2020 officially saw a record number of $1 billion weather and climate disasters.

Akrasia · 04-07-2021 7:07pm

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

But how observation is interpreted is often very subjective.

This is true, and this is why the scientific debate happens in the scientific literature.

Someone makes an observation that challenges another scientist's findings, so the other scientist investigates those claims and checks the calculations, and then incorporates those into their findings in a follow up study. Often, if the methodology of both studies is sound, both studies may be accurate, but focused on slightly different parts of the same problem, so each of them is contributing a different piece to the puzzle, and it is only when all of these studies are pieced together that we can get a clear picture of how the system actually behaves

A genuine attempt to understand a phenomena is one that incorporates the science that challenges the existing theory and attempts to improve the model

Akrasia · 04-07-2021 7:16pm

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

Your post reminded me of an article I read years ago about how synthetically produced margarine was sold as being healthy by bought and sold scientists, who were paid to go on a campaign to demonise butter as being incredibly unhealthy. As we know there is no truth to this at all but it was all about how it was marketed.

I have zero interest in the 'fuel debate', but I find it strange how oil/fossil fuel companies are portrayed as being demons when they are literally providing us the energy to function and survive. I ask, the next time a rescue helicopter is called upon to rescue people off the Galway coast, should they not bother because their very essential vehicle is using evil fossil fuels?

I also keep in mind that documentary produced by Michael Moore last year which exposed 'green energy' as not only being in hands of muti-billionaire politicians, business men and bought off scientists (no less by the Koch Brothers) but actively depends on fossil fuels and environmentally destructive practices in its own right.

The reason they are being demonised,is because the energy industry while providing a valuable commodity, have been downplaying the harm that their product is causing, while sabotaging any attempts to reduce the harm caused from consuming their product.

They are demonised because these are extremely wealthy companies and individuals who could sacrifice some of their wealth, to make their products safer, but instead of doing this, they spend money to try to pretend that their products are safe knowing that they will never have to pay the costs from the harm they are causing.

The Michael Moore documentary was really poor by the way. It was a hatchet piece.
Here are just some of the rebuttals
https://www.newsweek.com/michael-moore-planet-humans-film-climate-change-1502554
https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/04/michael-moores-green-energy-takedown-worse-than-netflixs-goop-series/
https://www.thesolarnerd.com/blog/planet-of-the-humans-debunked/
https://ketanjoshi.co/2020/04/24/planet-of-the-humans-a-reheated-mess-of-lazy-old-myths/
https://climatecrocks.com/2020/05/12/michael-me-just-went-boom/

Oneiric 3 · 04-07-2021 11:55pm

Akrasia wrote: »

The Michael Moore documentary was really poor by the way. It was a hatchet piece.
Here are just some of the rebuttals

The Moore documentary was really excellent but highly disturbing. The 'rebuttals' were anticipated because it revealed the dark underbelly of 'green energy'. How science is bought, how media manipulates, and how very powerful people with vested interests shape a favorable narrative to their (very lucrative) cause'.

What the doc showed is how big green energy (which isn't 'green' at all) is basically a big money making con. Banana speaks of the evils of capitalism above, well there it is right there.

Akrasia · 05-07-2021 11:47am

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

The Moore documentary was really excellent but highly disturbing. The 'rebuttals' were anticipated because it revealed the dark underbelly of 'green energy'. How science is bought, how media manipulates, and how very powerful people with vested interests shape a favorable narrative to their (very lucrative) cause'.

What the doc showed is how big green energy (which isn't 'green' at all) is basically a big money making con. Banana speaks of the evils of capitalism above, well there it is right there.

You can show anything is evil or corrupt etc if you just misrepresent the facts and use misleading and outdated
statistics
Lets just take one specific example of how Moore mislead in that documentary (there are loads to choose from, but its better to focus on one concrete example)

The film talks about solar PV being 8% efficient and they only last 10 years

14:51 - [Jan Nelson, Lansing Board of Water & Light] We took a hard look at wind and determined that, around here, there's not really any real good wind coming through all the time. That's what we liked about solar. You would get the power when you most needed it. Pass these around, look at 'em. They are pliable. Made in Michigan, that was another good thing. Although, the efficiency of these panels is only about, just under 8%. If you happen to be NASA and you happen to own a rover running around Mars, they have very efficient panels. But, we can't afford those at about a million dollars a square inch.

