This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

Jump to new
You seem to think ... CO2 is not a greenhouse gas,

but thanks

lets whisper the argest living thin on the planet is on the way out.

Golly

Maybe you like these fonts ?
 
Last edited:
kahuna1 said:
You seem to think ... CO2 is not a greenhouse gas,

but thanks
Click to expand...

Literally no one in this thread and virtually no one anywhere has said that.

Your continued deflection tactics demonstrate your lack of substance, but you have once again successfully changed the topic away from your own shortcomings. It is telling that the alarmists in this thread consistently change the topic and use ad hominem attacks rather than focussing on dissecting the actual issues. Well done.
 
I thought I quoted and LINKED .. one of your theories ... your words ... on a bad day ... about CO2.

Must have been another Sanjjedi poster
 
kahuna1 said:
I thought I quoted and LINKED .. one of your theories ... your words ... on a bad day ... about CO2.

Must have been another Sanjjedi poster
Click to expand...

You are very confused.

I have never said or in any way claimed CO2 is not a greenhouse gas. I learned it in primary school and have never been in any doubt since that day.
 
Sdajii said:
It is telling that the alarmists in this thread consistently change the topic and use ad hominem attacks rather than focussing on dissecting the actual issues.
Click to expand...
Actually you are one of those who do not understand climate science, changes the subject regularly, uses the term "alarmist," and is unable to show that your claims have merit.
You are so poorly informed that you have never raised the most basic issues of climate science, in countless posts here.
 

You have a penchant for making false statements, such as all of the above other than the fact that I do use the term 'alarmist'.
 
Sdajii said:
CO2 is not a greenhouse gas
Click to expand...


see you just said it AGAIN ....

your view is that it is NOT causing temperature rises ? Or not the guilty party ? Whilst you ignore CO2 spent 800,000 years if not a million between 200 and 280 PPM and now is 408 PPM. Even that you dispute ... ice cores are lying ... measurement is lying ... satellites are lying ... ice cores in Tasmania ?

So science operates different in your universe.

Did aliens come down and kill those Coral Reefs ? DON'T answer ... 34 theories is my limit.
 
Sdajii said:
You have a penchant for making false statements, such as all of the above other than the fact that I do use the term 'alarmist'.
Click to expand...
And yet every time I show you have no valid claim, you insist, without any evidence, that you have.
Your claims on sea levels, for example, showed how clueless you were with respect to what drives climate.
The list was long, and your evidence was caught short.
But again, exactly what is it that is the planet's greatest problem, seeing you keep saying it's not GHGs?
 

Riiiight. You've pretty much summed up your style and level of debating technique right there, misquoting my statement "I have never said CO2 is not a greenhouse gas" and "CO2 is not a greenhouse gas" without even starting it with a "..."

I'm not sure if you are trolling or genuinely that deranged, but either way you are not worth conversing with and I will likely not bother again.
 
Sdajii said:
CO2 is not a greenhouse gas
Click to expand...
yet again ...

Your view is CO2 is NOT the main contributor to warming. Nor Water vapor, Since 50,000 scientists, real ones ... disagree with BOTH theories, let alone the 33 others ones., you have .... 120 mete falls in sea levels no one ... saw in the past 100,00 years .... go right ahead.

What killed the coral reefs ?
 

Again, you are misquoting me. I don't have time to give an explanation you will again twist the words of.
 
I am not twisting your words.
Nor trying to annoy you.
Nor trying to misrepresent you.
I went through every theory you have postulated a few pages ago on the unstoppable climate change thread .... and addressed them all.

I found them to be the opposite of scientific evidence I and 50,000 scientists find irrevocable.
Unquestionable. Impossible to question in fact.

I did examine your theories, against at times chemical and simple exothermic reactions and found their conclusions lacking, bizarre and against the laws of basic science. I confirmed my limited understanding with the IPCC and the peer reviewed by 24,000 scientists paper and 200 Nobel prize winners from late 2017 and, well, I could not and do not accept your theories. Cause and effect were ignored in favor at times of quite impossible ideas and baseless understanding of events.

In the meantime, all sources, even ones that have less than 1 in a million of being even slightly incorrect are assumed to be incorrect, for that potential error and all findings and data dismissed.



