Anthropogenic climate change is real -- you all KNOW that, right?

[Politruk]

Yea, get the silly bullshit out of serious things.

Climate change is real, is cause by human activity, and is dangerous. There is no longer any room for scientific controversy on any of those points.

 

[Politruk]

So?

So the globe is warming and that matters.

 

[Politruk]

Nahhh......just less retarded thinking, in a state that's not regulating it's GDP out of existence.

That is exactly what Florida needs to do, to the extent its GDP depends on suburban development.

 

[PintlerMan]

more fake news, keep trying Tokyo Rose.

 

[Politruk]

more fake news, keep trying Tokyo Rose.

 

[UltraChad]

Climate change is real, is cause by human activity, and is dangerous.

Sure, and no it's not dangerous.

There is no longer any room for scientific controversy on any of those points.

It's not the science that's controversial, it's the psychotic totalitarianism and self destruction people like you push for because of it.

So the globe is warming and that matters.

Not really.

That is exactly what Florida needs to do, to the extent its GDP depends on suburban development.

LOL...you're just tired of capitalist economically embarrassing you and the other economically illiterate leftoids.

 

[Politruk]

Sure, and no it's not dangerous.

It's dangerous for sea levels to rise even by three feet.

 

[UltraChad]

It's dangerous for sea levels to rise even by three feet.

You mean like they were supposed to back in the 90's??? LOL

I'll buy it when all the green democrats stop buying Florida and Hawaiian beach houses.

 

[Politruk]

You mean like they were supposed to back in the 90's??? LOL

Never, ever fall back on "science was wrong before."

 

[UltraChad]

Never, ever fall back on "science was wrong before."

LOL.....don't ever acknowledge the flaws!!! BELIEVE THE FEAR MONGIERING!!!!!

Sure bud

 

[Politruk]

Here are the negative effects.

 

[UltraChad]

Here are the negative effects.

Like the Obama's and Al Gore ....... Not really seeing the problem. You and the other poors can move into pods, eat bugs and sterilize yourselves and your kids. IT'S GREEN!!! LMFAO!!!

I'm going to go cook a ribeye for breakfast.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Climate change is due to natural forces as well as human activities (greenhouse gas emissions and land use). The greenhouse effect is widely accepted in the scientific community but vigorous debates center around things such as:

- To what extent, if any, are anthropogenic factors attributed to specific weather events and weather patterns? Is EVERY extreme weather event or long term change in climate trends caused by human activity?

- To what extent, if any, can specific government policies impact global climate?

- Does climate change (caused by humans, natural forces, or some combination of the two), represent an “existential crisis?”

- How to balance the desire to reduce GHGs against the financial costs?

- How to balance adaptation strategies (building codes, damns and irrigation, etc.) against GHG reduction strategies?

- To what extent does warming benefit human existence? In other words, is all warming bad?

 

[HumpDayHoratio]

 

[Politruk]

Climate change is due to natural forces as well as human activities (greenhouse gas emissions and land use). The greenhouse effect is widely accepted in the scientific community but vigorous debates center around things such as:

- To what extent, if any, are anthropogenic factors attributed to specific weather events and weather patterns? Is EVERY extreme weather event or long term change in climate trends caused by human activity?

No, there is no longer any serious scientific debate about that. Climate change as a whole is anthropogenic.

- To what extent does warming benefit human existence? In other words, is all warming bad?

Yes, it is.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

No, there is no longer any serious scientific debate about that. Climate change as a whole is anthropogenic.

Yes, it is.

You are misinformed. Climate change is as old as the earth.

 

[Politruk]

You are misinformed. Climate change is as old as the earth.

[After setting your car on fire] Listen, your car's temperature has changed before.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

[After setting your car on fire] Listen, your car's temperature has changed before.

The chart shows that for millions of years the climate was very cold, then started warming, then got colder, then began warming again. Global average temperature is now less than 1 degree higher than it was in 7500 BCE. Most scientists agree that human activity, such as farming, urban development, and fossil fuels certainly plays a role in this slight modern warming.