This is a film released in 2020, talking about solar efficiency levels that would have been out of date a decade earlier without any attempt to inform the audience of the current state of technology.

The top 20 most efficient domestic SolarPV available when this film was released are all above 20% efficiency The vast majority of panels on sale are above 16% and most of them come with 25 year warranties
https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/what-are-the-most-efficient-solar-panels
https://news.energysage.com/best-solar-panels-complete-ranking/

Thelonious Monk · 05-07-2021 11:50am

Even if there are all kinds of charlatans in the Green energy field that doesn't mean man made climate change isn't real

Akrasia · 05-07-2021 11:58am

And just FYI, I don't just dislike the Moore documentary because i don't like it's conclusions, I don't like any documentary that plays fast and loose with the facts. I do not like 'An inconvenient truth' and have never once referred to it to support any argument, nor do I like those netflix 'Seaspiracy' documentaries because I don't want viewers to be manipulated or lied to.

Akrasia · 05-07-2021 1:08pm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Even if there are all kinds of charlatans in the Green energy field that doesn't mean man made climate change isn't real

The fact is, we're going to be migrating to a completely different energy generation and distribution system over the course of a few decades. Fortunes will be made, and fortunes will be lost. There will be individuals and corporations lobbying for their own interests, just like there are now, and always will be

There is a huge amount at stake here. People have made massive investments in both preserving the old energy system, and taking bets on where to invest in the new sustainable energy system.

The important thing is to assess things skeptically in relation to the best evidence we have available, and to use the mechanisms we have available to regulate industry and limit the ability for individuals and corporations to corrupt politicians through 'lobbying' for their own interests

Thelonious Monk · 05-07-2021 1:51pm

NZ just had its warmest June on record

Oneiric 3 · 05-07-2021 5:46pm

Akrasia wrote: »

You can show anything is evil or corrupt etc if you just misrepresent the facts and use misleading and outdated
statistics
Lets just take one specific example of how Moore mislead in that documentary (there are loads to choose from, but its better to focus on one concrete example)

The film talks about solar PV being 8% efficient and they only last 10 years

This is a film released in 2020, talking about solar efficiency levels that would have been out of date a decade earlier without any attempt to inform the audience of the current state of technology.

The top 20 most efficient domestic SolarPV available when this film was released are all above 20% efficiency The vast majority of panels on sale are above 16% and most of them come with 25 year warranties
https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/what-are-the-most-efficient-solar-panels
https://news.energysage.com/best-solar-panels-complete-ranking/

I think the 'misinformation' line is just a bit overused to be honest, and particular from people with an agenda like yourself and it is the mark of hubris to believe that 'your side' are the sole gate keepers of all that is good and true. We see actual mis (and dis) information everyday from the press (which has a far bigger influence on the general public) regarding the climate change issue and I have yet to see you call them out. Why would that be?

Anyway, I found this interview by Michael Moore in which he address some of the criticism from the usual suspects. I haven't watched it yet but will later. In the meantime, it may be of interest to you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bop8x24G_o0

Thelonious Monk · 05-07-2021 8:31pm

https://www.thejournal.ie/heatwave-hits-nordic-countries-arctic-5486665-Jul2021/

Heatwaves and record temps in the Arctic. I mean this isn't looking good to me, when even Journal commentators seem to be coming around to thinking climate change is real.

Banana Republic 1 · 05-07-2021 8:38pm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

https://www.thejournal.ie/heatwave-hits-nordic-countries-arctic-5486665-Jul2021/

Heatwaves and record temps in the Arctic. I mean this isn't looking good to me, when even Journal commentators seem to be coming around to thinking climate change is real.

