"Man-made" Climate Change Lunathicks Out in Full Force

Akrasia · 08-09-2018 11:15AM

dense wrote: »

I'm not sure whether you're being disingenuous or whether you just don't understand the question.

I didn't ask you whether you think the world needs to go carbon neutral.

I asked you to explain what affect Ireland will have on global warming by going carbon neutral.

So for all the young or slightly more naive readers out there looking out for someone they can trust to tell them about Ireland's past affect on climate change and how a fossil fuel free Ireland will affect climate change in the future, here's your chance to give an honest answer.

The more you avoid the question, or pretend to have been asked something else, the less credible you and the rest of those pushing the carbon neutral racket look.

Dense telling me I have no credibility is gas considering that you think NASA aren't trustworthy but Tony Heller aka Stephen Goddard is.

Your question has been answered. Ireland's contribution to global warming is greater than our proportion of the global population, therefore we have a greater obligation to act than the majority of the countries in the world, and as a member of the EU we have a much greater global influence than most other countries our size.

I'll wait patiently for you to answer my question now

dense · 08-09-2018 11:57AM

Akrasia wrote: »

Dense telling me I have no credibility is gas considering that you think NASA aren't trustworthy but Tony Heller aka Stephen Goddard is.

The irony of you posting under an anonymous username scoffing at someone else posting under a username seems to have gone over your head.

But I believe NASA when they say they'd created a +0.5°C warming from adjustments for the US for the 20th century.

Your own trustworthiness goes when you can't explain what affect Ireland has had or can have on climate change.

Akrasia wrote: »

Ireland's contribution to global warming is greater than our proportion of the global population, therefore we have a greater obligation to act than the majority of the countries in the world, and as a member of the EU we have a much greater global influence than most other countries our size.

This is pure waffle; instead of scouring eco activists sites for moral cliches why not quantify the effect on climate change of this disproportionate global influence you have invented for Ireland?

If you are going to make sweeping claims that Ireland has disproportionately globally influenced climate change you'll have to demonstrate that it is something other than a fuzzy idea you have read somewhere.

Be scientific, use numbers and we'll have a look and see whether your previous faux pas of believing a 0.6%
energy saving from the vacuum cleaner regulations was a "significant" energy saving was a one off or whether your idea of Ireland having a disproportionate global affect on global warming is more of the same hysterics.

dense · 08-09-2018 01:01PM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

I assume the clever point you think you're making here is that Ireland is a small country and therefore reducing our emissions won't have any significant effect, right? Correct me if I'm wrong. The problem with that line of thinking is similar to people saying one vote won't make a difference. Of course it won't, by itself, but if everyone takes that attitude then nothing ever changes.

Is there any actual reason you're against reducing emissions other than the socialist conspiracy stuff?

I have already told Akrasia that their carbon footprint could be the trigger that sets off the catastrophic tipping point they're so concerned about, or could have triggered the weather events that they claim were as a result of humans warming the planet but they're not buying it.

If Akrasia doesn't buy into that I can't see them having any legitimacy in this conversation.

They are flip flopping about the responsibility of others to reduce their carbon emissions and reneging on their own responsibilities by conveniently saying they are too small to count.

That is why eco activists have no credibility.

Hiding behind fake profiles trying to have half baked national emissions reduction policies implemented whilst they refuse to explain what affect it will have on global warming may be your cup of tea, but the readers deserve an honest answer even if you don't want it.

Renewable energy currently supplies just 8Twh of Ireland's 163Twh energy demand.

When someone from the green lobby loonies can explain how many extra windmills will be required to reliably supply the remaining 155Twh, the costs involved and then quantify the affect they believe it will have on climate change I will assess their answer.

Akrasia · 09-09-2018 12:33PM

dense wrote: »

The irony of you posting under an anonymous username scoffing at someone else posting under a username seems to have gone over your head.

Lol. If anyone ever quoted me as a source to contradict actual climate scientists or published research I'd think they were mad. Bloggers are not reliable sources, especially when they have a track record of fabricating and falsifying data and misrepresenting the conclusions of researchers

But I believe NASA when they say they'd created a +0.5°C warming from adjustments for the US for the 20th century. [\quote] lol. You are such a liar. You can't say you believe someone when the only thing you believe about what they say is that they are dishonest.

