Climate Change Performance Index 2023 Released

[sayak83]

But there is as yet, no one world government, and no consensus on AGW claims, you are speculating about the future and imho, you are on the wrong side of history, the baddies days are numbered.

There is overwhelming consensus in the scientific community that AGW is real and is a cause for grave concern.
You do not need a world govt. Corporates and Govts. who do not pay reparations for damage will be stopped from trade and doing business. Of course all of this will happen only if we do not do anything voluntarily now. The climate damages will rise exponentially to the point where unregulated emitters will be treated like North Korea's Nuclear weapons program. Pariah states and pariah companies.
You are on the wrong side of history, not me.

 

[sayak83]

So you think the ocean circulation oscillations like La Nina, and El Nino isn't affecting the current climate state, and changes in cloud coverage doesn't affect..., etc., etc. There is naturally an anthropogenic contribution, but it is not the sole cause. No one can say for certain the precise details and amounts of all the contributions.

We can say with 99% certainty that above trend of increasing temperature that is clearly visible in all actual scientific data is due to human emissions. Source
https://library.wmo.int/doc_num.php?explnum_id=11178

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is overwhelming consensus in the scientific community that AGW is real and is a cause for grave concern.
You do not need a world govt. Corporates and Govts. who do not pay reparations for damage will be stopped from trade and doing business. Of course all of this will happen only if we do not do anything voluntarily now. The climate damages will rise exponentially to the point where unregulated emitters will be treated like North Korea's Nuclear weapons program. Pariah states and pariah companies.
You are on the wrong side of history, not me.

Ironically if a neighbor of his dumped their trash all over his property I can guarantee to you that he would go to the cops. Yet he cannot understand how other nations could end up doing the same to the US or China.

Worse yet, why are science deniers unwilling to even try to learn the basics? It is not hard at all to understand the Greenhouse Effect fully. Three concepts is all that it takes. Understanding the Stefan Boltzmann law is easy. It was derived through direct observation and direct measurements. One does not need any advanced math to understand that. The fact that the air is transparent or opaque to different frequencies of light. White light can hit the Earth, Get absorbed and then reemitted as infrared light. Lastly electromagnetic absorption or if one wished the tendency for different gases to absorb different frequencies of light. There are plenty of experiments that show how CO2 will absorb infrared light and in a column of air 60 miles high there is going to be a fair amount of CO2. Raising the carbon dioxide amount is like throwing on another blanket.

Oh and I almost forgot. How do we know that man did it? That is done with isotope analysis. Plants do no absorb C13 are readily as C12. That was true hundreds of millions of years ago when oil and coal were formed by plant life just as it is true today. Scientists can confirm this by analyzing the carbon in fossil fuels. And carbon samples in various sources allow us to analyze the historic ratios of C13 to C12. The increase in CO2 was accompanied by a decrease in the relative amount of C13 in the atmosphere. Telling us that a low level source of carbon, specifically fossil fuels, was the source of the increase.

Sorry, i know that you know this, but others may read it and begin to understand the basics.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Well, the governments of the world are "panicking" but most are slacking. I.e. the question if AGW is true has been answered, according to almost all world governments. You trying to deny that is fighting windmills (and completely off topic and probably trolling).
The question now is only who does how much against it.

No. I don't believe governments always have my best interests at heart, my existence is of such importance that I do what is required to realize the truth through direct understanding, not through belief.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

We can say with 99% certainty that above trend of increasing temperature that is clearly visible in all actual scientific data is due to human emissions. Source
https://library.wmo.int/doc_num.php?explnum_id=11178

View attachment 68591

Mere claims by vested interests whose research is paid for by AGW believers.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

There is overwhelming consensus in the scientific community that AGW is real and is a cause for grave concern.
You do not need a world govt. Corporates and Govts. who do not pay reparations for damage will be stopped from trade and doing business. Of course all of this will happen only if we do not do anything voluntarily now. The climate damages will rise exponentially to the point where unregulated emitters will be treated like North Korea's Nuclear weapons program. Pariah states and pariah companies.
You are on the wrong side of history, not me.

Corruption is endemic in the world today, these are end times my friend and Satan is practically running the planet, do not be deceived.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No. I don't believe governments always have my best interests at heart, my existence is of such importance that I do what is required to realize the truth through direct understanding, not through belief.

You are once again using a strawman argument. There was no implication that governments always have your best interest at heart. Sometimes they do, sometimes they may not. This is a case where they do.


