Still believing in climate change?

This is long, so I doubt may will spend the time to watch it. However, if you still think man made climate change is real, you should watch this. This woman was at the very beginning of this farce. She explains how everything started and what a crock it all is. As usual, follow the money.

I didn’t watch it, but there’s always climate change. Heck, if they thinks it’s hot now, we’re still at the tail end of an ice age. It’s going to warm up whether we’re here or not which changes weather. When the real scientists that don’t swing left or right do their core sample stuff, the evidence is right there.

Very interesting listen. What many suspected and know. Follow the money!
Always say if not for climate change we here would be under 170 feet of ice!

https://www.investors.com/politics/...admits-real-motive-behind-warming-scare/

Yes, follow the money. Fossil fuel interests dump plenty of money to buy a few scientists to see things their way and try and muddy the waters for the public.

99% of accredited climatologists aren't seeing it that way. 19 of the hottest years on record happened since the year 2000. Wake up!

Biggest hoax of the century.......lots of money being made .......humans are easy to brain wash

What should we do about it?

you didn't read the link I posted, did you?

edit (a snippet of the article)...

"listen to the words of former United Nations climate official Ottmar Edenhofer:

"One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole," said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.

So what is the goal of environmental policy?

"We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy," said Edenhofer."

For those who want to believe that maybe Edenhofer just misspoke and doesn't really mean that, consider that a little more than five years ago he also said that "the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world's resources will be negotiated."

and another...

"Last year, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change, made a similar statement.

"This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution," she said in anticipation of last year's Paris climate summit.

"This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history."

The plan is to allow Third World countries to emit as much carbon dioxide as they wish -- because, as Edenhofer said, "in order to get rich one has to burn coal, oil or gas" -- while at the same time restricting emissions in advanced nations. This will, of course, choke economic growth in developed nations, but they deserve that fate as they "have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community," he said.

note re: timeframes...the article originally appeared in 2017.

you were right about "following the money" beaverpeeler...just not in the way you intended.

Carbon dioxide is what plants need to grow, and turn it into oxygen.
Learned that in 3 grade.
There's nothing taxes can do to stop what this world does.
The last mini ice age was in the 1400's , the world changes almost on a regular basis.
In the 1950's snow fall was many times greater than today in this area.
I remember being snowed in for a week at a time back then. Almost every winter.
Haven't seen that much snow since 1978.
The temperature in the 1930's was hotter than today's.
Some people will believe anything they hear.
Just look at history of your weather , it'll tell you more than any globalist will.

These kept the climate in check ......we need to go back to this

LOL That's carbon monoxide , not carbon dioxide , see even the globalists don't know the difference.
More carbon monoxide is produced by the active volcanos spread all over the world than factories , or cars.

^ ^humans are easy to brainwash

volcanos don't pay carbon taxes...

During the days directly after 9/11 ......zero flights ......the globe warmed by 1 degree



Yes , this works

LOL

The climate crisis is a business plan,,,


A very profitable business plan

Plants need Brawndo
Don't you know anything

so, their climate models all agree, yes?

I'll bet their climate models didn't account for all the variables that could affect climate.

There are a lot of people getting filthy rich selling that scam.

We've been in global warming since the end of the last ice age about 17,000 years ago.

Don't buy into what they're selling, it's all smoke and mirrors.

Pay huge taxes. Give up even more of your freedom. Vote democrat. It's the only way to save the planet.

… just checkin in on ya’ll

.. let’s keep it civil and as heterosexual as possible

.. carry on

LOL Then you stay out of it! We don't need someone pulling down everyone's pants!

…. As a deputy there are times when discipline is required

.. get back to the topic at hand

… carry on

Slap taming climate change believers is a great start.

…. Just went through the statutes

… believing in climate change does not violate any trapperman policy

… carry on

That's fair -

That’s a picture of the fictional character Barney

.. although posting it violates no trapperman code

… I do consider it a challenge to my authority and will be keeping a close eye on you going forward

… carry on

You misinterpret, that pic represents a cool calculated response symbolized by the restraint of only one bullet.

