Politics & Stuff

[KEVINAA 129]

I just found out this while looking at deaths in 2024 Wikipedia page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths_in_2024

Germany owned a Russian version of Soviet Union before is became USSR.

The Volga German Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic

ASSR of the Russian SFSR

1918–1941

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volga_German_Autonomous_Soviet_Socialist_Republic

 

Native name 

Мария Филипповна Лиманская

Born 12 April 1924

Staraya Poltavka, Volga German ASSR, Russian SFSR, USSR

Died 26 November 2024 (aged 100)

Russia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Limanskaya

This 100 year old Russian woman traffic controller died on my birthday today 26 November 2024.

Edited November 26, 2024 by KEVINAA

[Vesper 30,091]

2 hours ago, Fernando said:

I have a question, climate warming is real and this is being put on the humans. But I have a problem with this, climate warming is not the first time it happen to this earth.

Was reading this about the great lakes and how in the past there was climate warming. Well in that time there was no human activity. So if climate happen in the past without humans then can we just say it's a normal cycle and not just solely the humans fault? 

 

These vast lakes formed approximately 14,000 years ago due to climate warming and glacial melting.

https://search.app?link=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.worldatlas.com%2Flakes%2Fthe-great-lakes-ranked-by-size.html&utm_campaign=aga&utm_source=agsadl1%2Csh%2Fx%2Fgs%2Fm2%2F4

 

oh come on now

do not tell me we have to litigate anthropogenic global climate change denialism now on here

smdh

 

Evidence

There is unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate. Human activity is the principal cause.

https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

Takeaways

• While Earth’s climate has changed throughout its history, the current warming is happening at a rate not seen in the past 10,000 years.
• According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), "Since systematic scientific assessments began in the 1970s, the influence of human activity on the warming of the climate system has evolved from theory to established fact."¹
• Scientific information taken from natural sources (such as ice cores, rocks, and tree rings) and from modern equipment (like satellites and instruments) all show the signs of a changing climate.
• From global temperature rise to melting ice sheets, the evidence of a warming planet abounds.

The rate of change since the mid-20th century is unprecedented over millennia.

Earth's climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 800,000 years, there have been eight cycles of ice ages and warmer periods, with the end of the last ice age about 11,700 years ago marking the beginning of the modern climate era — and of human civilization. Most of these climate changes are attributed to very small variations in Earth’s orbit that change the amount of solar energy our planet receives.

This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution.

Luthi, D., et al.. 2008; Etheridge, D.M., et al. 2010; Vostok ice core data/J.R. Petit et al.; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record. Find out more about ice cores (external site).

 

The current warming trend is different because it is clearly the result of human activities since the mid-1800s, and is proceeding at a rate not seen over many recent millennia.¹ It is undeniable that human activities have produced the atmospheric gases that have trapped more of the Sun’s energy in the Earth system. This extra energy has warmed the atmosphere, ocean, and land, and widespread and rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere, and biosphere have occurred.

Do scientists agree on climate change?

Earth-orbiting satellites and new technologies have helped scientists see the big picture, collecting many different types of information about our planet and its climate all over the world. These data, collected over many years, reveal the signs and patterns of a changing climate.

Scientists demonstrated the heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases in the mid-19th century.² Many of the science instruments NASA uses to study our climate focus on how these gases affect the movement of infrared radiation through the atmosphere. From the measured impacts of increases in these gases, there is no question that increased greenhouse gas levels warm Earth in response.

Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal. - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain glaciers show that Earth’s climate responds to changes in greenhouse gas levels. Ancient evidence can also be found in tree rings, ocean sediments, coral reefs, and layers of sedimentary rocks. This ancient, or paleoclimate, evidence reveals that current warming is occurring roughly 10 times faster than the average rate of warming after an ice age. Carbon dioxide from human activities is increasing about 250 times faster than it did from natural sources after the last Ice Age.³

References

1. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, WGI, Technical Summary.

B.D. Santer et.al., “A search for human influences on the thermal structure of the atmosphere.” Nature 382 (04 July 1996): 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1038/382039a0.

Gabriele C. Hegerl et al., “Detecting Greenhouse-Gas-Induced Climate Change with an Optimal Fingerprint Method.” Journal of Climate 9 (October 1996): 2281-2306. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1996)009<2281:DGGICC>2.0.CO;2.

V. Ramaswamy, et al., “Anthropogenic and Natural Influences in the Evolution of Lower Stratospheric Cooling.” Science 311 (24 February 2006): 1138-1141. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1122587.

B.D. Santer et al., “Contributions of Anthropogenic and Natural Forcing to Recent Tropopause Height Changes.” Science 301 (25 July 2003): 479-483. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1084123.

T. Westerhold et al., "An astronomically dated record of Earth’s climate and its predictability over the last 66 million years." Science 369 (11 Sept. 2020): 1383-1387. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1094123

2. In 1824, Joseph Fourier calculated that an Earth-sized planet, at our distance from the Sun, ought to be much colder. He suggested something in the atmosphere must be acting like an insulating blanket. In 1856, Eunice Foote discovered that blanket, showing that carbon dioxide and water vapor in Earth's atmosphere trap escaping infrared (heat) radiation.

In the 1860s, physicist John Tyndall recognized Earth's natural greenhouse effect and suggested that slight changes in the atmospheric composition could bring about climatic variations. In 1896, a seminal paper by Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius first predicted that changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels could substantially alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse effect.

In 1938, Guy Callendar connected carbon dioxide increases in Earth’s atmosphere to global warming. In 1941, Milutin Milankovic linked ice ages to Earth’s orbital characteristics. Gilbert Plass formulated the Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climate Change in 1956.

3. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, WG1, Chapter 2
Vostok ice core data; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record
O. Gaffney, W. Steffen, "The Anthropocene Equation." The Anthropocene Review 4, issue 1 (April 2017): 53-61. https://doi.org/abs/10.1177/2053019616688022.