Your own trustworthiness goes when you can't explain what affect Ireland has had or can have on climate change.

This is pure waffle; instead of scouring eco activists sites for moral cliches why not quantify the effect on climate change of this disproportionate global influence you have invented for Ireland?

If you are going to make sweeping claims that Ireland has disproportionately globally influenced climate change you'll have to demonstrate that it is something other than a fuzzy idea you have read somewhere.

Be scientific, use numbers and we'll have a look and see whether your previous faux pas of believing a 0.6%
energy saving from the vacuum cleaner regulations was a "significant" energy saving was a one off or whether your idea of Ireland having a disproportionate global affect on global warming is more of the same hysterics.

Ireland produce .11℅ of global co2 emissions but only have. 07% of the global population.

The rest of your blathering is just a transparent effort to avoid answering my question. What are you afraid of dense?

dense · 09-09-2018 01:44PM

Akrasia wrote: »

Ireland produce .11℅ of global co2 emissions but only have. 07% of the global population.

And?

You're being asked to explain and quantify the affect this has had on climate change and quantify and explain the affect it will have on future climate change if it is eliminated - not whether you think Ireland's population is proportional to its CO2 emissions.

I don't know who's mentoring you in how to debate, but they're not doing a very good job.

Akrasia · 09-09-2018 02:00PM

Answer my question

Dohnjoe · 09-09-2018 02:57PM

dense wrote: »

I don't know who's mentoring you in how to debate, but they're not doing a very good job.

Again, this is not a debate.

It's one person dogmatically circling the wagons on their personal beliefs with the rest of the participants "trying" to convince them of something they will never accept

It's not a debate, it's a pedantic game of "endurance"

dense · 09-09-2018 09:59PM

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Again
It's one person dogmatically circling the wagons on their personal beliefs with the rest of the participants "trying" to convince them of something they will never accept

The people here who are dogmatic in promoting their belief that Ireland needs to transition off of fossil fuels cannot give any legitimate explanation as to how they belive such a transition will alleviate global warming or prevent climate change.

Nor can they articulate or quantify this alleged "disproportionate" affect that they're now claiming Ireland has had on global warming.

It is clear that you are of the same belief set as Akrasia that Ireland needs to transition off fossil fuels, so what would you say to someone who asks you how will that affect global warming?

You'd obviously invite them to take a hike too even though you probably know that it's a poor response.

I mean if you don't know the answer just get it off your chest now and say you don't know, I dont think anyone will think any less of you for being truthful about it.

xckjoo · 10-09-2018 10:16AM

Akrasia wrote: »

I'm shocked that dense ignored my question. Here it is again

'OK then Dense. Let's try something different. What do you think caused climate change in the past before humans arrived?'

In case you missed it

dense · 10-09-2018 04:30PM

xckjoo wrote: »

In case you missed it

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

You're great at demanding other people answer questions while ignoring those that people ask you.

I'm making no demands of anyone.

I'm inviting them to explain how transitioning Ireland off fossil fuels will affect climate change.

It's an open invitation by the way, it extends to any of you who are pushing that agenda.

Look on it as an opportunity to get more like minded people on the Irish climate change bandwagon calling for Ireland to Stop Climate Chaos.

Remember what the activists say, and try not to hide behind the fact that Ireland is a small country with a small population.

“And Ireland cannot hide behind its small size and population. According to Ireland’s Environmental Protection Agency, Ireland has one of the highest levels of greenhouse gas emissions per person in the world.”

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/call-for-managed-and-just-transition-from-fossil-fuels-1.3137175?mode=amp

If quantifying the affect on climate change that is expected to be achieved by eliminating what is clearly one of the highest emissions levels per person in the world is neither possible or important to those who want to direct public policy and to those who support such policies, how can they expect anyone to take their cultish policies seriously?

You folks clearly don't believe it will achieve anything but are too polite and environmentally aware to say so, right?