It's a testament to your fairness, and measured discipline.

… your sarcasm is duly noted

… going forward it will be considered flaming

.. carry on

We don't sarcast in this neck of the woods....I see you take this seriously, and only time will prove my position.

Carry on occifer.

.. breaker 1-9 330 we’ve got individual in violation of trapperman code 3:16 - over

It will be a cold day before you prove I've violated code 3:16 occifer.

… 330’s in route

… consider yourself detained ky

.. the rest of you

… carry on in a civil manner

… you’ve confused trapperman with the holy scriptures

… I consider that blasphemy and will be added to your charges once 330 arrives to take you in and process

… you have the right to remain silent… anything you say will be held against you in the court of Dobbins

… breaker 1-9 330 what’s your 20… we’ve got a live one here -over

… Chief Paul … at the risk of speaking outta line.. you might want to think about improving moderator response times

… I’ve be holding this hand at keyboard point for roughly 20 minutes now

I'll retain my right to remain silent by invoking my 5th amendment right, even though your probable cause is trumped up backwoods E. Texas law.

Will also sue for a change of venue, to drag your pine woods butt up to the beautiful oaks & hickory of scenic W. Kentucky, where you will be tarred & feathered but ultimately spared due to your allegiance to the confederacy.

… keep talkin boy … you’re just diggin your hole deeper

.. once a mod shows up you better not resist or there’ll be a price you ain’t ready to pay

… you understand me boy ?

… the rest of ya’ll

.. remain calm

… and carry on

LOL DD is getting serious now!

I want a attorney (not BC)....You have thrown your buck fifty around mercilessly toward the good folk on T-Man, with hollow threats of ruination.

In the meantime, contemplate your position, and realize the consequences of one lonestar to many.

… I don’t drink while on duty

.. and for you to insinuate such is another violation far as I’m concerned

… keep diggin that hole boy

I'm stubborn, might need to round up the night riders....Figure a 3 day horse ride to the Trinity River Basin to exact some vigilante justice.


Edit* Sorry to have suggested vigilante violence against a deputized member, that has to be illegal, right?....Here's a dead coyote.

Name one. Where they at? The only people we get to hear from are not the ones who conduct the studies.

BP, I was hopeful for your recovery after your post a couple weeks ago…. But after this, go ahead and stay on that side of the fence, you’re right where you belong…. If you would actually like to watch a very informative and mind blowing video, may I suggest Joe Rogan podcast #606. Very cool podcast that touches on many topics not just climate…. Have a great day fellas.

There are global environmental issues that need to be addressed ASAP ,,,,,plastic in the oceans, chemicals/ hormones in the water supply, etc


The only reason man made CO2 is pushed to the top of the crisis list

Is because it’s extremely profitable,,,plain and simple

There’s no fortune to be made from cleaning up the oceans

it's not JUST the fortunes they are making.

it's mainly the CONTROL (Re-Distribution of wealth/Socialism) that the climate "crisis" provides them.

You’re not wrong

You guys hold the minority view on the situation. We should not be able to see climate change in a lifetime but one can see it happening almost in real time. Permafrost melting and releasing megatons of methane (worst greenhouse gas out there). Weird weather patterns causing larger and more disruptive weather events. Rising sea levels...list goes on and on.

It is a very convenient story being told by the fossil fuels industry that it is a hoax. Every "scientific" paper you can find claiming it isn't real you can trace back to big fat pay checks from the fossil fuel industry. I once upon a time looked it up and it was unreal.

It is too bad this has become a political issue. It shouldn't be.

you're ignoring the IPCC officials ADMITTING it's a hoax/ploy.



the LEFT has turned it political!

if it was TRULY an "existential threat" (what's that...about the twelfth one in 6 months?)...then EVERYONE on the planet should cut their emissions by the same percentage. but that's NOT what is being promulgated, is it??

