies and hyperbole, greenhouse gas emissions continue to increase and they're increasing by a lot.
[IMGW=500]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=1474&pictureid=13596[/IMGW]

 

[dann]

Do people really still say that?

I hope the posts in this thread have convinced you that, yes, people still say that.

 

[dann]

So temperatures before 120,000 years don't matter?

Will folks lose their worry if we discover that 5 million years ago, temps were much warmer than today?

I'm sure it will make Thylacosmilus happy.

 

[lomiller]

Will folks lose their worry if we discover that 5 million years ago, temps were much warmer than today?

5 million years is plenty of time for evolution to adapt plants animals and ecosystems to new temperature regimes.

200 years is not...