If you do believe an Irish transition off fossil fuels will affect climate change, you're being given an opportunity to explain why you believe that.

xckjoo · 10-09-2018 04:32PM

Akrasia wrote: »

I'm shocked that dense ignored my question. Here it is again

'OK then Dense. Let's try something different. What do you think caused climate change in the past before humans arrived?'

Did you miss this dense?

dense · 10-09-2018 04:40PM

xckjoo wrote: »

In case you missed it

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

You're great at demanding other people answer questions while ignoring those that people ask you.

I'm making no demands of anyone.

I'm inviting them to explain how transitioning Ireland off fossil fuels will affect climate change.

It's an open invitation by the way, it extends to any of you who are pushing that agenda.

Look on it as an opportunity to get more like minded people on the Irish climate change bandwagon calling for Ireland to Stop Climate Chaos.

Remember what the activists say, and try not to hide behind the fact that Ireland is a small country with a small population.

“And Ireland cannot hide behind its small size and population. According to Ireland’s Environmental Protection Agency, Ireland has one of the highest levels of greenhouse gas emissions per person in the world.”

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/call-for-managed-and-just-transition-from-fossil-fuels-1.3137175?mode=amp

If quantifying the affect on climate change that is expected to be achieved by eliminating what is clearly one of the highest emissions levels per person in the world is neither possible or important to those who want to direct public policy and to those who support such policies, how can they expect anyone to take their cultish policies seriously?

You folks clearly don't believe it will achieve anything but are too polite and environmentally aware to say so, right?

If you do believe an Irish transition off fossil fuels will affect climate change, you're just being given an opportunity to explain why you believe that.

Rejection of such an opportunity might raise suspicions that you don't really understand what you're calling for or why you're calling for it.

And that appears to be the case.

xckjoo · 10-09-2018 04:48PM

'OK then Dense. Let's try something different. What do you think caused climate change in the past before humans arrived?'

dense · 10-09-2018 04:54PM

Would anyone who believes that Ireland needs to transition off of fossil fuels and do so urgently but cannot explain why like to explain where the 155Twh of energy currently supplied by fossil fuels each year is going to come from and what it will cost?

Or have none of you thought this aspect through either?

p1akuw47h5r3it · 10-09-2018 06:02PM

xckjoo wrote: »

'OK then Dense. Let's try something different. What do you think caused climate change in the past before humans arrived?'

And again.

dense · 11-09-2018 12:00AM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Which of the oil companies do you work for dense?

None.

Which climate alarm clubs that can't explain their policies are you a member of Doctor Jimbob?

If you're not a member of one of those outfits why are you blindly supporting their calls to transition us off of fossil fuels with no idea about whats going to supply the 155Twh of energy they supply if you're going to point blank refuse to explain what you think any of it will achieve?

Apparently "Ireland is 'completely' off course to achieve climate change targets" but from the trite responses I'm getting here from those who are concerned by that, it appears that even if we were to meet the targets and subsequently stop using fossil fuels it is not going to have any affect on climate change, because no effect is being discussed, and none is being claimed.

https://amp.independent.ie/business/farming/forestry-enviro/environment/ireland-completely-off-course-to-achieve-climate-change-targets-37153678.html

If no one wants to make a claim that it will have an affect on climate change with an explanation as to how, we can therefore wrap this nonsense up by concluding that no one here or anywhere else is claiming or has ever claimed that any of these national measures regarding Ireland's emissions will affect global warming.

Cue something about Akrasia deserving an answer to their through the looking glass question about what caused pre human climate change as a distraction from reality.

They don't.

Akrasia and the activists are leading you all up the river without a paddle with their nonsense and I think you're beginning to realise that.

maccored · 11-09-2018 09:16AM

dense wrote: »

None.

Which climate alarm clubs that can't explain their policies are you a member of Doctor Jimbob?

If you're not a member of one of those outfits why are you blindly supporting their calls to transition us off of fossil fuels with no idea about whats going to supply the 155Twh of energy they supply if you're going to point blank refuse to explain what you think any of it will achieve?

