Is Climate Change real or a Hoax

[Jollybear]

Yes, I do, because I actually went there and saw the information they have. Maybe you should try it.

I did try it, it raised more questions then it answered for me. Plus, like i said, theres some experts who disagree.

I didn't say you have cognitive dissonance, I wondered. Either way, saying you have it isn't a "tactic", it's an observation.We tried to explain scientific consensus to you, and you bleated about some bull**** youtube video you saw once with a nonsense list of phony signatures. You clearly have no interest in understanding this material, no familiarity with the basic scientific method, and a barely literate grasp of simple English spelling and grammar. Believe what you want. Be an ignorant dupe for commercial interests who care nothing about you nor the planet. I'm out.

Incredable.

No, just because you do not understand what is and what is not evidence does not mean that evidence has not been given to you.

Ok, well for me to understand whether it is or is not evidence i must understand it as such and to do that all my questions must be answered first.

When a person knows nothing and pretends to have knowledge it can be very frustrating for others.

Im not pretending nothing, im skeptical. Simple as that.

Actually you can't be skeptical since you do not u understand the evidence.. All you can be if you claim it is not a threat is a denier.

Excuse me? Im skeptical of global warming being a threat. Its as simple as that.

 

[Jollybear]

I usually respond the same way to skeptics, first is was, "how do you tell your grandkids 'sorry we **** up the world for you?". More recently is "how do you tell your children" and "climate change is killing people now"

Climate change is killing people now? I just wanna bang my head against the wall. Why do i come on this forum at all? I learn way more being off it.

 

[wellwisher]

Climate change is a magic trick. Magic uses science, technology and human nature to create illusions that appear to defy science. If the magician levitates his lovely assistant, he will use science and technology to create what appears to defy the laws of gravity.

The way the climate change magic trick works can be seen with an example. In the 1980's, scientists saw a trend that showed that we were in a period of global cooling. Over a period of about ten years, there way hard data that showed a cooling trend. If we only looked at that ten years, and extrapolated, based on that 10 year trend, it did suggested a new ice age was about to happen.

In terms of today, that ten years turned out to be a small subset, of a larger 100 year trend, which shows a global warming trend. If you focus on the full 100 years, instead of those 10 years, it looks like a warming trend. Like in magic, it is about getting your audience to see things in a certain way.

Science has only been keeping official records since about 1880. If science says today is the warmest day on record, that only means since 1880. It does not mean anytime before that. The earth has had climate for billions of years. However, before 1880, is not considered part of the official record. If 1860 was warmer, this in not included, as a record, since it is not considered official record but anecdotal. The wording is part of the trick to get the audience to look a certain way.

If we were look at an even longer time period, say 100,000 year; last ice age, our current warming tend, is really a small subset of an even larger warming trend. The glaciers used to extend half way down North America and Europe. This is thousand of miles south of today. These glacier melted and receded all the way to the Arctic Circle, by the time science started to keep official records in 1880. We are part of a longer warming cycle, that started way before man had any impact.The magic trick uses only an official 100 year subset. It does not use the entire 100,000 year cycle, or the trick will not work.

Another part of the magic trick has to do with science technology. We have more official tools collecting weather and climate data that in any time in history. The first weather satellite was launched in 1960. This allowed science to collect more data than ever before in a fraction of the time. This did not mean that in 1960, the earth suddenly had more weather events. It meant that science, in 1960, had the ability to officially witness more weather events. This has made it appear like more weather is happening. Now there are over 600 earth observation satellites. The result is we can see more events, than even before, thereby creating the impression there is more.

If you hypothetically stop using all the earth observation satellites, for one year, the amount of officially observed climate events, would drop drastically. There are not enough official weather collectors, on the ground, to compensate for the loss of the satellites. This drop in observational data would appear to show a trend with far less climate events, just like magic. It would also be difficult to get the same earth average temperature, without satellites, since the satellites can currently include remote places, as well as most ocean locations where there are no boats or sensors.

The more money we invest in climate change, the more we can see and report, therefore the better the magic trick is, in terms of an increasing number of official climate events. It is a good trick.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Climate change is a magic trick. Magic uses science, technology and human nature to create illusions that appear to defy science. If the magician levitates his lovely assistant, he will use science and technology to create what appears to defy the laws of gravity.

The way the climate change magic trick works can be seen with an example. In the 1980's, scientists saw a trend that showed that we were in a period of global cooling. Over a period of about ten years, there way hard data that showed a cooling trend. If we only looked at that ten years, and extrapolated, based on that 10 year trend, it did suggested a new ice age was about to happen.

In terms of today, that ten years turned out to be a small subset, of a larger 100 year trend, which shows a global warming trend. If you focus on the full 100 years, instead of those 10 years, it looks like a warming trend. Like in magic, it is about getting your audience to see things in a certain way.

