Climate change exposed

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: face23785

The irony is the video is the definition of junk science.

The only science presented in the video is from the sources and agencies that you hold dear. He simply presents more of it, while climate change advocates dishonestly hide the data that doesn't fit the agenda.

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: face23785

I watched...the usual b$ from the denial. Cherrypicking data points that suit the agenda, using statistical misleading methods to come to a conclusion, ECT...

Yes, that perfectly describes what your climate change religion does.

The sea level is most certainly rising.

You say this as if the video claims sea levels aren't rising. This is just more evidence you didn't watch it. The video does not claim sea levels aren't rising.

Watch the video. It's pointless and counterproductive to comment on something you're uninformed about. You're uninformed. Get informed, then come back and comment.

This time of year, my city floods at high tide especially during new and full moons. This did not happen 30 years ago.

Ask anyone who lives in the Florida Keys, they will tell the water gets higher every year...his sea level rise conclusion was statistically misleading.

More arguing against a point that was never made. You either didn't watch it and you're claiming you did, or you watched it and are purposefully arguing against a point he did not make. Either way, why the dishonesty? If the science is so conclusive, why do you have to lie?

Also, these last 2 points you made are what's known as anecdotes. For someone who cries so much about how we can only listen to science, you sure do like to use non-scientific methods to attempt rebuttals. Your personal observations are not data, and they're not science. There is a lot of science in the video, from the IPCC and many other "official" sources that you believe in. That is the only science he uses in the video. Point out something wrong with it. And if you think their science is wrong, how do you believe their conclusions?

Also the big smoking gun is CO2 levels, he never addressed this issue.

He has numerous videos about CO2. Again, why the lying? Stop lying, thanks.

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: face23785

I watched...the usual b$ from the denial. Cherrypicking data points that suit the agenda, using statistical misleading methods to come to a conclusion, ECT...

The sea level is most certainly rising. This time of year, my city floods at high tide especially during new and full moons. This did not happen 30 years ago.

Ask anyone who lives in the Florida Keys, they will tell the water gets higher every year...his sea level rise conclusion was statistically misleading.

Also the big smoking gun is CO2 levels, he never addressed this issue.

Just address the parts in the video. the guy is very specific, and uses data from the very group you claim are the smart ones. Jesus dude, you seem scared to even be faced with facts that might go against your beliefs.

If you want to grow as a person, you will have to face uncomfortable facts. Now go put on those big boy panties and show us what parts are wrong and why.

a reply to: face23785

No, there is nothing scientific about the conclusions the video makes.

He said sea level rise is the result of the end of the ice age and glacial melting...which is not true today.

Glaciers and ice caps are melting as a result of human induced global warming today and that is the driver behind sea level rise.

where the hell is the A team? that guy from the island, he always has something to say about those damn climate deniers.

a reply to: network dude

Why, just so you and the others can poke holes in whatever I write and just demand more?

It is a waste of time.

Here is a novel idea, do your own research and not blindly believe some quack with a YouTube video that strokes your confirmation bias.

You are basically telling me that the scientists all over the world who study climate change got it wrong, but a couple of guys with a YouTube channel and a handful of PhDs that get paid by fossil fuel conglomerates got it right?

Cool story bro!

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: face23785

No, there is nothing scientific about the conclusions the video makes.

I realize you don't agree with the conclusions. You weren't told to agree with them, so you can't. I get that.

What's wrong with the science? Where is the data he presented faulty? You said it's junk science. What's wrong with it?

He said sea level rise is the result of the end of the ice age and glacial melting...which is not true today.

Not true today?

Glaciers and ice caps are melting as a result of human induced global warming today and that is the driver behind sea level rise.

Get your story straight. Is there glacial melting today or not?

You've backed yourself into a corner trying to opine on something you don't know anything about. Stop lying. One more chance to post without lying and then you get put in time out like a 5 year old.

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: network dude

Why, just so you and the others can poke holes in whatever I write and just demand more?