Apparently "Ireland is 'completely' off course to achieve climate change targets" but from the trite responses I'm getting here from those who are concerned by that, it appears that even if we were to meet the targets and subsequently stop using fossil fuels it is not going to have any affect on climate change, because no effect is being discussed, and none is being claimed.

https://amp.independent.ie/business/farming/forestry-enviro/environment/ireland-completely-off-course-to-achieve-climate-change-targets-37153678.html

If no one wants to make a claim that it will have an affect on climate change with an explanation as to how, we can therefore wrap this nonsense up by concluding that no one here or anywhere else is claiming or has ever claimed that any of these national measures regarding Ireland's emissions will affect global warming.

Cue something about Akrasia deserving an answer to their through the looking glass question about what caused pre human climate change as a distraction from reality.

They don't.

Akrasia and the activists are leading you all up the river without a paddle with their nonsense and I think you're beginning to realise that.

who gives a bollocks if its manmade or not? its happening regardless

dubstepper · 11-09-2018 09:20AM

dense wrote: »

If no one wants to make a claim that it will have an affect on climate change with an explanation as to how, we can therefore wrap this nonsense up by concluding that no one here or anywhere else is claiming or has ever claimed that any of these national measures regarding Ireland's emissions will affect global warming.

xckjoo · 11-09-2018 09:54AM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

None. I've stated several times I don't go all-in on the alarmist position, I just think it would be wise to be cautious with emissions.

The rest of your post is just waffle twisting people's words to back up your position, so I'll just do what you've done with any questions you've been asked and ignore it.

There's no point in replying to his posts. The pattern is fairly obvious at this stage. Make claims, ignore refutes and questions he can't answer, then post unrelated claims with parts personalised to anybody that has posted anything that threatens his narrative. You then feel the need to defend the outlandish claim he's attributed to you and write a response, which sends the narrative off on one of the tangents he wants it on. Meanwhile the actual informative posts are swamped with walls of text about nonsense.

It's fairly simplistic but effective. The key is to get the other person off-point by doing things like claiming that they said something or think a certain way so they feel compelled to defend themselves.

dense · 11-09-2018 10:59AM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

None.

I've stated several times I don't go all-in on the alarmist position, I just think it would be wise to be cautious with emissions.

The rest of your post is just waffle twisting people's words to back up your position, so I'll just do what you've done with any questions you've been asked and ignore it.

But you haven't ignored it, you're now saying that the lefty eco activists' demands which have somehow been made public policy here will make no difference to global warming.

It's easy to call my posts waffle, but you're the first person here to respond by saying they think Ireland transitioning off fossil fuels will have no effect on climate change.

You could have stated that from the outset instead of dragging it out for so long.

And you could have said you are sceptical of the full on alarmist position adopted by Akrasia and other climate justice activists.

They won't be pleased with people saying all their emissions and eco grant policies for Ireland will have no affect on climate change...

Are you sure you're not a sceptic yourself Doctor Jimbob?

You certainly seem highly sceptical of the alarmists and their demands.

xckjoo · 11-09-2018 11:08AM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Yep.

I must be psychic. Time to chuck in the job and join the circus :pac:

Sofiztikated · 11-09-2018 12:13PM

xckjoo wrote: »

I must be psychic. Time to chuck in the job and join the circus :pac:

I wouldn't bother, there's already a clown here.

Akrasia · 11-09-2018 01:03PM

Dense demanding us attribute specific consequences to specific emissions is like an alcoholic demanding that a doctor explain specifically which bottle of cheap vodka gave him sirrhosis.

Most people can drink all their lives and never get sirrhosis. But if you drink too much your body cannot process the toxic byproducts and eventually permanent damage is done.

If you're an alcoholic with liver failure all alcohol is toxic. Some amount of alcohol will make you sick, too much will kill you.

dense · 12-09-2018 05:48PM

Akrasia wrote: »

Dense demanding us attribute specific consequences to specific emissions is like an alcoholic demanding that a doctor explain specifically which bottle of cheap vodka gave him sirrhosis.

Please don't misrepresent what I have asked.

People like myself and Dr. JimBob who are sceptical of alarmists are likely to become even more sceptical as a result of you doing it.

I asked you to quantify Ireland's contribution to global warming

The alarmists have already quantified the warming that they say is due to humans emitting CO2.

They say that from an undefined "pre industrial" baseline, C02 emissions have caused a temperature rise of c 1°C.