Let alone where your theories led you.
I say this with respect, no anger or taunting.

We agree to totally disagree on science and you with 50,000 scientists from the IPCC most of whom signed off on the 2017 peer review paper on the topic.

I find you position on virtually every issue the IPCC raises to be different and as such, amazing would be a polite way to say that.
 
New paper has been releases examining the financial risk to Australia from climate change.
Issue include stranded fossil fuel assets and the impact of CC on insurance investments.

Climate Risk and the Financial System
(PDF, 3.49 MB)
Our new report outlines how Australia can learn from a new wave of global climate policy to create sustainable finance.

Climate Risk and the Financial System, authored by Chris Barrett, Executive Director, Finance Strategy, at the European Climate Foundation, and Anna Skarbek, CEO of ClimateWorks Australia, sets out the risks to global finance posed by climate change, and how financial systems around the world are responding to these risks and seeking to capture the opportunities. Australia has been slower to grasp this new financial agenda, but its natural resources and sophisticated finance sector provide it with a powerful opportunity to catch up quickly, if it is willing to do so.

https://www.monash.edu/sustainable-...stralia/climate-risk-and-the-financial-system
 
MPs have approved a motion to declare an environment and climate emergency.

This proposal, which demonstrates the will of the Commons on the issue but does not legally compel the government to act, was approved without a vote.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who tabled the motion, said it was "a huge step forward".

Environment Secretary Michael Gove acknowledged there was a climate "emergency" but did not back Labour's demands to declare one.

The declaration of an emergency was one of the key demands put to the government by environmental activist group Extinction Rebellion, in a series of protests over recent weeks.

Addressing climate protesters from the top of a fire engine in Parliament Square earlier, Mr Corbyn said: "This can set off a wave of action from parliaments and governments around the globe.

"We pledge to work as closely as possible with countries that are serious about ending the climate catastrophe and make clear to US President Donald Trump that he cannot ignore international agreements and action on the climate crisis."

What is a climate emergency?
Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES
Image captionThousands of Scottish school pupils took part in climate protests last month
Dozens of towns and cities across the UK have already declared "a climate emergency".

There is no single definition of what that means but many local areas say they want to be carbon-neutral by 2030.

Some councils have promised to introduce electric car hubs or build sustainable homes to try to achieve that goal.

It's a much more ambitious target than the UK government's, which is to reduce carbon emissions by 80% (compared to 1990 levels) by 2050.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politic...SK5uPqj1ItheJQBKjcvGVor2OdPFvWmZJ59-su2s4hA38
 
I did not use any fossil fuels today for transport of any kind - i walked. Today was not special.

prolly better for the climate than some pollie announcing a motherhood statement about saving the planet as they fly around the place. ...... or protestors that drive across the country to inform the locals about the selfishness of mining.

How much energy did other people use today?
 

I bet y

I bet you're wearing clothes made of oil. I bet today you've eaten food made of oil (literally) which was transported to you using oil, from multiple continents. I bet at least some of the electricity you used to put your post on the internet used coal, and I'm sure the electricity I'm using to respond was largely produced using fossil fuels. I also have only used my legs today for transport, but I'm not kidding myself. I have two international flights booked for this month and will no doubt use a variety of ground-based transport this month, most of it powered by fossil fuels, including the electric trains I'll use.
 
Hey
the whole of ur post is indeed my thoughts

2 things often cross my mind...
1. more and more of those pre-packaged lettuce leaf salad things are appearing in the supermercato, and
2. those that are telling me that they are saving the future of the planet seem to use an awful lot of energy to give me that message (and that often involves them travelling the world to tell me how they are saving it), and
3. nobody walks to the corner shop when they run out of milk.

(I do not have the internet btw, i tried to tell PZ bloke that .....)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Electricity investments
Replies
8
Views
2K
Smurf1976
February 2025
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
14K
ducati916
Fun with ChatGPT
2
Replies
24
Views
4K
SirRumpole
Fake News - Global Warming Consensus
40 41 42
Replies
831
Views
70K
SirRumpole
What does Lloyds think is happening?
2
Replies
22
Views
6K
springhill
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...