You just admitted your argument is weak. You know we'll be able to refute you because the facts aren't on your side.

originally posted by: jrod

He said sea level rise is the result of the end of the ice age and glacial melting...which is not true today.

Also, he acknowledges this. That's why the rate of sea level rise has drastically slowed in modern times. CO2 emissions have been increasing in modern times, and, purportedly, so have global temperatues, so the rate of sea level rise should be increasing. The data shows the rate has remained constant for decades.

Try to make even the slightest effort to be open-minded and understand what you're learning? Just a thought.

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: network dude

Why, just so you and the others can poke holes in whatever I write and just demand more?

It is a waste of time.

Here is a novel idea, do your own research and not blindly believe some quack with a YouTube video that strokes your confirmation bias.

You are basically telling me that the scientists all over the world who study climate change got it wrong, but a couple of guys with a YouTube channel and a handful of PhDs that get paid by fossil fuel conglomerates got it right?

Cool story bro!

No one is denying sea level rise, only that it´s man made. This chart from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration says the same as those in the video, and you probably can´t get more real scientists than the guys & gals from NOAA. Here you can clearly see a steady rise in sea levels since at least the 1850s, long before humans could have been the cause.


Source: noaa.gov

Also, there may be a general unity among scientists that there is climate change going on, but there is a division between them when it comes to climate change being caused by man or not.

-MM

Climate change exists and is the biggest issue facing our planet. The real conspiracy is the fossil fuel industry funding bogus studies and bribing scientists & media figures to suggest otherwise. Same crap big tobacco used to pull... it worked so well that to this day some people deny smoking causes cancer. It makes me laugh that people think "Climate Change activism" has somehow been corrupted by money as if the biggest industry in the world doesn't have vested interest in making the world believe the exact opposite.

originally posted by: bigsnowman
Climate change exists and is the biggest issue facing our planet. The real conspiracy is the fossil fuel industry funding bogus studies and bribing scientists & media figures to suggest otherwise. Same crap big tobacco used to pull... it worked so well that to this day some people deny smoking causes cancer. It makes me laugh that people think "Climate Change activism" has somehow been corrupted by money as if the biggest industry in the world doesn't have vested interest in making the world believe the exact opposite.

This tired old crap.

"Big oil is scared of climate change cause they'd lose all their money." You realize the big oil companies are spending billions on developing green energy right? When the world eventually does switch over, so will big oil. They have no reason to fear it. Think for yourself, just this once, please.

Also, you failed to address anything in the video. Tell us where the science is wrong. The only science presented in the video is the same science used by climate change believers.

ETA: And no one seriously denies climate change exists. Effective rebranding. Now the only way you guys are wrong is if the climate remains exactly the same, which is impossible. If the data were so conclusive, you wouldn't need to rely on such snake-oil-salesman tactics.

While Climate Change is man-made, it is overwhelmingly due to fossil fuels. Certain political groups try to turn it around and say it's "our fault" and try to get rid of plastic straws & ask us to take other 'green' measures but that will do nothing in the grand scheme of things. The only thing that will fix it is eliminating fossil fuel use and pursuing clean energy sources.

You can bet 80% of the "climate change is bogus/not man-made" sources you find out there are indirectly funded by big oil & other unscrupulous interest groups. They're supplying you a conspiracy to distract from the real conspiracy and, therefore, accountability on their part. Don't play into it.

Y'all keep throwing parties without inviting me... I'm gonna get an inferiority complex if this keeps up!


Nice video... it coincides exactly with the graphs of temperature in my area taken from Weather Underground. The data I have accumulated, going back to 1950, appears to show a portion of a sinusoidal wave that bottomed out around the 1960s and appears to be peaking sometime between now and 2030. When assembling the data, I observed the trend lines were declining until I hit the mid 1980s.

That's exactly what the video showed... the short period before the 1960s showed a steep downward trend in my data that is ignored whenever climatologists try to present data in favor of Global Warming.

a reply to: jrod

Funny how you believe a short video debunks what all credible scientists around the world tell us is true.

Funny how you believe it doesn't.

