By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Trump: 'Nobody Really Knows' If Climate Change Is Real

fatslob-:O on 15 December 2016
the-pi-guy said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v-w8Cyfoq8

So sad of Bill Nye to promote the doomsday scenario and strangely enough the comments are disabled on the video ...  

Too bad you can't exactly use the greenhouse model for Earth when temperature changes are not proportional to the input of carbon dioxide ... 

Another falsification on video's part is that climate change causes more extreme whether in general but the only extreme weather that even has correlation with climate change are heat waves so climate change doesn't correlate to having more tornados, huricanes, floods, cyclones, etc ...



Around the Network
Teeqoz on 15 December 2016
Lawlight said:
the-pi-guy said:

We are actually able to perform experiments on this.  We know what CO2 does.  There's no doubt about it.  We can test it in labs or at home.  There are tons of factors that affect climate, but seeing as most of those factors are actually low right now; they are clearly not what's causing the change.  We can create models based on all those things.  

The countries that have a fertility rate of more than 2 are actually not the problem.  Those countries aren't very rich or industrialized.  The more industrialized countries, firstly have a rate around 2 or even a little lower for some of them, and secondly burn oil and coal to heat and power cars, houses, skyscrapers, and everything else.  

Fertility rate drops when countries get richer.  CO2 production conversely increases.  

And conversely, climate is not in a closet.  It is open and free to anyone who wants to study it.  So, even easier for fraud to be detected.  

Fertility might decrease in those developed countries but population growth doesn't. The US's population has increased by a factor of 10 in the past 150 years. China doubled in the past 50 years. UK doubled in the past 100 years. Even Japan with its low fertility has seen an increase of 150% in its population over the past 100 years.

You know it's only recently that Japan has had very low fertility rates? So quoting data from the last 100 years makes no sense. I honestly can't tell if you chose a misleading dataset on purpose, or maybe you actually aren't aware that Japan's population has been decreasing since 2009. China too. Again, silly to only use the past 50 years when they are currently at the lowest population growth they've had in modern times.



Chris Hu on 15 December 2016
shikamaru317 said:

He has a point. Scientists always think they know something, once upon a time the scientific community thought the Earth was flat and that the Sun revolved around the Earth, they were wrong. Modern Science is not incontrovertible. While the climate definitely is changing, there is no way to know for certain that it's human caused rather than the natural climate changes this planet has always had.

Uh, nope scientist never thought the Earth was flat or that the Sun revolved around the Earth those believes where held by religious people.  The ancient Greeks already knew that the Earth was round and that the Sun is at the center of our solar system.



binary solo on 15 December 2016
the-pi-guy said:
fatslob-:O said:

No it doesn't because you could be wasting time or resources that could be used elsewhere instead of having to combat a future where you don't know if it's a doomsday scenario or not ... 

It's just a stupid impediment to be paranoid about the worst case scenario to the point where it hurts productivity at every level!

Do you suggest that we don't use cars because of a possible chance that they'll crash ? Do you suggest that we destroy every possible electronics out there just to make the extreme environmentalists happy ? Do you suggest that we stop all development on science because of a fear that it may one day be used as a weapon ? Do you suggest that every country be extremely isolationist so that nations may never be at war with each other ? Do you suggest that we don't industrialize AT ALL so that we may never have machines produce CO2 emissions in favour of bringing world wide famine just to save ourselves from global warming ? Do we have to stifle human progress for the sake of the planet to the point where it won't serve our needs anymore ?

Surely you MUST be intelligent enough to see stupidity in these similar cases and that includes unfounded fears on a doomsday scenario of global warming ? 

Climate change isn't unfounded.  It's based on physics.  You can perform experiments on Carbon Dioxide, and see the effects it has on temperature. You can create models based on those experiments.  You can compare the atmospheres of different planets and see how that affects the temperature. 

Venus for example is warmer than Mercury despite being further away, because of the composition and density of its atmosphere.  Venus's temperature is also more consistent because of it.  Mercury despite being very close gets very cold at night.  Whereas Venus is farther away, and yet still hotter than Mercury during the day time.  

Fighting climate change doesn't have to do with stopping industrialization.  There's a reason why Bill Gates and Elon Musk are spending billions of dollars on this.  All it means is that we have to use alternative industries.  Solar for example, will be huge.  If anything, with the increased push by all the other countries in the world, fighting climate change by creating new industries will actually help us be more competitive.  China will run away with green technologies, otherwise.  

I thought mercury was tidally locked to the sun so it doesn't rotate on its axis. Just like the moon doesn't rotate on its axis. 



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

IsawYoshi on 15 December 2016
fatslob-:O said:

Too bad you can't exactly use the greenhouse model for Earth when temperature changes are not proportional to the input of carbon dioxide ... 

The oceans works as a buffer system. This means that they absorb the CO2 and stops it from all going into the air (some still do, just not all of it). This is only a temporary "solution", that in the end will make the pH levels of the oceans decrease and make most life there die out. 



Around the Network
Chris Hu on 15 December 2016
Birimbau said:

Yeah that guy is a moron he works for a conservative think tank of course he is gonna denny global warming.



fatslob-:O on 15 December 2016
the-pi-guy said:

Climate change leads to higher sea levels.  Which affects flooding and hurricanes.  Heat also helps in forming tornadoes.  

heat waves -> tornadoes

heat waves -> melting ice -> flooding

It doesn't! 

Even the NOAA found no discernible relationship between climate change and other forms of extreme weather like droughts, flooding, cyclones, or hurricanes ... 

The only thing you could argue is that climate change is correlated heat waves but even the united states is benefitting from warmer temperatures as it's citizens are less likely to die than before from colder weather! 



Lawlight on 15 December 2016
Teeqoz said:
Lawlight said:

Fertility might decrease in those developed countries but population growth doesn't. The US's population has increased by a factor of 10 in the past 150 years. China doubled in the past 50 years. UK doubled in the past 100 years. Even Japan with its low fertility has seen an increase of 150% in its population over the past 100 years.

You know it's only recently that Japan has had very low fertility rates? So quoting data from the last 100 years makes no sense. I honestly can't tell if you chose a misleading dataset on purpose, or maybe you actually aren't aware that Japan's population has been decreasing since 2009. China too. Again, silly to only use the past 50 years when they are currently at the lowest population growth they've had in modern times.

Effing hell, I typed a response and VGChartz was down and now I don't feel like typing. But the jist of it is that Im using 100 years to correlate it to approximately how long we've had climate change data. The point remains that population has exploded in developed countries which contributes to global warming.

 

China's growth might have slowed but we're still talking about 7M more people each year (7.3M last - highest increase in the past 10 years).



Nem on 15 December 2016
naruball said:
How people keep defending him is beyond me.

He never had any defense. Half of america just falls for the simplest one liners.



bunchanumbers on 15 December 2016

Its amusing. Your house could be on fire, and I'm thinking that some of you would still be saying 'Prove it.'