The seas are being over fished, insects are dropping like flies, agricultural land has maybe 100 years left before the soil is totally degraded. It’s much worse then climate change what we’re seeing now is split second before a Chuck Norris round house kick to the face.

Gaoth Laidir · 05-07-2021 8:50pm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

https://www.thejournal.ie/heatwave-hits-nordic-countries-arctic-5486665-Jul2021/

Heatwaves and record temps in the Arctic. I mean this isn't looking good to me, when even Journal commentators seem to be coming around to thinking climate change is real.

Brilliant reporting there. No contradictions whatsoever.

The Journal now trying to cash in on the climate panic, and doing so miserably.

METEOROLOGISTS ACROSS THE Nordic countries have registered near-record temperatures over the weekend, including highs of 34 degrees Celsius in some places, news agencies reported.

The latest figures came after Finland’s national meteorological institute registered its hottest temperature for June since records began in 1844.

Kevo, at the far north of Finland (marked on the image above), recorded heat of 33.5 degrees Celsius yesterday, the hottest since 1914 when authorities registered 34.7 degrees Celsius, said the STT agency.

So still more than a degree less than the record set 107 years ago? What's the big deal here?

And Norway’s meteorological institute registered 34 degrees Celsius in Saltdal, a county near the Polar Circle.

That is the highest temperature measured in the country this year, and just 1.6 degrees Celsius short of Norway’s all-time record.

Well holy shít, the warmest day of the year. Very strange for early July. And still below the record.

Thelonious Monk · 05-07-2021 9:03pm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Brilliant reporting there. No contradictions whatsoever.

The Journal now trying to cash in on the climate panic, and doing so miserably.

So still more than a degree less than the record set 107 years ago? What's the big deal here?

Well holy shít, the warmest day of the year. Very strange for early July. And still below the record.

So what do you think is behind the climate scam then? Why would scientists want to push an agenda that isn't real?

Tyrone212 · 05-07-2021 9:11pm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Brilliant reporting there. No contradictions whatsoever.

The Journal now trying to cash in on the climate panic, and doing so miserably.

So still more than a degree less than the record set 107 years ago? What's the big deal here?

Well holy shít, the warmest day of the year. Very strange for early July. And still below the record.

To be fair the article says there's a heat wave with near record breaking temperatures and that "The latest figures came after Finland’s national meteorological institute registered its hottest temperature for June since records began in 1844."

I don't see what panic or cashing in the journal are doing with that article or any contradictions. Just reporting that there's heatwave in Scandinavia.

Oneiric 3 · 05-07-2021 10:06pm

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

They do effect the laws/legislation and if you bothered your arse to even watch the clips from channel 4 news I posted last week you would have seen that exonmobil have been lobbying senators to obstruct the climate change policies joe Biden is trying to bring and pay people like tony heller to put out fake news.

I present to you your 'climate hero'.

Biden administration proceeding with $23 billion weapon sales to UAE
"The $23.37 billion package contained products from General Atomics, Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N) and Raytheon Technologies Corp (RTX.N), including 50 F-35 Lighting II aircraft, up to 18 MQ-9B Unmanned Aerial Systems and a package of air-to-air and air-to-ground munitions".
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/exclusive-biden-administration-proceeding-with-23-billion-weapon-sales-uae-2021-04-13/

Biden's Lawless Bombing of Iraq and Syria Only Serves the Weapons Industry Funding Both Parties
"Indeed, anyone invested in endless war in the Middle East — including the entire U.S. intelligence community and the weapons industry which feeds off of it — must be thrilled by all of this. Each time the U.S. "retaliates” against Iran or Iraqi militias or Syrian fighters, it causes them to "retaliate” back, which in turn is cited as the reason the U.S. can never leave but must instead keep retaliating, ensuring this cycle never ends. It also creates a never-ending supply of angry people in that region who hate the U.S. for bringing death and destruction to their countries with bombs that never stop falling and therefore want to strike back: what we are all supposed to call "terrorism.” That is what endless war means: a war that is designed never to terminate, one that is as far removed as possible from actual matters of self-defense and manufactures its own internal rationale to continue it".
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/bidens-lawless-bombing-of-iraq-and

You actually think that these psychos care about you, or the environment or climate change?