Science has only been keeping official records since about 1880. If science says today is the warmest day on record, that only means since 1880. It does not mean anytime before that. The earth has had climate for billions of years. However, before 1880, is not considered part of the official record. If 1860 was warmer, this in not included, as a record, since it is not considered official record but anecdotal. The wording is part of the trick to get the audience to look a certain way.

If we were look at an even longer time period, say 100,000 year; last ice age, our current warming tend, is really a small subset of an even larger warming trend. The glaciers used to extend half way down North America and Europe. This is thousand of miles south of today. These glacier melted and receded all the way to the Arctic Circle, by the time science started to keep official records in 1880. We are part of a longer warming cycle, that started way before man had any impact.The magic trick uses only an official 100 subset. It does not use the entire 100,000 year cycle or the trick will not work.

Another part of the magic trick has to do with science technology. We have more official tools collecting weather and climate data that in any time in history. The first weather satellite was launched in 1960. This allowed science to collect more data than ever before in a fraction of the time. This did not mean that in 1960, the earth suddenly had more weather events. It meant that science, in 1960, had the ability to officially witness more weather events. This has made it appear like more weather is happening. Now there are over 600 earth observation satellites. The result is we can see more events, than even before, thereby creating the impression there is more. We can key in on the worse, of more, and used fake news news to make this look like the trend.

If you hypothetically stop using all the earth observation satellites, for one year, the amount of officially observed climate events, would drop drastically. There are not enough official weather collectors, on the ground, to compensate for the loss of the satellites. This drop in observational data would appear to show a trend with far less climate events, just like magic. It would also be difficult to get the same earth average temperature, without satellites, since the satellites can currently include remote places, as well as most ocean locations where there are no boats or sensors.

The more money we invest in climate change, the more we can see and report, therefore the better the magic trick is, in terms of an increasing number of official climate events. It is a good trick.

It would help if you knew what you're talking about. I stopped reading when I got to the debunked "scientists used to think global cooling was happening" bit. "Global cooling" was never a mainstream scientific belief. Global cooling - Wikipedia

 

[Subduction Zone]

I did try it, it raised more questions then it answered for me. Plus, like i said, theres some experts who disagree.



Incredable.



Ok, well for me to understand whether it is or is not evidence i must understand it as such and to do that all my questions must be answered first.



Im not pretending nothing, im skeptical. Simple as that.



Excuse me? Im skeptical of global warming being a threat. Its as simple as that.

please do not abuse the term "skeptical". It is perfectly okay to own up to ignorance. You admittedly have no good reason to oppose this concept. If you expect others to try to explain this a negative attitude will not encourage others to instruct you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It would help if you knew what you're talking about. I stopped reading when I got to the debunked "scientists used to think global cooling was happening" bit. "Global cooling" was never a mainstream scientific belief. Global cooling - Wikipedia

Unfortunately the media was more to blame for "global cooling" than anything else. There was no conspiracy behind it, it was merely an attempt to find an interesting news story and they got quite a bit wrong.

 

[ChristineM]

Climate change is killing people now? I just wanna bang my head against the wall. Why do i come on this forum at all? I learn way more being off it.

Ok, up to you how you learn.

Researchers believe that global warming is already responsible for some 150,000 deaths each year around the world,
The Impact of Global Warming on Human Fatality Rates
​

Read and enjoy

 

[metis]

Climate change is a magic trick. Magic uses science, technology and human nature to create illusions that appear to defy science.

That is complete nonsense as I've been following this topic from scientific sources for many decades now since I constantly delve into scientific sources because that was my profession. To portray this as some sort of "magic" or dishonesty by the researchers is to ignore the actual research of what climate scientists have found out that includes their data and also what we know about the effects of increased CO2 and methane gas levels that have been gradually increasing. And we've known the effect of both of those gases since back in the 1800's.

If one wants to argue the above, that's all fine and dandy for some, but since it's clear that we are in a warming trend that is largely caused by human endeavors, there really is no debate except with those who prefer right-wing sources that are not even tied to real scientific studies.

BTW, this last June was the hottest June since records have been kept.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Unfortunately the media was more to blame for "global cooling" than anything else. There was no conspiracy behind it, it was merely an attempt to find an interesting news story and they got quite a bit wrong.

I am aware of this. However, the people who have decided to tack climate change denial onto their political identity LOVE to bring it up, in a "duuur, climatologists used to think we were having a new ICE AGE, now they say it's getting hotter, science is stupid" strawman.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am aware of this. However, the people who have decided to tack climate change denial onto their political identity LOVE to bring it up, "duuur, climatologists used to think we were having a new ICE AGE, now they say it's getting hotter, science is stupid" strawman.

Some of them will also bring up irradiance as the cause, and yet from my understanding the latest irradiance predicts cooler temperatures. I wonder why it is warmer?