 

[Politruk]

The chart shows that for millions of years

Not that many. Look closer.

the climate was very cold, then started warming, then got colder, then began warming again. Global average temperature is now less than 1 degree higher than it was in 7500 BCE. Most scientists agree that human activity, such as farming, urban development, and fossil fuels certainly plays a role in this slight modern warming.

They also agree that the warming since 1800 is a whole new thing, without precedent for speed.

 

[Rightguide]

There really is a definite scientific consensus. There is no room left for debate about this.

Because you've been thoroughly brainwashed:

 

[Rightguide]

The chart shows that for millions of years the climate was very cold, then started warming, then got colder, then began warming again. Global average temperature is now less than 1 degree higher than it was in 7500 BCE. Most scientists agree that human activity, such as farming, urban development, and fossil fuels certainly plays a role in this slight modern warming.

How many Ice ages have there been five or six? The left doesn't know this or fails to see how it undermines their view that we are living in some sort of unique era.

 

[Politruk]

How many Ice ages have there been five or six? The left doesn't know this or fails to see how it undermines their view that we are living in some sort of unique era.

We are living in an ice age now -- that's any period when there is ice at the poles. There has not always been ice at the poles. But there has been ice at the poles at all times since our species emerged -- we are not adapted to any other world.

 

[Rightguide]

We are living in an ice age now -- that's any period when there is ice at the poles. There has not always been ice at the poles. But there has been ice at the poles at all times since our species emerged -- we are not adapted to any other world.

We are not in a recognized Ice age.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Not that many. Look closer.

They also agree that the warming since 1800 is a whole new thing, without precedent for speed.

I stand corrected on the time scale on the chart but the point remains clear. The average temperature of the earth is less than one degree higher than it was many thousands of years ago.

Mankind has adapted quite nicely to the agricultural revolution, the industrial revolution, and the Information Age. Crop yields have increased exponentially. Modern medicine has dramatically increased life expectancy and improved the quality of life for countless millions. Modern HVAC technology allows comfortable human habitation in the hottest and coldest parts of the globe. We can order food, clothing and other things delivered to our doorsteps from our phones. Human mobility on the ground, in the air, and over the water is unprecedented.

If that is the price of increasing global temperatures by less than one degree C over thousands of years, partly because of human activity, most of us happily accept that deal. What most of us are less willing to accept is more expensive and less reliable electricity in exchange for a theoretical modest reduction or slowdown in global temperatures.

 

[Rightguide]

Climate Science—Settled Until It’s Not​

2 hours ago

Charles Rotter

The “Settled Science” Myth​

This latest revelation underscores a glaring truth: the so-called “settled science” of climate prediction is about as settled as a house of cards in a windstorm. For years, we’ve been told the models are robust, the predictions reliable. Meanwhile, every few years, another critical factor—like MeSH—emerges, requiring significant recalibration, yet we’re continuously reassured of both the past accuracy and the future reliability of these models, as if such revelations are mere footnotes rather than paradigm shifts. Are these models approximations of reality, or are they haphazard guesses dressed up in complex mathematics?

The study’s authors painstakingly compiled global data on MeSH concentrations, feeding it into a chemistry-climate model to quantify its effects. The results? Not only does MeSH enhance aerosol cooling, but it also extends the lifetime of DMS, amplifying its cooling impact. Essentially, the climate system has been operating with a hidden double feature of sulfur-driven cooling—and we’re just now cluing in.

Why Does This Keep Happening?​

Perhaps it’s time to acknowledge that climate models, while valuable, are not omniscient. They’re as much about what we don’t know as what we do. MeSH joins a long list of overlooked or misunderstood variables—like cloud microphysics, ocean circulation anomalies, and feedback loops—that fundamentally alter our understanding of Earth’s climate system.

In this case, the ramifications are clear. The additional cooling effect attributed to MeSH may mean we’ve been overestimating certain warming scenarios. Or perhaps it simply adds another layer of uncertainty to already imprecise projections. Either way, the narrative of “settled science” takes another hit.

The full article here: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/12/13/climate-science-settled-until-its-not/