They are laughing in your face.

Oneiric 3 · 05-07-2021 10:12pm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

So what do you think is behind the climate scam then? Why would scientists want to push an agenda that isn't real?

What has this loaded question got to do with GL's response?

Thelonious Monk · 05-07-2021 10:35pm

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

What has this loaded question got to do with GL's response?

I just dont get why people get so hostile towards people who believe what most scientists are saying on boards.

Oneiric 3 · 05-07-2021 10:39pm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I just dont get why people get so hostile towards people who believe what most scientists are saying on boards.

Fair enough, but GL was taking a swipe at yet another example of media disinformation, not scientists.

Gaoth Laidir · 05-07-2021 10:41pm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

So what do you think is behind the climate scam then? Why would scientists want to push an agenda that isn't real?

All I was saying is that the Journal made a whole big deal out of some warm temperatures in a region that gets them most years. Saying that X is the warmest day of the year...I mean, how is that newsworthy? Somewhere else got hot but not as hot as it did in 1914. Did they not have a big enough wordcount and felt the need to pad the article with waffle like that?

I didn't see any mention of places that were cooler at the same time. What goes up must come down. No, that wouldn't be of interest at all.

Gaoth Laidir · 05-07-2021 10:47pm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I just dont get why people get so hostile towards people who believe what most scientists are saying on boards.

I don't think we have many climate scientist saying anything on Boards...but I get what you mean.

My point was about the report.

Thelonious Monk · 05-07-2021 10:54pm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

I don't think we have many climate scientist saying anything on Boards...but I get what you mean.

My point was about the report.

Yeah discussions on this matter always get so heated (excuse the pun) there's no need for it really. I get what you're saying about the report but with the Canadian temps lately and seeing this today it's bound to spook the lay person like myself. My opinion on climate change is that even if it turns out not to be influenced by man, the way we are treating the environment can only lead to global disaster anyway, so we have to change one way or another.

Gaoth Laidir · 05-07-2021 11:21pm

From the Journal.ie article above it's interesting that the Swedish demon girl Greta chose to cherrypick the last three years of June temperatures and make the statement below. Had she chosen to go further back to 2018, 17, 16, 15, etc. she would see that Sweden was well below the longterm average for many years in the past 17 years. This link shows the June anomalies back to 2004.

Of course nobody will pull her up on that.

Several parts of Sweden also reported record highs for last month.

“June 2021 was the hottest June ever recorded in my hometown Stockholm by a large margin,” climate campaigner Greta Thunberg tweeted.

“The second hottest June was in 2020. The third in 2019,” she added.

Am I sensing a pattern here? Nah, probably just another coincidence.
At a national level, June 2021 was the third-hottest ever recorded in Sweden.

Gaoth Laidir · 05-07-2021 11:23pm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Yeah discussions on this matter always get so heated (excuse the pun) there's no need for it really. I get what you're saying about the report but with the Canadian temps lately and seeing this today it's bound designed to spook the lay person like myself. My opinion on climate change is that even if it turns out not to be influenced by man, the way we are treating the environment can only lead to global disaster anyway, so we have to change one way or another.

Fixed your post.

Banana Republic 1 · 06-07-2021 5:51am

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

From the Journal.ie article above it's interesting that the Swedish demon girl Greta chose to cherrypick the last three years of June temperatures and make the statement below. Had she chosen to go further back to 2018, 17, 16, 15, etc. she would see that Sweden was well below the longterm average for many years in the past 17 years. This link shows the June anomalies back to 2004.

Of course nobody will pull her up on that.

How dare she play your game !

Banana Republic 1 · 06-07-2021 5:53am

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

I present to you your 'climate hero'.