To prove a theory requires extensive evidence. To disprove a theory requires one example of that theory being incorrect. That's just the way it works. Someone who believes in a flat earth can show data all day long, but once I traverse the planet in a circle, the theory is disproven. I do not have to continue to traverse the planet in all possible directions to show that it is not flat.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: network dude

Why, just so you and the others can poke holes in whatever I write and just demand more?

It is a waste of time.

Here is a novel idea, do your own research and not blindly believe some quack with a YouTube video that strokes your confirmation bias.

You are basically telling me that the scientists all over the world who study climate change got it wrong, but a couple of guys with a YouTube channel and a handful of PhDs that get paid by fossil fuel conglomerates got it right?

Cool story bro!

I am basically telling you that this video has compelling information. I personally don't deny the change in climate, or even the recent severity of it. I'm not sold on how much is man's fault, but you seem to be all in on that part. If you can't even be bothered to look into this, then anything you have to say on the topic is pointless. Big boy panties. Put them on.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
Y'all keep throwing parties without inviting me... I'm gonna get an inferiority complex if this keeps up!

Nice video... it coincides exactly with the graphs of temperature in my area taken from Weather Underground. The data I have accumulated, going back to 1950, appears to show a portion of a sinusoidal wave that bottomed out around the 1960s and appears to be peaking sometime between now and 2030. When assembling the data, I observed the trend lines were declining until I hit the mid 1980s.

That's exactly what the video showed... the short period before the 1960s showed a steep downward trend in my data that is ignored whenever climatologists try to present data in favor of Global Warming.

That's interesting, since he said that was what you would find. He said similar trends appear across the country. Great to know your data matches up.

a reply to: jrod
Funny how you believe it doesn't.

To prove a theory requires extensive evidence. To disprove a theory requires one example of that theory being incorrect. That's just the way it works. Someone who believes in a flat earth can show data all day long, but once I traverse the planet in a circle, the theory is disproven. I do not have to continue to traverse the planet in all possible directions to show that it is not flat.

TheRedneck

Excellent point. Of course, it's not like these people actually believe in science. This is a political movement, not a scientific one.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: network dude

Why, just so you and the others can poke holes in whatever I write and just demand more?

It is a waste of time.

Here is a novel idea, do your own research and not blindly believe some quack with a YouTube video that strokes your confirmation bias.

You are basically telling me that the scientists all over the world who study climate change got it wrong, but a couple of guys with a YouTube channel and a handful of PhDs that get paid by fossil fuel conglomerates got it right?

Cool story bro!

I am basically telling you that this video has compelling information. I personally don't deny the change in climate, or even the recent severity of it. I'm not sold on how much is man's fault, but you seem to be all in on that part. If you can't even be bothered to look into this, then anything you have to say on the topic is pointless. Big boy panties. Put them on.

I really couldn't care less if he doesn't look into it, I just wish we could get him to stop posting blatant lies.

a reply to: bigsnowman

what part in the video was wrong? was any of it wrong?

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: network dude

Why, just so you and the others can poke holes in whatever I write and just demand more?

It is a waste of time.

Here is a novel idea, do your own research and not blindly believe some quack with a YouTube video that strokes your confirmation bias.

You are basically telling me that the scientists all over the world who study climate change got it wrong, but a couple of guys with a YouTube channel and a handful of PhDs that get paid by fossil fuel conglomerates got it right?

Cool story bro!

I am basically telling you that this video has compelling information. I personally don't deny the change in climate, or even the recent severity of it. I'm not sold on how much is man's fault, but you seem to be all in on that part. If you can't even be bothered to look into this, then anything you have to say on the topic is pointless. Big boy panties. Put them on.

I really couldn't care less if he doesn't look into it, I just wish we could get him to stop posting blatant lies.

He's like Phage, but without the smarts and links and junk. Shame he isn't interested in the climate anymore.

a reply to: bigsnowman

Climate change exists and is the biggest issue facing our planet.

I really wish you guys would work on your definitions. What do you mean by "Climate Change"? If you mean that the weather changes from one year to the next, that's a "d'oh!" Of course it does, and it would take a pretty unintelligent individual to say it doesn't.