4. https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/monitoring
https://crudata.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp

5. https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20170118/

6. S. Levitus, J. Antonov, T. Boyer, O Baranova, H. Garcia, R. Locarnini, A. Mishonov, J. Reagan, D. Seidov, E. Yarosh, M. Zweng, "NCEI ocean heat content, temperature anomalies, salinity anomalies, thermosteric sea level anomalies, halosteric sea level anomalies, and total steric sea level anomalies from 1955 to present calculated from in situ oceanographic subsurface profile data (NCEI Accession 0164586), Version 4.4. (2017) NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information.

https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/index3.html

K. von Schuckmann, L. Cheng, L,. D. Palmer, J. Hansen, C. Tassone, V. Aich, S. Adusumilli, H. Beltrami, H., T. Boyer, F. Cuesta-Valero, D. Desbruyeres, C. Domingues, A. Garcia-Garcia, P. Gentine, J. Gilson, M. Gorfer, L. Haimberger, M. Ishii, M., G. Johnson, R. Killick, B. King, G. Kirchengast, N. Kolodziejczyk, J. Lyman, B. Marzeion, M. Mayer, M. Monier, D. Monselesan, S. Purkey, D. Roemmich, A. Schweiger, S. Seneviratne, A. Shepherd, D. Slater, A. Steiner, F. Straneo, M.L. Timmermans, S. Wijffels. "Heat stored in the Earth system: where does the energy go?" Earth System Science Data 12, Issue 3 (07 September 2020): 2013-2041. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2013-2020.

7. I. Velicogna, Yara Mohajerani, A. Geruo, F. Landerer, J. Mouginot, B. Noel, E. Rignot, T. Sutterly, M. van den Broeke, M. Wessem, D. Wiese, "Continuity of Ice Sheet Mass Loss in Greenland and Antarctica From the GRACE and GRACE Follow-On Missions." Geophysical Research Letters 47, Issue 8 (28 April 2020): e2020GL087291. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL087291.

8. National Snow and Ice Data Center
World Glacier Monitoring Service

9. National Snow and Ice Data Center
D.A. Robinson, D. K. Hall, and T. L. Mote, "MEaSUREs Northern Hemisphere Terrestrial Snow Cover Extent Daily 25km EASE-Grid 2.0, Version 1 (2017). Boulder, Colorado USA. NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center. doi:
https://doi.org/10.5067/MEASURES/CRYOSPHERE/nsidc-0530.001. http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/snow_extent.html
Rutgers University Global Snow Lab. Data History

10. R.S. Nerem, B.D. Beckley, J. T. Fasullo, B.D. Hamlington, D. Masters, and G.T. Mitchum, "Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era." PNAS 15, no. 9 (12 Feb. 2018): 2022-2025. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1717312115.

11. https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/sea_ice.html
Pan-Arctic Ice Ocean Modeling and Assimilation System (PIOMAS, Zhang and Rothrock, 2003)
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/research/projects/arctic-sea-ice-volume-anomaly/
http://psc.apl.uw.edu/research/projects/projections-of-an-ice-diminished-arctic-ocean/

12. USGCRP, 2017: Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I [Wuebbles, D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, D.J. Dokken, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, 470 pp, https://doi.org/10.7930/j0j964j6.

13. http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/What+is+Ocean+Acidification%3F

14. http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/Ocean+Acidification

15. C.L. Sabine, et al., “The Oceanic Sink for Anthropogenic CO2.” Science 305 (16 July 2004): 367-371. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097403.

16. Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate, Technical Summary, Chapter TS.5, Changing Ocean, Marine Ecosystems, and Dependent Communities, Section 5.2.2.3.
https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/chapter/technical-summary/

_{Header image shows clouds imitating mountains as the sun sets after midnight as seen from Denali's backcountry Unit 13 on June 14, 2019. Credit: NPS/Emily Mesner
Image credit in list of evidence: Ashwin Kumar, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic.}

[Fernando 6,585]

3 minutes ago, Vesper said:

oh come on now

do not tell me we have to litigate anthropogenic global climate change denialism now on here

smdh

 

Evidence

There is unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate. Human activity is the principal cause.

https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

Takeaways

• While Earth’s climate has changed throughout its history, the current warming is happening at a rate not seen in the past 10,000 years.
• According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), "Since systematic scientific assessments began in the 1970s, the influence of human activity on the warming of the climate system has evolved from theory to established fact."¹
• Scientific information taken from natural sources (such as ice cores, rocks, and tree rings) and from modern equipment (like satellites and instruments) all show the signs of a changing climate.
• From global temperature rise to melting ice sheets, the evidence of a warming planet abounds.

The rate of change since the mid-20th century is unprecedented over millennia.

Earth's climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 800,000 years, there have been eight cycles of ice ages and warmer periods, with the end of the last ice age about 11,700 years ago marking the beginning of the modern climate era — and of human civilization. Most of these climate changes are attributed to very small variations in Earth’s orbit that change the amount of solar energy our planet receives.

This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution.

Luthi, D., et al.. 2008; Etheridge, D.M., et al. 2010; Vostok ice core data/J.R. Petit et al.; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record. Find out more about ice cores (external site).

 

The current warming trend is different because it is clearly the result of human activities since the mid-1800s, and is proceeding at a rate not seen over many recent millennia.¹ It is undeniable that human activities have produced the atmospheric gases that have trapped more of the Sun’s energy in the Earth system. This extra energy has warmed the atmosphere, ocean, and land, and widespread and rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere, and biosphere have occurred.

Do scientists agree on climate change?

Earth-orbiting satellites and new technologies have helped scientists see the big picture, collecting many different types of information about our planet and its climate all over the world. These data, collected over many years, reveal the signs and patterns of a changing climate.

Scientists demonstrated the heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases in the mid-19th century.² Many of the science instruments NASA uses to study our climate focus on how these gases affect the movement of infrared radiation through the atmosphere. From the measured impacts of increases in these gases, there is no question that increased greenhouse gas levels warm Earth in response.

Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal. - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain glaciers show that Earth’s climate responds to changes in greenhouse gas levels. Ancient evidence can also be found in tree rings, ocean sediments, coral reefs, and layers of sedimentary rocks. This ancient, or paleoclimate, evidence reveals that current warming is occurring roughly 10 times faster than the average rate of warming after an ice age. Carbon dioxide from human activities is increasing about 250 times faster than it did from natural sources after the last Ice Age.³

References

1. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, WGI, Technical Summary.

B.D. Santer et.al., “A search for human influences on the thermal structure of the atmosphere.” Nature 382 (04 July 1996): 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1038/382039a0.

Gabriele C. Hegerl et al., “Detecting Greenhouse-Gas-Induced Climate Change with an Optimal Fingerprint Method.” Journal of Climate 9 (October 1996): 2281-2306. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1996)009<2281:DGGICC>2.0.CO;2.

V. Ramaswamy, et al., “Anthropogenic and Natural Influences in the Evolution of Lower Stratospheric Cooling.” Science 311 (24 February 2006): 1138-1141. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1122587.

B.D. Santer et al., “Contributions of Anthropogenic and Natural Forcing to Recent Tropopause Height Changes.” Science 301 (25 July 2003): 479-483. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1084123.

T. Westerhold et al., "An astronomically dated record of Earth’s climate and its predictability over the last 66 million years." Science 369 (11 Sept. 2020): 1383-1387. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1094123

2. In 1824, Joseph Fourier calculated that an Earth-sized planet, at our distance from the Sun, ought to be much colder. He suggested something in the atmosphere must be acting like an insulating blanket. In 1856, Eunice Foote discovered that blanket, showing that carbon dioxide and water vapor in Earth's atmosphere trap escaping infrared (heat) radiation.

In the 1860s, physicist John Tyndall recognized Earth's natural greenhouse effect and suggested that slight changes in the atmospheric composition could bring about climatic variations. In 1896, a seminal paper by Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius first predicted that changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels could substantially alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse effect.

In 1938, Guy Callendar connected carbon dioxide increases in Earth’s atmosphere to global warming. In 1941, Milutin Milankovic linked ice ages to Earth’s orbital characteristics. Gilbert Plass formulated the Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climate Change in 1956.

3. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, WG1, Chapter 2
Vostok ice core data; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record
O. Gaffney, W. Steffen, "The Anthropocene Equation." The Anthropocene Review 4, issue 1 (April 2017): 53-61. https://doi.org/abs/10.1177/2053019616688022.

4. https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/monitoring
https://crudata.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp

5. https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20170118/

6. S. Levitus, J. Antonov, T. Boyer, O Baranova, H. Garcia, R. Locarnini, A. Mishonov, J. Reagan, D. Seidov, E. Yarosh, M. Zweng, "NCEI ocean heat content, temperature anomalies, salinity anomalies, thermosteric sea level anomalies, halosteric sea level anomalies, and total steric sea level anomalies from 1955 to present calculated from in situ oceanographic subsurface profile data (NCEI Accession 0164586), Version 4.4. (2017) NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information.

https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/index3.html

K. von Schuckmann, L. Cheng, L,. D. Palmer, J. Hansen, C. Tassone, V. Aich, S. Adusumilli, H. Beltrami, H., T. Boyer, F. Cuesta-Valero, D. Desbruyeres, C. Domingues, A. Garcia-Garcia, P. Gentine, J. Gilson, M. Gorfer, L. Haimberger, M. Ishii, M., G. Johnson, R. Killick, B. King, G. Kirchengast, N. Kolodziejczyk, J. Lyman, B. Marzeion, M. Mayer, M. Monier, D. Monselesan, S. Purkey, D. Roemmich, A. Schweiger, S. Seneviratne, A. Shepherd, D. Slater, A. Steiner, F. Straneo, M.L. Timmermans, S. Wijffels. "Heat stored in the Earth system: where does the energy go?" Earth System Science Data 12, Issue 3 (07 September 2020): 2013-2041. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2013-2020.

7. I. Velicogna, Yara Mohajerani, A. Geruo, F. Landerer, J. Mouginot, B. Noel, E. Rignot, T. Sutterly, M. van den Broeke, M. Wessem, D. Wiese, "Continuity of Ice Sheet Mass Loss in Greenland and Antarctica From the GRACE and GRACE Follow-On Missions." Geophysical Research Letters 47, Issue 8 (28 April 2020): e2020GL087291. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL087291.

8. National Snow and Ice Data Center
World Glacier Monitoring Service

9. National Snow and Ice Data Center
D.A. Robinson, D. K. Hall, and T. L. Mote, "MEaSUREs Northern Hemisphere Terrestrial Snow Cover Extent Daily 25km EASE-Grid 2.0, Version 1 (2017). Boulder, Colorado USA. NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center. doi:
https://doi.org/10.5067/MEASURES/CRYOSPHERE/nsidc-0530.001. http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/snow_extent.html
Rutgers University Global Snow Lab. Data History

10. R.S. Nerem, B.D. Beckley, J. T. Fasullo, B.D. Hamlington, D. Masters, and G.T. Mitchum, "Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era." PNAS 15, no. 9 (12 Feb. 2018): 2022-2025. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1717312115.

11. https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/sea_ice.html
Pan-Arctic Ice Ocean Modeling and Assimilation System (PIOMAS, Zhang and Rothrock, 2003)
http://psc.apl.washington.edu/research/projects/arctic-sea-ice-volume-anomaly/
http://psc.apl.uw.edu/research/projects/projections-of-an-ice-diminished-arctic-ocean/

12. USGCRP, 2017: Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I [Wuebbles, D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, D.J. Dokken, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, 470 pp, https://doi.org/10.7930/j0j964j6.

13. http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/What+is+Ocean+Acidification%3F

14. http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/Ocean+Acidification

15. C.L. Sabine, et al., “The Oceanic Sink for Anthropogenic CO2.” Science 305 (16 July 2004): 367-371. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097403.

16. Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate, Technical Summary, Chapter TS.5, Changing Ocean, Marine Ecosystems, and Dependent Communities, Section 5.2.2.3.
https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/chapter/technical-summary/

_{Header image shows clouds imitating mountains as the sun sets after midnight as seen from Denali's backcountry Unit 13 on June 14, 2019. Credit: NPS/Emily Mesner
Image credit in list of evidence: Ashwin Kumar, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic.}

Good stuff. 

So in the past we did had the planet getting hot and colder, because it was part of the system right?

This time is the humans fault. 

I take that. Then the question is if we are producing climate change then will it have the same effect in the past?

As you have their in your analysis that we have had periods of ice age and global warming. Right now we are in a global warming, so can we use the previous model to see how far we will go into global warming before we reverse and enter into an ice age?

Because on the analysis it seems to indicate that we had global warming and eventually ice age....

[Vesper 30,091]

1 minute ago, Fernando said:

Good stuff. 

So in the past we did had the planet getting hot and colder, because it was part of the system right?

This time is the humans fault. 

I take that. Then the question is if we are producing climate change then will it have the same effect in the past?

As you have their in your analysis that we have had periods of ice age and global warming. Right now we are in a global warming, so can we use the previous model to see how far we will go into global warming before we reverse and enter into an ice age?

Because on the analysis it seems to indicate that we had global warming and eventually ice age....

there has never before been this level of anthropogenic climate change-inducing inputs that we have seen introduced now over the past 120 or so years, asn especially the last 125 or so years

never in the entire history of the planet

 

Climate change denial

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial

Climate change denial (also global warming denial) is a form of science denial characterized by rejecting, refusing to acknowledge, disputing, or fighting the scientific consensus on climate change. Those promoting denial commonly use rhetorical tactics to give the appearance of a scientific controversy where there is none.[4] Climate change denial includes unreasonable doubts about the extent to which climate change is caused by humans, its effects on nature and human society, and the potential of adaptation to global warming by human actions.[5][6][7]: 170–173  To a lesser extent, climate change denial can also be implicit when people accept the science but fail to reconcile it with their belief or action.[6] Several studies have analyzed these positions as forms of denialism,[8]: 691–698  pseudoscience,[9] or propaganda.[10]: 351 

Many issues that are settled in the scientific community, such as human responsibility for climate change, remain the subject of politically or economically motivated attempts to downplay, dismiss or deny them—an ideological phenomenon academics and scientists call climate change denial. Climate scientists, especially in the United States, have reported government and oil-industry pressure to censor or suppress their work and hide scientific data, with directives not to discuss the subject publicly. The fossil fuels lobby has been identified as overtly or covertly supporting efforts to undermine or discredit the scientific consensus on climate change.[11][12]

Industrial, political and ideological interests organize activity to undermine public trust in climate science.[13][14][15][8]: 691–698  Climate change denial has been associated with the fossil fuels lobby, the Koch brothers, industry advocates, ultraconservative think tanks, and ultraconservative alternative media, often in the U.S.[10]: 351 [16][8] More than 90% of papers that are skeptical of climate change originate from right-wing think tanks.[17] Climate change denial is undermining efforts to act on or adapt to climate change, and exerts a powerful influence on the politics of climate change.[15][8]: 691–698 

In the 1970s, oil companies published research that broadly concurred with the scientific community's view on climate change. Since then, for several decades, oil companies have been organizing a widespread and systematic climate change denial campaign to seed public disinformation, a strategy that has been compared to the tobacco industry's organized denial of the hazards of tobacco smoking. Some of the campaigns are even carried out by the same people who previously spread the tobacco industry's denialist propaganda.[18][19][20]

 

 

[Vesper 30,091]

On 25/11/2024 at 16:25, Fulham Broadway said:

Good site for independent news -set up by disenchanted NYTimes and other journos who were fucked off with the corporate editorial control

Welcome to The Free Press

that is a pretty RW site, headed up by the hardcore US zionist Bari Weiss, her progressive-bashing wife Nellie Bowles, plus the RW British journo Douglas Murray, and the Thatcher/Reagan-loving RW US/British historian Niall Ferguson

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bari_Weiss

According to The Washington Post, Weiss "portrays herself as a liberal uncomfortable with the excesses of left-wing culture"[70] and has sought to "position herself as a reasonable liberal concerned that far-left critiques stifled free speech".[71] Vanity Fair called Weiss "a provocateur".[6] The Jewish Telegraphic Agency said that her writing "doesn't lend itself easily to labels".[72] Weiss has been described as conservative by Haaretz, The Times of Israel, The Daily Dot, and Business Insider.[73][74][75][76] In an interview with Joe Rogan, she called herself a "left-leaning centrist".[77] The Times of Israel reported that her public fight with The New York Times made her a hero among some conservatives.[78]

Weiss has expressed support for Israel and Zionism in her columns. When writer Andrew Sullivan described her as an "unhinged Zionist", she responded that she "happily plead[s] guilty as charged".[79] As of 2024, Weiss had visited Israel over 15 times, including after the October 7 attacks, and compared pro-Israel social media commentators to former Soviet refusenik Natan Sharansky, whose years in prison made him an icon of the movement to free Jews from the Soviet Union.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Murray_(author)

Douglas Murray (born 16 July 1979)[1] is a British author and conservative political commentator, cultural critic, and journalist. He founded the Centre for Social Cohesion in 2007, which became part of the Henry Jackson Society, where he was associate director from 2011 to 2018.

He is currently an associate editor of the conservative British political and cultural magazine The Spectator, and has been a regular contributor to The Times, The Daily Telegraph, The Sun, the Daily Mail, New York Post, National Review, The Free Press, and Unherd.[2][3][4][5][6][7]

Murray is known for his criticism of immigration and Islam. His books include Neoconservatism: Why We Need It (2005), The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam (2017), The Madness of Crowds: Gender, Race and Identity (2019) and The War on the West (2022).