Doesn’t matter which side of the issue you’re on,,,

97% of scientists agree with whom ever is funding them

and every "scientific" paper that claims it's a man-made phenomenon can be traced back to big fat grants from government (often INTERNATIONAL governments!)

[they, TOO have a vested interest in the outcome]

can you find even ONE climate model that factors in the newly discovered (within the last ten years or so) subterranean ocean?

EXACTLY!!

The climate is changing as it always has running farmers loggers and other consumptive and renewable land users out of business is the wrong direction but gains the most headlines which= money

I'm still waiting for NY City to be under water.
Isn't that what Al Gore predicted 50 years ago, something like NY City will be under water in 10 years.
There's no noticeable rise in any of the oceans.
Just big bucks in Al's pocket.
Just look up the history on weather in your area alone.
It will give you a different view of your opinion.
Then look up the history world wide.
Yes things have changed, but so has the earth's axis.
I haven't looked lately but it seems to be tilting more toward the west, and the north pole is heading east.
somewhere around 100+- feet a year.
There has been entire switch of poles per studies , at least once , and possibility of many more.


The difference today is about 500 kilometers. But the Magnetic North Pole is actually moving kilometers every year. This phenomenon is known as the Polar Shift Theory.


https://gisgeography.com/magnetic-north-vs-geographic-true-pole/

I’ll throw my 2 bits in though they don’t matter.

I agree with BC, it’s observable and he’s right about the FF industry and the vast dollars spent. It’s also true about scientists and government. While that is true, it’s also true that here in Canada former PM Harper muzzled scientists from relaying findings to the public. So, it’s political from both sides, the most recent C government here in Canada cut funding for climate research because that’s bad for their business. The political aspect of it goes both ways.

Yes, weather is always changing, always has, the weather patterns here are currently just nuts, above freezing days in Februarys, frost in July, areas that have always been wet, drought stricken, dry areas getting 5” of rain in a day, the list goes on and on.

That said, I don’t think there’s much to be done about it and taxing it is a money grab that won’t do anything. 100 years ago there were about a billion people, now around 8, soon to be 15. I think it’s arrogant to believe we play no role. I also think it’s foolish to think we can reverse anything. I’ll be dead and gone long before projected things might possibly happen therefore I’ll actually never truly “know”.

Oh yeah in response to OW, there actually has been a very observable rise in global ocean levels according to NASA. That information is easily found. Is it enough to drown NYC? No, but to say there had been no rise is false.

"global warming is now large enough that we can ascribe with a high degree of confidence a cause and effect relationship to the greenhouse effect."...

Dr. Hanson is saying that because one [his preferred] theory fits with the observed temperature data, that proves a cause and effect relationship.

that's not Science. that's advocacy.

Aside from volcanoes and giant meteor strikes normal climate change happens slowly enough that you would see zero change in your lifetime. I am seeing climate change in just my seven decades and that is scary.

okay.

but that doesn't mean humans are causing it.

it could be natural. Nature doesn't ascribe to our preference for gradual change. it changes in fits and starts.

and 70 years isn't even a blip in geologic times.

Fits and starts when something extraordinary happened. Other than that it takes thousands of years. Slow enough that you won't notice a change in one lifetime.

The science is very easy to understand. Greenhouse gases hold the heat in making the planet warm up a lot faster than what it should be doing. The amount of gases that we humans are responsible for is easily computed and has been shown over and over with different models that it is game changing quantities. There is a lot of money in industries that want to keep status quo.

This truly is not hard to figure out.

[video:youtube]https://youtu.be/zmfRG8-RHEI?si=0i_v5TVniSGteblq[/video]

let us know when you've identified and evaluated all of the variables that affect climate.

so far, you've mentioned one.

At the end of the day we will all believe what we want. I’ll choose NASA over Matt Durkin’s YouTube movie. I also chose to believe the many experts that claimed much of the film was falsehoods. It is ironic I feel that someone who uses YouTube etc as business is certain climate change is just a global business.

