Just found the above chart backing up what I have been saying for years.
Global warming is a wholly natural event, if humanity disappeared tonight, global warming would still happen.
You're ago with the Saudi's, in name of protecting the doomster narrative.
I'd rather reduce my exposure to petro wars, but you do you.
You increase our reliance then on hundreds of minerals and elements and ores from even more geopolitically questionable places
I made a point about heat related deaths.
indeed. You made a point about increasing rates of heart attacks and increased heat. I made the point about increasing rates of heart attacks and increased calorie consumption.
They didn't say "the atom isn't the smallest particle" after quarks etc had been discovered though, did they? Which is effectively what you were doing. Trying to draw an equivalence between the questioning/experimentation of the scientific method and what you did with regard to CFCs/ozone hole is just further evidence of disingenuousness on your part.
Increasing global temps is the point.
Im for renewables for purely reducing our exposure to petro geopolitics.
Doesn't mean I'm pro doomster narrative.
AI uses a large amount of water and alot of power , ai will replace millions of jobs, theres citys right now running out of water with temperatures over 90 degrees .every month there seems to be fires or hurricanes or floods in america
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/4774109-houston-grid-crisis-power-outages/
extreme heat causes more power usage as people turn on air conditioning ,
i don,t understand anyone who complains about the weather in ireland
theres an expression if you are in a hole stop digging.
if theres aliens out there they must think we are crazy,
oh right now lets build 100s of data centres that use more power and create more heat what could go wrong.
So has the rate of take away food consumed and calories eaten. What’s your point?
As is fossil fuel. A really big industry.
What we're seeing is that there's a definite enviromental doomster narrative that changes as the science debunks their beliefs.
Back in the 50s and 60s the doomsters were telling us of wide spread famine as there was enough land to support the massive baby boom as infant mortality was being reduced with improved healthcare.
Then in the 80s it was acid rain, 90s ozone layer, global warming was the 00s, which has now being rebranded as climate change to keep the fear factor fresh.
The doomster narrative is an industry.
So when someone once said "the atom isnt the smallest particle". Was that them saying either a) you know to be untrue or b) you didn't bother to find out if they are untrue or not because they support the agenda you are trying to push for whatever reason.
Or is it just the fact that other opinions exist outside your personal thoughts?
Its not a conspiracy theory to say that if you are a prominent scientist who goes against the norm, you will not be awarded funding and you will be ostracized for questioning a money magnet. How many Oil companies are struggling as a result of our change to cleaner fuels?
It's not a "conversation". It's you saying things that either a) you know to be untrue or b) you didn't bother to find out if they are untrue or not because they support the agenda you are trying to push for whatever reason. Posters like yourself come along regularly and we are well used to all your tactics.
CFC's were replaced by Hydrofluorocarbons and Hydrochlorofluorocarbons. Both were said to be "not as bad for the Ozone" but it was pointed out that they werent perfect. Again, we use more aerosols now than back in the 90's. Look at brands and types. There are wider selections and the demand has increased.
So while it is said that they are "safer" we use more.
It is like saying that you wont drink a Vodka and coke but instead you will have 10 low alcohol beers. The volume of each is less but the overall is not.
Also a side note: When someone claims that someone shouldnt be listened to, it means that they are the ones we should ignore. When you want to stop a conversation it is the opposite of science. The scientific community once believed the atom was the smallest particle. Science is only what the majority of political scientists at any one time, believe. For instance science one used leaches to cure people of cancer. They used CBT!! Science should ALWAYS be questioned.
Records are not been ignored, they are in the trended data. It clearly shows overall that more heatwaves are occuring and the average global temp has increased by 1.5C since industrialization.
No one is ignoring anything apart from yourself.
"There is the other possibility, of course: that someone is merely repeating climate change denial propaganda from another source without considering what it says."
Unfortunately the Bingo card I found didn't include CFC's. Pity.
The hole in the ozon layer is currently repairing itself. It is predicted to be back to 1980's level within the next couple of decades.
People use more aerosols now than they did in the 90's. We are told there is far more air pollution also.
It is widely-known that CFC (Chlorofluorocarbons) were discovered to be responsible, and they were removed from aerosols and packaging. Which allowed the ozone damage to recover.
Now, if someone is going to wade into a debate about climate change and not know that, I think their contributions can safely be ignored.
There is the other possibility, of course: that someone is merely repeating climate change denial propaganda from another source without considering what it says.
Jesus wept, what utter ignorant stupidity.
Eh, you've fundamentally misunderstood what led to the Ozone layer repairing itself. CFC gases were responsible for the damage and they're effectively outlawed for most use cases since the 80s so no, our usage of such gases have not increased.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ozone-depleting-substance-consumption
https://www.verificat.cat/en/the-hole-in-the-ozone-layer-was-not-an-exaggeration-the-problem-was-solved-by-banning-the-gases-that-caused-it-2/
Back in the 90's we were told in school all about the hole in the Ozon Layer. If we didnt stop using aerosols then the hole would get bigger and we would all burn to death. They told us that it will never get better but if we stop NOW, then hopefully it wont get worse. People predicted that it would be totally eradicated by the year 2000.
If you light a coal fire, it will have no effect on global warming.
If a cow farts, it will not cause global warming.
If you drive your car you will not destroy the planet. Car congestion and air pollution do however effect peoples health. It can affect peoples lungs. It is in all of our interests to reduce pollution. But trying to tax it away only makes certain people richer. And for the love of god will people stop saying "this never happened in all of time" when we only have 100 years of records.
We have 0.0000022% of data relating to climate on this planet. Everything else is guess work. It is better than guess work to be fair but it suffers from confirmation bias.
Yeh my spuds not doing great, where is that damned global warming
A narrative is being set, there is no time for facts.
I almost feel sorry for the likes of George Lee tbh. He would have had his doomster charts and best panicky voice ready for the first couple of hot days this summer telling us the end is nigh unless we all pay more taxes and here we are with an absolutely crap summer spoiling his moment of glory. Bless em..
There's an agenda.
Why are previous official weather records now being ignored?
Reliance on the Copernicus info only dates back to late 1940's, whereas the hottest year on record previously was I think 1873!.
But since that doesn't fit in with current campaigning it is brushed under the carpet.
"Frankfurt airport open again after climate activists block runway and glue themselves to tarmac"
What a bunch of morons
Of course. But, there's way more people on the planet, which is why global warming is such a menace.
from Yale university
And before these studies did not hear related fatalities occur?
Here's a paper from 2023 that talks about tracking deaths due to heat in Europe: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-023-02419-z
The deaths aren't being mis-attributed. Sure there are more old people, but the deaths due to heat are correctly flagged.
I was in Valencia for a break last summer. While I was there I read a climate change doom piece that Valencia was 45 degrees the day before and people couldn't cope, the place was shutting down. I was there the day before too, and it was a lovely low 30s degrees and the place was carrying on perfectly normally. When I posted that piece of information on here, I had Green Zealots losing their sh*t completely calling me every version of liar they could think of, even though I was actually THERE.
They had taken a ground reading from the airport and used it in the article.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/f6ec3b6ae14cc6cd4a0e3a3374e0ef7b.svg)