Murray has been praised by conservatives, but strongly criticised by many progressives.[8][9][10][11] Articles in the academic journals Ethnic and Racial Studies and National Identities associate his views with Islamophobia[12][13] and he has been linked to far-right political ideologies[14] and the promotion of far-right ideas such as the Eurabia, Great Replacement, and Cultural Marxism conspiracy theories.[15][16][17][18]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niall_Ferguson

Sir Niall Campbell Ferguson, HonFRSE (/niːl/ NEEL; born 18 April 1964)[1] is a British-American conservative historian who is the Milbank Family Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution and a senior fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University.[2][3] Previously, he was a professor at Harvard University, the London School of Economics, New York University, a visiting professor at the New College of the Humanities, and a senior research fellow at Jesus College, Oxford. He was a visiting lecturer at the London School of Economics for the 2023/24 academic year and at Tsinghua University, China in 2019–20.[4][5] He is a co-founder of the University of Austin, Texas.[6]

Ferguson writes and lectures on international history, economic history, financial history and the history of the British Empire and American imperialism.[7] He holds positive views concerning the British Empire.[8] In 2004, he was one of Time magazine's 100 most influential people in the world.[9] Ferguson has written and presented numerous television documentary series, including The Ascent of Money, which won an International Emmy Award for Best Documentary in 2009.[10] In 2024, he was knighted by King Charles III for services to literature.[11]

Ferguson has been a contributing editor for Bloomberg Television and a columnist for Newsweek.[12] He began writing a semi-monthly column for Bloomberg Opinion in June 2020 and has also been a regular columnist at The Spectator and the Daily Mail.[13][14] In 2021 he became a joint-founder of the new University of Austin. Since June 2024 he is a bi-weekly columnist at The Free Press.[15] Ferguson has also contributed articles to many journals including Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy.[16][17] He has been described as a conservative and called himself a supporter of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.[18][19]

[Fernando 6,585]

54 minutes ago, Vesper said:

there has never before been this level of anthropogenic climate change-inducing inputs that we have seen introduced now over the past 120 or so years, asn especially the last 125 or so years

never in the entire history of the planet

 

Climate change denial

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial

Climate change denial (also global warming denial) is a form of science denial characterized by rejecting, refusing to acknowledge, disputing, or fighting the scientific consensus on climate change. Those promoting denial commonly use rhetorical tactics to give the appearance of a scientific controversy where there is none.[4] Climate change denial includes unreasonable doubts about the extent to which climate change is caused by humans, its effects on nature and human society, and the potential of adaptation to global warming by human actions.[5][6][7]: 170–173  To a lesser extent, climate change denial can also be implicit when people accept the science but fail to reconcile it with their belief or action.[6] Several studies have analyzed these positions as forms of denialism,[8]: 691–698  pseudoscience,[9] or propaganda.[10]: 351 

Many issues that are settled in the scientific community, such as human responsibility for climate change, remain the subject of politically or economically motivated attempts to downplay, dismiss or deny them—an ideological phenomenon academics and scientists call climate change denial. Climate scientists, especially in the United States, have reported government and oil-industry pressure to censor or suppress their work and hide scientific data, with directives not to discuss the subject publicly. The fossil fuels lobby has been identified as overtly or covertly supporting efforts to undermine or discredit the scientific consensus on climate change.[11][12]

Industrial, political and ideological interests organize activity to undermine public trust in climate science.[13][14][15][8]: 691–698  Climate change denial has been associated with the fossil fuels lobby, the Koch brothers, industry advocates, ultraconservative think tanks, and ultraconservative alternative media, often in the U.S.[10]: 351 [16][8] More than 90% of papers that are skeptical of climate change originate from right-wing think tanks.[17] Climate change denial is undermining efforts to act on or adapt to climate change, and exerts a powerful influence on the politics of climate change.[15][8]: 691–698 

In the 1970s, oil companies published research that broadly concurred with the scientific community's view on climate change. Since then, for several decades, oil companies have been organizing a widespread and systematic climate change denial campaign to seed public disinformation, a strategy that has been compared to the tobacco industry's organized denial of the hazards of tobacco smoking. Some of the campaigns are even carried out by the same people who previously spread the tobacco industry's denialist propaganda.[18][19][20]

 

 

Climate change is real, I'm not denying. 

I was saying how it happen in the past and in the past we had more stronger climate change then today. 

Based on your article it was because of the rotation:

Earth's climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 800,000 years, there have been eight cycles of ice ages and warmer periods, with the end of the last ice age about 11,700 years ago marking the beginning of the modern climate era — and of human civilization. Most of these climate changes are attributed to very small variations in Earth’s orbit that change the amount of solar energy our planet receives.

 

So the question is if we had that in the past right now we are not nowhere near the level of the past. Because you form lakes in the past that are big. Example on this article: 

These vast lakes formed approximately 14,000 years ago due to climate warming and glacial melting.

https://search.app?link=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.worldatlas.com%2Flakes%2Fthe-great-lakes-ranked-by-size.html&utm_campaign=aga&utm_source=agsadl1%2Csh%2Fx%2Fgs%2Fm2%2F4

We had ice age and global warming. Right now we are in a trend of global warming, but this time based on your article the human fault not the orbit. 

Question is if we can use the model of past global warming to see how far we will go into the warming of the planet before we enter into an ice age?

That is the vibe I'm getting from your article, that we will produced these types of cycles from warm to cold. 

 

 

Edited November 26, 2024 by Fernando

[Vesper 30,091]

7 minutes ago, Fernando said:

Climate change is real, I'm not denying. 

I was saying how it happen in the past and in the past we had more stronger climate change then today. 

Based on your article it was because of the rotation:

Earth's climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 800,000 years, there have been eight cycles of ice ages and warmer periods, with the end of the last ice age about 11,700 years ago marking the beginning of the modern climate era — and of human civilization. Most of these climate changes are attributed to very small variations in Earth’s orbit that change the amount of solar energy our planet receives.