Biden administration proceeding with $23 billion weapon sales to UAE
"The $23.37 billion package contained products from General Atomics, Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N) and Raytheon Technologies Corp (RTX.N), including 50 F-35 Lighting II aircraft, up to 18 MQ-9B Unmanned Aerial Systems and a package of air-to-air and air-to-ground munitions".
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/exclusive-biden-administration-proceeding-with-23-billion-weapon-sales-uae-2021-04-13/

Biden's Lawless Bombing of Iraq and Syria Only Serves the Weapons Industry Funding Both Parties
"Indeed, anyone invested in endless war in the Middle East — including the entire U.S. intelligence community and the weapons industry which feeds off of it — must be thrilled by all of this. Each time the U.S. "retaliates” against Iran or Iraqi militias or Syrian fighters, it causes them to "retaliate” back, which in turn is cited as the reason the U.S. can never leave but must instead keep retaliating, ensuring this cycle never ends. It also creates a never-ending supply of angry people in that region who hate the U.S. for bringing death and destruction to their countries with bombs that never stop falling and therefore want to strike back: what we are all supposed to call "terrorism.” That is what endless war means: a war that is designed never to terminate, one that is as far removed as possible from actual matters of self-defense and manufactures its own internal rationale to continue it".
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/bidens-lawless-bombing-of-iraq-and

You actually think that these psychos care about you, or the environment or climate change?

They are laughing in your face.

What is the context for this?

Banana Republic 1 · 06-07-2021 5:55am

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

What has this loaded question got to do with GL's response?

I refer to a previous statement of mine,

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

SOP on this forum amongst the "deniers" is to deflect, obfuscate, flipflop, spoof and gaslight.

Banana Republic 1 · 06-07-2021 5:56am

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Fixed your post.

I refer to a previous statement of mine:

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

SOP on this forum amongst the "deniers" is to deflect, obfuscate, flipflop, spoof and gaslight.

Gaoth Laidir · 06-07-2021 7:32am

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

I refer to a previous statement of mine:

"What is the context for this?"

Akrasia · 06-07-2021 8:17am

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

I think the 'misinformation' line is just a bit overused to be honest, and particular from people with an agenda like yourself and it is the mark of hubris to believe that 'your side' are the sole gate keepers of all that is good and true. We see actual mis (and dis) information everyday from the press (which has a far bigger influence on the general public) regarding the climate change issue and I have yet to see you call them out. Why would that be?

Anyway, I found this interview by Michael Moore in which he address some of the criticism from the usual suspects. I haven't watched it yet but will later. In the meantime, it may be of interest to you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bop8x24G_o0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bop8x24G_o0

So your rebuttal to a very specific point that I went through the trouble of presenting with evidence to support it, is to accuse me of having ‘hubris’ and post a link to a YouTube video that you didn’t even bother to watch

You’re not worth the effort. I’m not engaging with you anymore

Akrasia · 06-07-2021 8:23am

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Brilliant reporting there. No contradictions whatsoever.

The Journal now trying to cash in on the climate panic, and doing so miserably.

So still more than a degree less than the record set 107 years ago? What's the big deal here?

Well holy shít, the warmest day of the year. Very strange for early July. And still below the record.

There is no contradiction between being the hottest temperature in June on record, and not beating the overall hottest ever temperature

June is not usually the hottest month of the year

Akrasia · 06-07-2021 8:36am

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

From the Journal.ie article above it's interesting that the Swedish demon girl Greta chose to cherrypick the last three years of June temperatures and make the statement below. Had she chosen to go further back to 2018, 17, 16, 15, etc. she would see that Sweden was well below the longterm average for many years in the past 17 years. This link shows the June anomalies back to 2004.

Of course nobody will pull her up on that.

Don’t be ridiculous. The 3 hottest years on record happening in a row one after another is noteworthy. It’s very different to being just warmer or cooler than average over a 17 year period
And I bet you that even the coldest year in that 14 year period was warmer than the 20th century average if this was just a statistical anomaly then it should be about a 50 50 chance that 2022 will see a cooler than average temperature. I bet you a hundred euros 2022 won’t be below the 30 year rolling average temperature for Sweden

What is your agenda Gaoth?