If you mean the theory that the use of hydrocarbon combustion by humans is creating carbon dioxide, that's another given. Hydrocarbons are comprised, by definition, of varying amounts of hydrogen and carbon. The complete combustion of carbon in an oxygen-rich environment will lead to the production of carbon dioxide just as surely as the complete combustion of hydrogen in an oxygen-rich environment will lead to water. That's first-week chemistry.

If you mean the theory that a minuscule change in the amount of carbon dioxide in the environment will inevitably lead to major shifts in the temperature and weather patterns of the planet, making life on earth all but impossible and causing cities to be inundated with sea level changes... OK, that's a load of bunk.

The real conspiracy is the fossil fuel industry funding bogus studies and bribing scientists & media figures to suggest otherwise. Same crap big tobacco used to pull... it worked so well that to this day some people deny smoking causes cancer. It makes me laugh that people think "Climate Change activism" has somehow been corrupted by money as if the biggest industry in the world doesn't have vested interest in making the world believe the exact opposite.

What's truly funny is that every study is funded by those who want a particular outcome. The only problem comes when those outcomes that do not support the agenda of the grantors are buried and those which do show the desired outcomes are rewarded and lauded. Do you really believe that governments around the world, especially the IPCC, all of whom stand to gain massive amounts of power over the citizenry, are not just as corrupt, just as interested in skewing the results of their grants, as oil companies?

Please, please, please tell me you are not that gullible?

Scientific research has always been at the mercy of the money brokers. It is only since the advent of Global Warming as Al Gore's and Jim Hansen's personal pet project that scientists have been forced into silence by the threat of poverty and exclusion from future scientific endeavors. Exxon doesn't have that much power over all avenues of science... but governments do.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: bigsnowman

Climate change exists and is the biggest issue facing our planet.

I really wish you guys would work on your definitions. What do you mean by "Climate Change"? If you mean that the weather changes from one year to the next, that's a "d'oh!" Of course it does, and it would take a pretty unintelligent individual to say it doesn't.

If you mean the theory that the use of hydrocarbon combustion by humans is creating carbon dioxide, that's another given. Hydrocarbons are comprised, by definition, of varying amounts of hydrogen and carbon. The complete combustion of carbon in an oxygen-rich environment will lead to the production of carbon dioxide just as surely as the complete combustion of hydrogen in an oxygen-rich environment will lead to water. That's first-week chemistry.

If you mean the theory that a minuscule change in the amount of carbon dioxide in the environment will inevitably lead to major shifts in the temperature and weather patterns of the planet, making life on earth all but impossible and causing cities to be inundated with sea level changes... OK, that's a load of bunk.

The real conspiracy is the fossil fuel industry funding bogus studies and bribing scientists & media figures to suggest otherwise. Same crap big tobacco used to pull... it worked so well that to this day some people deny smoking causes cancer. It makes me laugh that people think "Climate Change activism" has somehow been corrupted by money as if the biggest industry in the world doesn't have vested interest in making the world believe the exact opposite.

What's truly funny is that every study is funded by those who want a particular outcome. The only problem comes when those outcomes that do not support the agenda of the grantors are buried and those which do show the desired outcomes are rewarded and lauded. Do you really believe that governments around the world, especially the IPCC, all of whom stand to gain massive amounts of power over the citizenry, are not just as corrupt, just as interested in skewing the results of their grants, as oil companies?

Please, please, please tell me you are not that gullible?

Scientific research has always been at the mercy of the money brokers. It is only since the advent of Global Warming as Al Gore's and Jim Hansen's personal pet project that scientists have been forced into silence by the threat of poverty and exclusion from future scientific endeavors. Exxon doesn't have that much power over all avenues of science... but governments do.

TheRedneck

And who, exactly, controls the government, Mr Redneck? Why was Trump so anti-Saudi Arabia when he ran for president, only to roll over as soon as he was elected? I'm sure you remember that his first Secretary of State was the CEO of Exxon

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

S&F