 

So the question is if we had that in the past right now we are not nowhere near the level of the past. Because you form lakes in the past that are big. Example on this article: 

These vast lakes formed approximately 14,000 years ago due to climate warming and glacial melting.

https://search.app?link=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.worldatlas.com%2Flakes%2Fthe-great-lakes-ranked-by-size.html&utm_campaign=aga&utm_source=agsadl1%2Csh%2Fx%2Fgs%2Fm2%2F4

We had ice age and global warming. Right now we are in a trend of global warming, but this time based on your article the human fault not the orbit. 

Question is if we can use the model of past global warming to see how far we will go into the warming of the planet before we enter into an ice age?

That is the vibe I'm getting from your article, that we will produced these types of cycles from warm to cold. 

 

 

no, that is not 'the vibe', that is your attempt at playing denialist games, and just repeating the same talking failed points

look at the graph

it says nothing like you are trying to say it does

it clearly shows a massive rise within a very short duration

that duration started when human beings started to flood the ecosphere with hydrocarbon emissions

it is NOT some sort of 'natural cycle'

 

 

[Vesper 30,091]

Neo-Nazis Are on the March Across America

A recent neo-Nazi rally in Columbus, Ohio drew national attention—but it was just one of dozens that increasingly emboldened white power groups have held this year.

https://www.wired.com/story/neo-nazi-demonstrations-trump/

On November 16, eleven days after the presidential election, a dozen neo-Nazis from a group called “Hate Club 1488” brazenly marched through Columbus, Ohio, carrying swastika flags and shouting racial slurs. State and national leaders, including President Joe Biden, condemned the march, as did community leaders and activists.

On that same day, about 500 miles south, around eight masked neo-Nazis from several groups came together to hold a roadside demonstration in Decatur, Alabama. They brandished signs containing antisemitic, anti-immigrant, and generally racist statements.

The demonstration in Decatur received no media attention—much less condemnation from the president. But researchers say that both rallies are part of a disturbing pattern of increasingly hateful demonstrations led by neo-Nazis who have been emboldened to use explicit Nazi imagery.

WIRED compiled all reported instances of similar neo-Nazi demonstrations, gleaned from local news reports and social media, and counted 34 in total for 2024, across 16 states. That’s compared to about 30 demonstrations in 2023, 22 in 2022, and four in 2021. Experts say they are now happening with such frequency that they risk becoming normalized.

And although hardcore neo-Nazi groups tend to eschew electoral politics, they view Trump and his second presidency opportunistically. Blood Tribe leader Christopher Pohlhaus, known as “Hammer,” celebrated Trump’s victory after the election in a post on Telegram. “Thanks Trump,” he wrote. “Cheaper gas will make it easier to spread White Power across the whole country.”

Days after the election, a group of neo-Nazis gathered outside a community theater production of Anne Frank’s Diary in Howell, Michigan to shout antisemitic slurs. They chanted “heil Hitler; heil Trump,” according to news reports.

Most of the demonstrations observed in recent years have been led by the same handful of networks and organizations, which, despite their small membership numbers, have become increasingly visible. These particular extremists fall under the category of “racially motivated violent extremists”—which, according to FBI Director Christopher Wray, are among the biggest domestic terror threats facing the US.

The vast majority of neo-Nazi demonstrations that WIRED logged in 2024 have targeted immigrants with their messaging, continuing a trend that emerged late last year, when groups like NSC-131, a neo-Nazi network active in New England, began showing up outside hotels housing migrants, lighting flares and holding banners that said “invaders go home.”

The renewed focus on immigrants by neo-Nazi groups coincides with surging hate crimes targeting immigrants, according to recently released FBI data. And it also marks a sharp pivot away from the drag shows and Pride events that had consumed their attention during the previous years. That pivot matches with the shift in the GOP’s attention away from the “culture war” issues surrounding drag shows and trans teens that had failed to galvanize Republican voters in the 2022 midterms, and back towards the same nativist, anti-immigrant rhetoric that secured president-elect Donald Trump’s victory in 2016 and again this November.

As the GOP and conservative influencers turned their attention towards immigration, hardcore hate groups followed suit. This synchronicity is not a coincidence, says Jeff Tischauser, a researcher at the Southern Poverty Law Center. While hardcore groups don’t tend to care about electoral politics, they do see opportunity in dragging the “overton window” (the range of ideas, policies and speech deemed acceptable in mainstream society) towards the far-right fringe, which they hope will result in lawmakers pursuing increasingly extreme policies.

“White power activists get their marching orders from conservative influencers,” says Tischauser. “[These groups] see themselves, particularly post-2022 and -2023, as really pushing the GOP further to the right by being out in the street. They see themselves as doing and saying what the GOP elected officials and influencers cannot.”

Springfield, Ohio, was the clearest example of this relationship at work. The small Ohio city and its burgeoning Haitian community became a flashpoint for vitriolic anti-migrant rhetoric from conservative influencers and the Trump campaign. Hyper-local rumors and conspiracy theories about Haitians in Springfield circulated on Facebook, before eventually making their way to major right-wing social media accounts and then regurgitated by Trump and vice president-elect JD Vance. With Springfield in the spotlight, armed members from the neo-Nazi group Blood Tribe descended on the city on two separate occasions, in August and in September.

“These MAGA influencers pointed out a target, and white power activists took that as a call to arms,” says Tischauser. (According to recent reports, since Trump’s victory, Haitian migrants are seeking to flee Springfield.)

For groups like Blood Tribe or Hate Club 1488, demonstrations are also a way to “normalize and mainstream their ideas and symbols,” as well as create propaganda opportunities—for example, filming themselves marching unopposed, or trolling bystanders, and then posting those videos across their social networks.

Tischauser believes that the decision by Hate Club 1488, which is based out of St Louis, Missouri, to rally in Columbus, was one that had been carefully calculated to stoke fears and associate themselves with Trump’s victory.

“It was a well-timed march. They picked their location, an island of blue in a sea of red,” says Tischauser. “And the ways that migrants were used by GOP elected officials and candidates during the election really put Ohio on the map for groups like Hate Club.”