Gaoth Laidir · 06-07-2021 9:02am

Akrasia wrote: »

Don’t be ridiculous. The 3 hottest years on record happening in a row one after another is noteworthy. It’s very different to being just warmer or cooler than average over a 17 year period
And I bet you that even the coldest year in that 14 year period was warmer than the 20th century average if this was just a statistical anomaly then it should be about a 50 50 chance that 2022 will see a cooler than average temperature. I bet you a hundred euros 2022 won’t be below the 30 year rolling average temperature for Sweden

What is your agenda Gaoth?

Did she mention that the past few Mays have been colder than average? Nope.

2021

2020

Oneiric 3 · 06-07-2021 9:18am

Akrasia wrote: »

So your rebuttal to a very specific point that I went through the trouble of presenting with evidence to support it, is to accuse me of having ‘hubris’ and post a link to a YouTube video that you didn’t even bother to watch

You’re not worth the effort. I’m not engaging with you anymore

And I posted Moore's response to your 'rebuttals'. I am not the one criticising his doc, you are, so you could at least listen to what he has to say.. or would that be too uncomfortable for you? You might actually find yourself surprised at how much his thinking aligns with your own.

It is hubris to assume that you are the sole truth and that all else is 'misinformation'. Sorry, but you, the media, science and politics do not have that exclusive ownership. By they way, wasn't it you sometime last year that predictably called me a 'conspiracy theorist' (another overused term rendered meaningless by self appointed moral authorities) for daring to suggest that this virus might have had lab origins? Or do you now accept that this just might now be a possibility, because your mainstream media overlords (who are all as thick as 3 short planks) told you that it is now ok?

Oneiric 3 · 06-07-2021 9:25am

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Did she mention that the past

Did she mention this?

COVID-19 lockdowns temporarily raised global temperatures, research shows
Reductions in aerosol emissions had slight warming impact, study finds
Date:February 2, 2021
Source:National Center for Atmospheric Research/University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
Summary:
The lockdowns and reduced societal activity related to the COVID-19 pandemic affected emissions of pollutants in ways that slightly warmed the planet for several months last year, according to new research. The counterintuitive finding highlights the influence of airborne particles, or aerosols, that block incoming sunlight.

This is my second time posting a link to this study. Maybe those with the agenda on here might consider it this time around.

Oneiric 3 · 06-07-2021 9:29am

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

I refer to a previous statement of mine,

Please... just stop.

Oneiric 3 · 06-07-2021 9:54am

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

Or do you now accept that this just might now be a possibility, because your mainstream media overlords (who are all as thick as 3 short planks) told you that it is now ok?

And this guy puts it in a way that few can.
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1395163292742651904
Glenn Greenwald@ggreenwald
May 20
"Fact-checking, like virtually everything the corporate media does to feign superiority, is a total scam: just another way for them to smuggle their own ideologically-driven disinformation and conspiracy theories under a more elevated facade".

The Left is beginning at last to find voice, and the pseudo-left frauds are going to be sought out, one by glorious one.

Akrasia · 06-07-2021 3:41pm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Did she mention that the past few Mays have been colder than average? Nope.

2021

2020

Did they happen to be the record minimum temperatures for May?

Akrasia · 06-07-2021 3:43pm

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

And I posted Moore's response to your 'rebuttals'. I am not the one criticising his doc, you are, so you could at least listen to what he has to say.. or would that be too uncomfortable for you? You might actually find yourself surprised at how much his thinking aligns with your own.

It is hubris to assume that you are the sole truth and that all else is 'misinformation'. Sorry, but you, the media, science and politics do not have that exclusive ownership. By they way, wasn't it you sometime last year that predictably called me a 'conspiracy theorist' (another overused term rendered meaningless by self appointed moral authorities) for daring to suggest that this virus might have had lab origins? Or do you now accept that this just might now be a possibility, because your mainstream media overlords (who are all as thick as 3 short planks) told you that it is now ok?