 

[james dixon]

Some of them will also bring up irradiance as the cause, and yet from my understanding the latest irradiance predicts cooler temperatures. I wonder why it is warmer?

Your life time is a "second" in time
The north half of earth was once covered in ice...,<>.,.
& once a molten, bubbling mass
Be thankful you were not seeing the ash falling upon you
-

 

[Jollybear]

please do not abuse the term "skeptical". It is perfectly okay to own up to ignorance. You admittedly have no good reason to oppose this concept. If you expect others to try to explain this a negative attitude will not encourage others to instruct you.

Why cant you just be a good boy and accept that im skeptical of your position, despite whether i know alot about how it works or not.

The fact you have to paint me to look like i somehow secretly agree with you says volumes about your position being so lacking in defense that you got to go to this level by making this about me rather then the subject, question and answers. Bite after bite process.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why cant you just be a good boy and accept that im skeptical of your position, despite whether i know alot about how it works or not.

The fact you have to paint me to look like i somehow secretly agree with you says volumes about your position being so lacking in defense that you got to go to this level by making this about me rather then the subject, question and answers. Bite after bite process.

Because you don't know enough to be skeptical. By the way, I tried to find out how much you knew about the sciences. Are you willing to begin again?

 

[Jollybear]

Because you don't know enough to be skeptical. By the way, I tried to find out how much you knew about the sciences. Are you willing to begin again?

I do know enough to be skeptical. I dont know enough to stop being skeptical to certain.

Ok?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I do know enough to be skeptical. I dont know enough to stop being skeptical to certain.

Ok?

When you do not even understand the Greenhouse Effect that is clearly not the case. And that is at a very basic level.

Didn't you want the information that would allow you to judge this properly?

 

[Jollybear]

When you do not even understand the Greenhouse Effect that is clearly not the case. And that is at a very basic level.

Didn't you want the information that would allow you to judge this properly?

Bfore i came on this thread i must have listened to 4 debates and listened to lectures and read some articles too.

Just because i dont remember everything or understand everything dont mean im not skeptical.

But if you wanna keep making this about me, then we may as well move on.

But, if you wanna discuss the subject, lets presume.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Bfore i came on this thread i must have listened to 4 debates and listened to lectures and read some articles too.

Just because i dont remember everything or understand everything dont mean im not skeptical.

But if you wanna keep making this about me, then we may as well move on.

But, if you wanna discuss the subject, lets presume.

I don't want to make this "about you". But I am willing to go over the basics so that you can judge the claims of sources better.

 

[james dixon]

When you do not even understand the Greenhouse Effect that is clearly not the case. And that is at a very basic level.

I find the evolution of our earth very interesting and it is so simple you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to understand It.

Stage one: a molten ball of melted rock

Stage two: the lava cooled while volcano's spewed out huge amounts of CO2

Stage three: microbial life breathed in the CO2 and exhaled O2

Stage four: living creators breathed in O2 and exhaled CO2

Stage five: all living things in the oceans died and sink to the bottom which metabolized into fossil fuels

Stage six: humans burn the fuel releasing CO2

Stage seven: Humans burn up the fossil fuels and switch to renewable s

Stage eight: a balance is reached where animals breath in O2 and exhale CO2

Plants breath in CO2 and exhale O2

Life goes on and animals/plants are happy campers living together in harmony
Then comes WW3 and all humans are blown to pieces leaving the monkeys left to inherit the earth

 

[wellwisher]

One of the conceptual problems with the green house affect, is the affect is treated as a one way street, that acts as an insulator that causes the earth to accumulate heat. The reality is, CO2 and the other greenhouse gases, can also block the heat from the sun, so less reaches the surface. CO2 absorbs specific wavelengths of energy, and is not fussy of the source. It works with the sun as well as the earth.

If you have thermal windows on your house, these keep you warm in winter and cool in summer. They block the direction of maximum heat flow. During the day this is from the sun, and at night this is from the earth. The one way street assumption, is one of the reasons the temperature rise predictions are always too high. The solar heat is also blocked, using the same gases.

 

[Subduction Zone]

One of the conceptual problems with the green house affect, is the affect is treated as a one way street, that acts as an insulator that causes the earth to accumulate heat. The reality is, CO2 and the other greenhouse gases, can also block the heat from the sun, so less reaches the surface. CO2 absorbs specific wavelengths of energy, and is not fussy of the source. It works with the sun as well as the earth.

If you have thermal windows on your house, these keep you warm in winter and cool in summer. They block the direction of maximum heat flow. During the day this is from the sun, and at night this is from the earth. The one way street assumption, is one of the reasons the temperature rise predictions are always too high. The solar heat is also blocked, using the same gases.

Nope, you do not understand how the Greenhouse effect works. It is not that hard to understand, would you like to go over it?