Other extremist groups, such as the Proud Boys and Blood Tribe, are also active in Ohio. “White power groups are competing among themselves, among a finite resource of people that they can recruit and fundraise from,” said Tischauser. “They’re trying to say, “we’re the realest of the neo-Nazis.’”

In August, a coalition of activist groups in the state formed Ohioans Against Extremism in response to what they saw as rising extremism on the streets and in the state house. Their executive director Maria Bruno says they were grateful for the national spotlight on the issue of rising extremism in Ohio following the Columbus rally, but is a little surprised it’s taken this long. “At the same time, it’s hard not to feel like, “where have you all been?” says Bruno. “This is something that I and marginalized communities in Ohio have been screaming about for years.”

Blood Tribe set up shop in Ohio in 2023, and a slew of alarming incidents followed. 20 members of Blood Tribe showed up to a Pride event and a Jewish center in Toledo; 26 armed Blood Tribe members rallied outside a Drag story hour in Columbus, chanting “There will be Blood; a coalition of extremist groups including Blood Tribe, Proud Boys, and White Lives Matter rallied outside a drag queen story hour in Wadsworth; a member of White Lives Matter firebombed a progressive church in Chesterland, Ohio, that was planning a drag queen story hour.

Earlier this year, Nashville, Tennessee, also emerged as a flashpoint for neo-Nazi activity. In February, about 36 members of Blood Tribe and another group called Vinland Rebels marched through historically Black neighborhoods in Nashville, Tennessee, chanting “deport every Mexican” and performing Nazi salutes. Over the course of several weeks in July, a network called Goyim Defense League held several antisemitic rallies across Nashville. (Goy is a Hebrew term used to describe non-Jews, sometimes disparagingly, which has been co-opted by antisemites).

In one instance, about 30 members of the Goyim Defense League wore t-shirts saying “Whites Against Replacement” and disrupted the Nashville-Davidson county metro council public meeting, performing Nazi salutes and berating media and bystanders with slurs. According to The Guardian, the Nashville police chief had learned that the Goyim Defense League had secured a temporary residence about 65 miles away in Scottsville, Kentucky. They had seemingly zeroed in on Nashville because, like Columbus, it’s a bastion of liberalism in a red state.

Tischauser expects these groups to ramp up demonstrations, as they envision themselves influencing and engaging not just with state policies but with federal policies. And by latching onto Trumpism, whether MAGA likes it or not, they’re trying to prod his supporters into backing an increasingly extreme version of their president.

Edited November 26, 2024 by Vesper

[cosmicway 1,333]

Sanctions on Canada and Mexico announced.

[robsblubot 3,595]

2 hours ago, Fernando said:

Climate change is real, I'm not denying. 

I was saying how it happen in the past and in the past we had more stronger climate change then today. 

Based on your article it was because of the rotation:

Earth's climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 800,000 years, there have been eight cycles of ice ages and warmer periods, with the end of the last ice age about 11,700 years ago marking the beginning of the modern climate era — and of human civilization. Most of these climate changes are attributed to very small variations in Earth’s orbit that change the amount of solar energy our planet receives.

 

So the question is if we had that in the past right now we are not nowhere near the level of the past. Because you form lakes in the past that are big. Example on this article: 

These vast lakes formed approximately 14,000 years ago due to climate warming and glacial melting.

https://search.app?link=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.worldatlas.com%2Flakes%2Fthe-great-lakes-ranked-by-size.html&utm_campaign=aga&utm_source=agsadl1%2Csh%2Fx%2Fgs%2Fm2%2F4

We had ice age and global warming. Right now we are in a trend of global warming, but this time based on your article the human fault not the orbit. 

Question is if we can use the model of past global warming to see how far we will go into the warming of the planet before we enter into an ice age?

That is the vibe I'm getting from your article, that we will produced these types of cycles from warm to cold. 

 

 

That's like saying that, "it does not happen because I had a fall and a winter." The fallacy here is that climate change never said that past natural fluctuations (big or small) did not happen.

We've been through this before: it's forensics similar to what the police uses to solve crime. Analyzing Tree cores and a number of difference methodologies in a number of sciences come to the same conclusions, which makes for as much consensus as you get in science.

There is FAR less consensus in how to address it; I personally always found the idea of a global emission control naive and silly.
For me the only solution at this point is through science itself: some form of carbon sequestration, or something that we don't yet know.

Edited November 26, 2024 by robsblubot

[Fulham Broadway 17,299]

2 hours ago, Vesper said:

that is a pretty RW site, headed up by the hardcore US zionist Bari Weiss, her progressive-bashing wife Nellie Bowles, plus the RW British journo Douglas Murray, and the Thatcher/Reagan-loving RW US/British historian Niall Ferguson

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bari_Weiss

According to The Washington Post, Weiss "portrays herself as a liberal uncomfortable with the excesses of left-wing culture"[70] and has sought to "position herself as a reasonable liberal concerned that far-left critiques stifled free speech".[71] Vanity Fair called Weiss "a provocateur".[6] The Jewish Telegraphic Agency said that her writing "doesn't lend itself easily to labels".[72] Weiss has been described as conservative by Haaretz, The Times of Israel, The Daily Dot, and Business Insider.[73][74][75][76] In an interview with Joe Rogan, she called herself a "left-leaning centrist".[77] The Times of Israel reported that her public fight with The New York Times made her a hero among some conservatives.[78]

Weiss has expressed support for Israel and Zionism in her columns. When writer Andrew Sullivan described her as an "unhinged Zionist", she responded that she "happily plead[s] guilty as charged".[79] As of 2024, Weiss had visited Israel over 15 times, including after the October 7 attacks, and compared pro-Israel social media commentators to former Soviet refusenik Natan Sharansky, whose years in prison made him an icon of the movement to free Jews from the Soviet Union.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Murray_(author)

Douglas Murray (born 16 July 1979)[1] is a British author and conservative political commentator, cultural critic, and journalist. He founded the Centre for Social Cohesion in 2007, which became part of the Henry Jackson Society, where he was associate director from 2011 to 2018.