Drilling down further it is found that they also claim to be able to attribute specific responsibility for this rise in temperature to specific companies.

Research undertaken by earth scientists suggests that "The climate crisis of the 21st century has been caused largely by just 90 companies, which between them produced nearly two-thirds of the greenhouse gas emissions generated since the dawning of the industrial age".

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/20/90-companies-man-made-global-warming-emissions-climate-change

As I have said earlier, not one alarmist NGO has ever explained what affect on global warming will occur if Ireland follows their demands to stop emitting C02.

And not one alarmist has ever explained what they believe Ireland's contribution to global warming to be.

Instead of scraping the bottom of the barrel and talking about cheap vodka and trying to reject the fact that the earth scientists can now attribute global warming to specific companies, leading to you now seeming to reject the suggestion that global warming is being caused by national emissions, why not simply demonstrate our national contribution to global warming and our potential to stop it?

And if you believe Ireland has contributed to global warming please show your calculations which permit you to arrive at that conclusion.

You're not being asked if you believe in the tooth fairy, you're being asked what share of global warming, if any, is attributable to Ireland.

You have said Ireland's per capita emissions have disproportionately affected global warming.

You are clearly making this up, and are fantasising if you cannot demonstrate this disproportionate affect on global warning that you are imagining.

If that doesn't interest you (and it clearly doesn't), you could always try to explain where we're going to reliably get 155Twh of renewable energy from annually to substitute the fossil fuel energy that we currently use.

It's all very well for the alarmists continually whining about our need to nationally transition off of fossil fuels, but they're going to need to outline what they think that's going to achieve in terms of global warming and offer intelligent solutions regarding what's going to replace them.

The leftys are great at being alarmed, not so good at providing solutions.

Vision

That Ireland makes a rapid and just transition to a carbon free future.

https://www.stopclimatechaos.ie/about/

Propaganda from the climate chaos alarmists, who also say they want to "engage" the public.

Lots of vacuous bullshït there as there is from you too about Ireland's needing to accept
its "fair share" of responsibility for causing climate change.

And it's all trés cool hip and on trend as long as no one asks what share of global warming has been caused by Ireland.

Cults and their followers don't like their policies being questioned, do they?

Akrasia · 12-09-2018 09:21PM

dense wrote: »

Please don't misrepresent what I have asked.

People like myself and Dr. JimBob who are sceptical of alarmists are likely to become even more sceptical as a result of you doing it.

I asked you to quantify Ireland's contribution to global warming

The alarmists have already quantified the warming that they say is due to humans emitting CO2.

They say that from an undefined "pre industrial" baseline, C02 emissions have caused a temperature rise of c 1°C.

Drilling down further it is found that they also claim to be able to attribute specific responsibility for this rise in temperature to specific companies.

Research undertaken by earth scientists suggests that "The climate crisis of the 21st century has been caused largely by just 90 companies, which between them produced nearly two-thirds of the greenhouse gas emissions generated since the dawning of the industrial age".

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/20/90-companies-man-made-global-warming-emissions-climate-change

As I have said earlier, not one alarmist NGO has ever explained what affect on global warming will occur if Ireland follows their demands to stop emitting C02.

And not one alarmist has ever explained what they believe Ireland's contribution to global warming to be.

Instead of scraping the bottom of the barrel and talking about cheap vodka and trying to reject the fact that the earth scientists can now attribute global warming to specific companies, leading to you now seeming to reject the suggestion that global warming is being caused by national emissions, why not simply demonstrate our national contribution to global warming and our potential to stop it?

And if you believe Ireland has contributed to global warming please show your calculations which permit you to arrive at that conclusion.

You're not being asked if you believe in the tooth fairy, you're being asked what share of global warming, if any, is attributable to Ireland.

You have said Ireland's per capita emissions have disproportionately affected global warming.

You are clearly making this up, and are fantasising if you cannot demonstrate this disproportionate affect on global warning that you are imagining.

If that doesn't interest you (and it clearly doesn't), you could always try to explain where we're going to reliably get 155Twh of renewable energy from annually to substitute the fossil fuel energy that we currently use.

