Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Oh tish-tosh, the real “reason” things are getting hotter is that people sin more and we’re getting closer to making the world go to [heck]!
The legions of [heck] have to arise, we stole all of the coal and oil that they need to keep the place hot!Sounds plausible.
Isaiah 5:14 Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it.
The legions of [heck] have to arise, we stole all of the coal and oil that they need to keep the place hot!
Last year saw record low levels of sea ice — and this year looks set to be even worse, scientists say
This appears to be a variation on "it snowed, in Ohio, in February so therefore global warming is a hoax".
Yes. I've been posting on a closely related aspect of this quite a few times in the last 5 years here -- how new findings of mechanisms that affect climate, new factors and feedback loops discovered (year after year) -- almost all of them will act to increase warming speed.
We do tend to get disproportionately more responses at from those most adamant to deny something they wanted to be different than it is.... But there are many that agree and don't feel a need to post, and even a few perhaps that are learning something new.You're preaching to the tone-deaf, Halbhh...tone deaf and sweating...
In my experience, when an issue has two basic sides, both sides deny some things and accept other things. The question is, which things should be denied and which should be accepted, and why? Consensus is never the answer. It is merely an ad-populum argument. It always begs the question, "why is there a consensus? What evidence convinced them? And should it be denied or accepted?"We do tend to get disproportionately more responses at from those most adamant to deny something they wanted to be different than it is.... But there are many that agree and don't feel a need to post, and even a few perhaps that are learning something new.
In a vacuum, sure. But a scientific consensus is not the same as you and your buddies agreeing on which bar you think is the best.Consensus is never the answer. It is merely an ad-populum argument.
Because a large number of studies show similar or complementary results.It always begs the question, "why is there a consensus?
This can be determined by reading those studies.What evidence convinced them?
That depends - do you have research that shows an alternative explanation for the same observations? Do your studies point in a different direction?And should it be denied or accepted?"
Why twice the current level? What effect would that have, how have you determined it, and how would you propose to hold it at that level without getting any higher?I would like to see the planet get more CO2 (about twice the current level)
How much warmer?and get a bit warmer.
In parts, perhaps. It makes other parts drier though. And while global average precipitation is increasing, it's hard to say for certain if that trend will continue. While climate changes on shorter timescales than many other natural processes, those timescales are still long compared to human lifespans. We don't really know how things will end up until the situation stabilizes.A warmer planet is a wetter planet.
Why is it a good thing?The planet is already greening. This is a good thing, IMO.
But what if our grants/livelihood depend on us picking a particular bar.In a vacuum, sure. But a scientific consensus is not the same as you and your buddies agreeing on which bar you think is the best.
I dunno. I just think it could get warmer/wetter and increased CO2 could really, really help. See the video I posted a few posts up.Why twice the current level? What effect would that have, how have you determined it, and how would you propose to hold it at that level without getting any higher?
How much warmer?
unfortunately this is already happening, as we are departing from the more favorable than today global climate of the past we knew in the 1970s-1990s really, into a different climate already that is less reliable for agriculture in already established great bread basket areas....(and moving agriculture to some new areas is chancy (will it work?), even though that appears necessary) and this already coming new climate is worse with worse droughts, floods and storms on average than the past average from the 70s-90s.I would like to see the planet get more CO2 (about twice the current level) and get a bit warmer.
Actually, storm activity decreased. There is a good list of articles and discussion here: Not a Billion Dollar Disasterunfortunately this is already happening, as we are departing from the more favorable than today global climate of the past we knew in the 1970s-1990s really, into a different climate already that is less reliable for agriculture in already established great bread basket areas....(and moving agriculture to some new areas is chancy (will it work?), even though that appears necessary) and this already coming new climate is worse with worse droughts, floods and storms on average than the past average from the 70s-90s.
Ah yes, it's all one big conspiracy.But what if our grants/livelihood depend on us picking a particular bar.
Increased greening is not necessarily beneficial. Impacts on crop yields are pretty minimal (increases in that department over time are primarily due to improvements in fertilizers, genetic modification, and irrigation), and there's even research showing that plants grown in environments higher in CO2 are actually less nutritious.I dunno. I just think it could get warmer/wetter and increased CO2 could really, really help. See the video I posted a few posts up.
Based on your expert opinion, of course.My comment is not to say how much warmer it could get. Rather, that it's not there yet and it's not something we should even concern ourselves with any more than we did a couple hundred years ago.
How are the solutions "civilization destroying"?Regarding the subject at hand, I just see this whole issue as a bunch of civilization destroying solutions looking for a problem.
Actually, that is not what I said. And what about the "deniers are just frontmen for their financial backers, the oil industry"? At least the grant money is a real thing and not just a BFC*.Ah yes, it's all one big conspiracy.
Regarding your first question: Without exposing details, yes.Based on your expert opinion, of course.
How are the solutions "civilization destroying"?
Wait, before reviewing anything that could be redundant information for me, that might only tell me what I already know, let me just state a general thing I already know, first:Actually, storm activity decreased. There is a good list of articles and discussion here: Not a Billion Dollar Disaster
And the good news about change is that it is very slow. Slow enough that the local culture can adapt. e.g. they can start planting orange trees and vineyards in the Sahara and Siberia.
But I posted a video a few posts up that discusses what's happening.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?