That you apparently feel a need to attempt to change the argument tells us that you are trying to fool yourself.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

You are once again using a strawman argument. There was no implication that governments always have your best interest at heart. Sometimes they do, sometimes they may not. This is a case where they do.

That you apparently feel a need to attempt to change the argument tells us that you are trying to fool yourself.

You did not read the post I responded to, it said some governments are "panicking", others are slacking wrt AGW response, and all I implied in my response was that I don't trust governments regardless, in the context of having my best interests at heart.

If you believe them, fine, go for it, join Greta, but as for me, there is nothing new under the sun.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You did not read the post I responded to, it said some governments are "panicking", others are slacking wrt AGW response, and all I implied in my response was that I don't trust governments regardless, in the context of having my best interests at heart.

If you believe them, fine, go for it, join Greta, but as for me, there is nothing new under the sun.

I had read it. You added the word " always" which was not in or implied in the post that you responded to. Sometimes adding one word makes one lose the argument.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I had read it. You added the word " always" which was not in or implied in the post that you responded to. Sometimes adding one word makes one lose the argument.

Is English your second language, reread my post?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Is English your second language, reread my post?

Please, you are projecting again. That does not change your use of the word "always" in your earlier post.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Please, you are projecting again. That does not change your use of the word "always" in your earlier post.

Post the complete sentence and tell me what you think it means I am conveying.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Post the complete sentence and tell me what you think it means I am conveying.

I already quoted your whole post when I first refuted it. That was your chance. You don't get a second one.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I already quoted your whole post when I first refuted it. That was your chance. You don't get a second one.

You live in a fantasy world, there are no chances involved, I merely explain to you my position.

If you don't like it, that's fine, it is not as though I need to prove anything to a time waster whose life's legacy is endlessly posting on an insignificant internet forum about nonsense.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You live in a fantasy world, there are no chances involved, I merely explain to you my position.

If you don't like it, that's fine, it is not as though I need to prove anything to a time waster whose life's legacy is endlessly posting on an insignificant internet forum about nonsense.

I missed this.

You are projecting wildly. How do I know this? Because you refuse to go over even the basics of science, which you do have a good chance of understanding.

And what is nice about the basics is that they are very hard to deny.

 

[Mock Turtle]

You live in a fantasy world, there are no chances involved, I merely explain to you my position.

If you don't like it, that's fine, it is not as though I need to prove anything to a time waster whose life's legacy is endlessly posting on an insignificant internet forum about nonsense.

Mirror meet @ben d

 

[sayak83]

Corruption is endemic in the world today, these are end times my friend and Satan is practically running the planet, do not be deceived.

I am a scientist working on renewable energy and climate dynamics. It will be very hard to deceive me in my own area.

 

[sayak83]

Mere claims by vested interests whose research is paid for by AGW believers.

Scientific consensus build by thousands of hours of meticulous peer reviews research and data analysis is far far more than mere claims. These are collections of thousands and thousands of real world temperature data and associated variables thoroughly vetted by hundreds of scientists. Those who believe in the true facts of global warming believe so because the data is inescapable.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I hope that is a joke. You cannot increase the water vapour content of the atmosphere no matter how much steam you emit. The only way to increase or decrease the water vapor content of the atmosphere is by raising the temperature of the atmosphere (as is happening now). That is why water vapor is considered not a forcer of climate change, but part of a positive feedback mechanism.

Water vapour and air is something like a sugar in water solution. You cannot dissolve more sugar in water than its max capacity unless you heat up the solution by some other means.

That's not what the experts say/suggest.. No joke.


'Runaway greenhouse' easier to trigger on Earth than thought, study says

Snippet..

It's plausible that conditions on Earth could get so hot and steamy that the oceans entirely evaporate and render the planet inhospitable to life, according to new calculations that suggest this so-called runaway greenhouse is easier to initiate than previously believed.

"We could go into the runaway greenhouse today if we could get the planet hot enough to get enough water vapor into the atmosphere," Colin Goldblatt, a professor of Earth system evolution at the University of Victoria in British Columbia, Canada, and lead author of the study, told NBC News.

 

[sayak83]

That's not what the experts say/suggest.. No joke.


'Runaway greenhouse' easier to trigger on Earth than thought, study says

Read the article carefully. See that it says

We could go into the runaway greenhouse today if we could get the planet hot enough to get enough water vapor into the atmosphere," Colin Goldblatt, a professor of Earth system evolution at the University of Victoria in British Columbia.

Now read what I said about how you need to heat up the planet by other means before water vapour content can be increased