Nonsense, You introduced the documentary, you said it was 'brilliant' and you then responded to my fully referenced specific point challenging your praise of the documentary with a youtube video that you didn't even bother to watch first. You wasted enough of my time, I'm not wasting any more time on you

Oneiric 3 · 06-07-2021 4:55pm

Akrasia wrote: »

Nonsense, You introduced the documentary, you said it was 'brilliant' and you then responded to my fully referenced specific point challenging your praise of the documentary with a youtube video that you didn't even bother to watch first. You wasted enough of my time, I'm not wasting any more time on you

Except your 'fully referenced specific point' was nothing but the blatant attempt to dismiss the whole message of the, yes, brilliant movie.

Here is just one short clip from the film for others to make up their own mind. I said it was disturbing for a reason... because it is. We have been sold a lie regarding 'green energy' and there is no getting away from this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXUGysIX3fc

Gaoth Laidir · 06-07-2021 5:03pm

Akrasia wrote: »

Did they happen to be the record minimum temperatures for May?

I don't know. I just know they were well below the sacred 1961-1990 reference value. For someone who's so hysterical about warming temperatures I'm surprised she didn't take a bit of solace in the fact that it's not all doom and gloom. I suppose her PR team wouldn't approve of that.

Banana Republic 1 · 06-07-2021 6:04pm

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

Except your 'fully referenced specific point' was nothing but the blatant attempt to dismiss the whole message of the, yes, brilliant movie.

Here is just one short clip from the film for others to make up their own mind. I said it was disturbing for a reason... because it is. We have been sold a lie regarding 'green energy' and there is no getting away from this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXUGysIX3fc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXUGysIX3fc

The start of the film with him at the music festival was recorded in the mid 1990s, the movie was released in 2020 so that first scene was misleading. The next part where they go to a solar farm was also recorded in the past, circa ten years. The guy said the panels where 8% efficient. Today ten years on there about 23% efficient, the were also the wrong type for what was meant to be achieved,again the movie is misleading.

There was also another scene where they quickly ran through a bunch of images all attributed to electric car manufacturing, including children in Africa mining cobalt, what they failed to explain was all those things including cobalt, which is used in oil refining, are used in virtual everything humans consume. Needless to say they hacked out things for this movie.

Like I said before capitalism has dragged us down to this point and if it continues unchanged there is no way out.

Birdnuts · 06-07-2021 6:06pm

Akrasia wrote: »

Did they happen to be the record minimum temperatures for May?

According to the UK Met - this April/May combo over the BI was the coldest in 80 years

Oneiric 3 · 06-07-2021 6:32pm

Birdnuts wrote: »

According to the UK Met - this April/May combo over the BI was the coldest in 80 years

Western Australia had its coldest mean maxima for June in 28 years
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/month/wa/summary.shtml

But it doesn't matter where you are in the world really, warmer temps (relative to average) will occur more frequently than cold over long term periods.

Oneiric 3 · 06-07-2021 6:37pm

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

The start of the film with him at the music festival was recorded in the mid 1990s, the movie was released in 2020 so that first scene was misleading. The next part where they go to a solar farm was also recorded in the past, circa ten years. The guy said the panels where 8% efficient. Today ten years on there about 23% efficient, the were also the wrong type for what was meant to be achieved,again the movie is misleading.

There was also another scene where they quickly ran through a bunch of images all attributed to electric car manufacturing, including children in Africa mining cobalt, what they failed to explain was all those things including cobalt, which is used in oil refining, are used in virtual everything humans consume. Needless to say they hacked out things for this movie.

Like I said before capitalism has dragged us down to this point and if it continues unchanged there is no way out.

This is literally the whole point of the documentary. 'Green energy' is every bit as environmentally damaging as fossil fuels and is no less capitalistic than fossils. Big money is the game here, nothing else.

Akrasia · 06-07-2021 6:41pm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

I don't know. I just know they were well below the sacred 1961-1990 reference value. For someone who's so hysterical about warming temperatures I'm surprised she didn't take a bit of solace in the fact that it's not all doom and gloom. I suppose her PR team wouldn't approve of that.

You said you don’t know, but you do know, They definitely were not record low temperatures, they were slightly cooler than average.