It's all very well for the alarmists continually whining about our need to nationally transition off of fossil fuels, but they're going to need to outline what they think that's going to achieve in terms of global warming and offer intelligent solutions regarding what's going to replace them.

The leftys are great at being alarmed, not so good at providing solutions.

https://www.stopclimatechaos.ie/about/

Propaganda from the climate chaos alarmists, who also say they want to "engage" the public.

Lots of vacuous bullshït there as there is from you too about Ireland's needing to accept
its "fair share" of responsibility for causing climate change.

And it's all trés cool hip and on trend as long as no one asks what share of global warming has been caused by Ireland.

Cults and their followers don't like their policies being questioned, do they?

Christ your username is apt. Scientists can attribute emissions to individual countries,Companies, economic sectors etc so what. If you have a point other than cults blah blah socialism then get to it.

BTW. Nobody has forgotten that you refused to answer a very simple question multiple times.

Akrasia · 12-09-2018 09:42PM

But if you insist in quantifying the heat ireland been responsible for, it's the equivalent heat of 2,921,882 Hiroshima nuclear bombs since 1998 (and rising)
http://4hiroshimas.com/#Home

dense · 13-09-2018 02:33AM

Akrasia wrote: »

But if you insist in quantifying the heat ireland been responsible for, it's the equivalent heat of 2,921,882 Hiroshima nuclear bombs since 1998 (and rising)
http://4hiroshimas.com/#Home

It would be interesting to know why you think that Ireland's CO2 emissions have caused the equivalent heat of 2,921,882 Hiroshima nuclear bombs and what you think that translates to in terms of thousandths of a degree in a hypothetical 0.4°C degree of global warming scenario for that period, a period distinctly lacking any global warming.

to:2018

2m of the total 2,000,000,000 Hiroshima bombs you were talking about is around 0.1% of them.

I'll let you work out what 0.1% of any alleged temperature rise for the period equates to in degrees Celsius.

Think along the lines of 0.0004 degrees for 0.4° warming.

Statistical noise basically.

Your initial figure could have been just plucked from thin air after all.

p1akuw47h5r3it · 13-09-2018 01:34PM

dense wrote: »

It would be interesting to know why you think that Ireland's CO2 emissions have caused the equivalent heat of 2,921,882 Hiroshima nuclear bombs and what you think that translates to in terms of thousandths of a degree in a hypothetical 0.4°C degree of global warming scenario for that period, a period distinctly lacking any global warming.

2m of the total 2,000,000,000 Hiroshima bombs you were talking about is around 0.1% of them.

I'll let you work out what 0.1% of any alleged temperature rise for the period equates to in degrees Celsius.

Think along the lines of 0.0004 degrees for 0.4° warming.

Statistical noise basically.

Your initial figure could have been just plucked from thin air after all.

It'd be more interesting to know why you have yet to answer Akrasia's question:

'OK then Dense. Let's try something different. What do you think caused climate change in the past before humans arrived?'

dense · 13-09-2018 03:54PM

DanDan6592 wrote: »

It'd be more interesting to know why you have yet to answer Akrasia's question:

'OK then Dense. Let's try something different. What do you think caused climate change in the past before humans arrived?'

If you have been reading the last few pages you will be aware that I have already explained that I have no intention of entertaining Akrasia's invitation to go down a rabbit hole indulging their through the looking glass question about what caused pre human climate change.

If you, Akrasia or others wish to advance and discuss reasons for climate change in pre human times there is nothing stopping you from doing so if that is your desire.

But please be aware that Akrasia reguarly questions the reliability of historic pre 19th century data, so if you start referring to proxy data dating from pre human times expect it to be rejected.

I hope that satisfactorily answers your question, and as always I look forward with interest to reading your comments here.

Akrasia · 14-09-2018 12:29PM

Sorry Dense, of course the causes of climate change should be totally off topic in a discussion about the causes of climate change. You're totally right

Now lets get back to your questions where you're trying to say that the equivalent energy of 2 million nuclear bombs is insignificant because humans are actually responsible for adding the equivalent of 2 billion nuclear bombs.

"Man-made" Climate Change Lunathicks Out in Full Force

Comments