He is currently an associate editor of the conservative British political and cultural magazine The Spectator, and has been a regular contributor to The Times, The Daily Telegraph, The Sun, the Daily Mail, New York Post, National Review, The Free Press, and Unherd.[2][3][4][5][6][7]

Murray is known for his criticism of immigration and Islam. His books include Neoconservatism: Why We Need It (2005), The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam (2017), The Madness of Crowds: Gender, Race and Identity (2019) and The War on the West (2022).

Murray has been praised by conservatives, but strongly criticised by many progressives.[8][9][10][11] Articles in the academic journals Ethnic and Racial Studies and National Identities associate his views with Islamophobia[12][13] and he has been linked to far-right political ideologies[14] and the promotion of far-right ideas such as the Eurabia, Great Replacement, and Cultural Marxism conspiracy theories.[15][16][17][18]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niall_Ferguson

Sir Niall Campbell Ferguson, HonFRSE (/niːl/ NEEL; born 18 April 1964)[1] is a British-American conservative historian who is the Milbank Family Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution and a senior fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University.[2][3] Previously, he was a professor at Harvard University, the London School of Economics, New York University, a visiting professor at the New College of the Humanities, and a senior research fellow at Jesus College, Oxford. He was a visiting lecturer at the London School of Economics for the 2023/24 academic year and at Tsinghua University, China in 2019–20.[4][5] He is a co-founder of the University of Austin, Texas.[6]

Ferguson writes and lectures on international history, economic history, financial history and the history of the British Empire and American imperialism.[7] He holds positive views concerning the British Empire.[8] In 2004, he was one of Time magazine's 100 most influential people in the world.[9] Ferguson has written and presented numerous television documentary series, including The Ascent of Money, which won an International Emmy Award for Best Documentary in 2009.[10] In 2024, he was knighted by King Charles III for services to literature.[11]

Ferguson has been a contributing editor for Bloomberg Television and a columnist for Newsweek.[12] He began writing a semi-monthly column for Bloomberg Opinion in June 2020 and has also been a regular columnist at The Spectator and the Daily Mail.[13][14] In 2021 he became a joint-founder of the new University of Austin. Since June 2024 he is a bi-weekly columnist at The Free Press.[15] Ferguson has also contributed articles to many journals including Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy.[16][17] He has been described as a conservative and called himself a supporter of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.[18][19]

Yup you're right.  It was on someone elses recommendation - now I think if his reputation stinks, what does that say about his organisation ? (tony montana)

[Fernando 6,585]

2 hours ago, Vesper said:

no, that is not 'the vibe', that is your attempt at playing denialist games, and just repeating the same talking failed points

look at the graph

it says nothing like you are trying to say it does

it clearly shows a massive rise within a very short duration

that duration started when human beings started to flood the ecosphere with hydrocarbon emissions

it is NOT some sort of 'natural cycle'

 

 

And again if the human are producing it is nowhere near as  bad as the climate warming of past. 

Previous global warming was extreme that lead to ice age. 

 

[Fernando 6,585]

25 minutes ago, robsblubot said:

That's like saying that, "it does not happen because I had a fall and a winter." The fallacy here is that climate change never said that past natural fluctuations (big or small) did not happen.

We've been through this before: it's forensics similar to what the police uses to solve crime. Analyzing Tree cores and a number of difference methodologies in a number of sciences come to the same conclusions, which makes for as much consensus as you get in science.

There is FAR less consensus in how to address it; I personally always found the idea of a global emission control naive and silly.
For me the only solution at this point is through science itself: some form of carbon sequestration, or something that we don't yet know.

But according to the chart shown here it is the human fault. 

In the past it was the orbit. And in the past the weather was more extreme that led to ice age. 

We are nowhere near those levels of extreme heat to produce an ice age right now. Which tells me we can change this if something scientific is done. 

It's good that we are going to EV, but I'm not sure how much that will help when the plants that produce them are also using a lot of fossil fuels. 

[Vesper 30,091]

7 minutes ago, Fernando said:

And again if the human are producing it is nowhere near as  bad as the climate warming of past. 

Previous global warming was extreme that lead to ice age. 

 

there has been nothing in the past 800,000 years plus remotely like what has occurred in the past 150 years

anthropogenic climate change denialists are either thoroughly discredited malign actors, with ill intentions and nefarious motives, or are wilful dupes, or are plain old crackpots and cranks, spewing out anti-science ramblings and all manner of false conspiracy theories

end of story

this is not something that is up for any sort of legitimate debate

it is like debating flat earthers and/or people who think the moon landing was fake

people are entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts

[robsblubot 3,595]

1 hour ago, Fernando said:

But according to the chart shown here it is the human fault. 

In the past it was the orbit. And in the past the weather was more extreme that led to ice age. 

We are nowhere near those levels of extreme heat to produce an ice age right now. Which tells me we can change this if something scientific is done. 

It's good that we are going to EV, but I'm not sure how much that will help when the plants that produce them are also using a lot of fossil fuels. 

Sorry, these claims are both false as well as irrelevant.

Just to show how that is irrelevant:
Imagine that at some point in time a natural event DID indeed produce a similar jump in that one chart you showed -- just as it is happening today. Let's say that it was caused by 2 super volcanos erupting, or a solar event... Now, what would be the natural event today that is causing a similar drastic change? If we had cause and consequence back then, what's the cause now? All reputable scientists agree that we are cause.

Besides looking at *one* chart is a vast simplification; in my line of business I deal with many many different graphs and each may tell a different story. It takes time to learn how to interpret them. I can imagine scientists who study this for a living have access to far more information than a single chart.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to put more trust in opinions from (random) people (even here) than vetted information. We are in an era where good information is harder to find, but it's still available--it just takes some looking and it usually comes from the usual suspects (e.g. not from your friendly YT content creator or podcaster).

I, for one, respect specialists opinions because they put their time and efforts into things so that we don't have to -- there are only so many hours in a day. 😅

Edited November 26, 2024 by robsblubot