Noting a record being broken is noteworthy, slightly warmer of cooler than average temperatures are not noteworthy
I do think it is hilarious that you accuse Thunburg for cherry-picking by not mentioning a slightly below average May this year, while you presented the last 3 Mays in Sweden and conveniently forget to mention the fact that the 2018 May was the hottest May on record with average temperatures above 10 degrees warmer than average that month

Gaoth Laidir · 06-07-2021 6:50pm

Akrasia wrote: »

You said you don’t know, but you do know, They definitely were not record low temperatures, they were slightly cooler than average.

Noting a record being broken is noteworthy, slightly warmer of cooler than average temperatures are not noteworthy
I do think it is hilarious that you accuse Thunburg for cherry-picking by not mentioning a slightly below average May this year, while you presented the last 3 Mays in Sweden and conveniently forget to mention the fact that the 2018 May was the hottest May on record with average temperatures above 10 degrees warmer than average that month

But according to you, the past 3 years of warmer Junes is a trend and cause for worry. By that rationale, surely colder Mays in 2019, 2020 and 2021 are equally a trend in the other direction? Or does it only work one way?

Banana Republic 1 · 06-07-2021 6:51pm

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

This is literally the whole point of the documentary. 'Green energy' is every bit as environmentally damaging as fossil fuels and is no less capitalistic than fossils. Big money is the game here, nothing else.

No it’s bastardised by capitalism.

Akrasia · 06-07-2021 8:55pm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

But according to you, the past 3 years of warmer Junes is a trend and cause for worry. By that rationale, surely colder Mays in 2019, 2020 and 2021 are equally a trend in the other direction? Or does it only work one way?

What are you talking about? Thunburg remarked about this June, being the warmest on record in her home city,following from last year beng the warmest June on record, following from the June before being the warmest June on record in her city and you go off and complain that she didn't qualify this statement by mentioning 3 previous Mays that were very slightly below average

And you yourself deliberately didn't mention that the May directly before your sample ended, happened to have been the warmest May on record in that country

I'm not the one bringing these facts up and making myself look silly (I should know, I've made myself look silly plenty of times in the past, I know what it looks like)

Akrasia · 06-07-2021 9:07pm

Birdnuts wrote: »

According to the UK Met - this April/May combo over the BI was the coldest in 80 years

May was amongst the wettest Mays on Record. April was dominated by a blocking high that trapped polar air over much of the UK for weeks on end.
Weather has a cause. These were the causes of the cold spring in this corner of the planet.

Perhaps if it wasn't for global warming, it might have been the coldest april/may on record instead of just in the last 80 years

Even with global warming, there are still 'cold records' being broken. It's just that the number of record warm temperatures are happening at a ratio of about 2:1

as time goes on, that ratio will likely change to 2.5:1, then 3:1 etc

All the while, the bell curve for what constitutes 'extreme' weather shifts towards more high energy events

(All the above is notwithstanding the breakdown of the atmospheric and oceanic circulation patterns that could cause major changes in how heat is distributed globally and would introduce a whole series of new and troubling issues)

Gaoth Laidir · 06-07-2021 11:04pm

Akrasia wrote: »

May was amongst the wettest Mays on Record. April was dominated by a blocking high that trapped polar air over much of the UK for weeks on end.
Weather has a cause. These were the causes of the cold spring in this corner of the planet.

Perhaps if it wasn't for global warming, it might have been the coldest april/may on record instead of just in the last 80 years

Even with global warming, there are still 'cold records' being broken. It's just that the number of record warm temperatures are happening at a ratio of about 2:1

as time goes on, that ratio will likely change to 2.5:1, then 3:1 etc

All the while, the bell curve for what constitutes 'extreme' weather shifts towards more high energy events

(All the above is notwithstanding the breakdown of the atmospheric and oceanic circulation patterns that could cause major changes in how heat is distributed globally and would introduce a whole series of new and troubling issues)

Do you really think that that graph is accurate? A 1-sigma shift right?

2020 officially saw a record number of $1 billion weather and climate disasters.

Comments