To each their own I guess.

These 'different models' to which you refer, are they computer models? The same kind of faulty or deliberately altered models used in the past to predict dire outcomes, none of which have come to fruition?

Everything revolves in cycles. In a life time there are seasons, hot and cold cycles, wet and dry cycles. There are hundred year cycles revolving inside thousand year cycles and them inside larger ones. Odd how the sun goes through cycles also. Wonder why our temperature cycles correspond with the sun spot cycles? Our politicians and the need for taxes seem to run in cycles to fit agendas also. Always looking for a reason and ways to control minds and money. Seems there are cycles in people believing in what and how much kool -ad to drink to support such cycles.

and NONE of the computer models evaluate all of the variables that could affect climate.

CO2 makes up 0.04% of the atmosphere,,,,

Humans contribute between 3-5 % of total cO2 emitted annually,,,

Make it make sense?

It doesn’t!!!!

find some scientist that does got get big taxpayer paid grants and ask them. Even if there is any facts to climate change, how many US taxpayer dollars will it take for china and others to go net zero? china puts way more greenhouse gases than the US by the power of 4

Fact and at .02% trees and plants start dying meaning the end of life on earth

Now you're getting to the heart of the matter

tell you what...when Obama sells off his beachfront properties for pennies on the dollar and Algore gives up flying in private jets, I'll consider that the issue might be serious.

until then...

The insurance companies are showing us with their coverage costs or no coverage where development won't be covered, which will make those areas only for the very wealthy. Whether we believe in climate change or not or if it is man made or a natural change we should be concerned about how or where we spend monies on infrastructure. There are many very high population areas in the world that are far more vulnerable then we are and if we want to expand markets we should be concerned about that.

Bryce

insurance companies are not immune to government dogma

Insurance companies are in big time bind due to massively inflated asset values

Caused by currency debasement

They are using the “climate crisis” as an easy out

The climates alarmists are claiming that "stronger and more frequent storms caused by climate change have resulted in unprecedented increases in monetary losses."
Truth is, there have not been more strong and frequent storms than ever. What has happened is that the few strong and infrequent storms that have hit land happened to hit densely populated, highly valued areas.
The alarmists cannot allow the truth to get in the way of a good fairy tale.
Insurance companies don't care about climate change or people anymore than PETA cares about animals or people. Both of their top level people only care about their bottom lines. One wants high profit margins while the other wants the donations to keep pouring in.

there is a heck of a lot (maybe MORE!) of infrastructure that didn't exist 50 years ago.

hence...more damage in an average storm.

it isn't rocket surgery...it's common sense!

A lot of money is being spent to make sure people think climate change is still a hoax.

What is most alarming is that it is happening even faster than originally projected. We probably are too late to reverse it at this point. The melting of permafrost is releasing vast amounts of methane which is the worst offender of the greenhouse gases.

Hey Keith, want some mango trees to try at your place?

Human caused variables: Greenhouse gas emissions, Deforestation, Industrial activity, Transportation, Energy production, Agriculture
Naturally occurring variables: Solar radiation, Volcanic activity, Ocean currents and Circulation, Earth's orbit and tilt, Natural carbon sinks, and the Albedo effect. Climate change would have always existed but it would have been a SLOWER process if it wasn't for human variables.

I could use some of that warming. Had a fire in the stove today. Been sticking to the 50s most days here lately.

According to Al Gore my eastern Pennsylvania property was supposed to be beach front property by now? LOL

After listening to many years of absolute bull crap promoting "man made global warming" even the ignorant masses started to see through the lies. What did the left do? They changed the terminology from global warming to climate change and became a bit more subtle but continued pushing the crap.

And folks like BP wonder why so many, especially those of us on the right, are skeptical.

Fifty years ago it was "global cooling" that was going to exterminate life on earth. I remember hearing about hair-brained schemes to spread fly ash on the polar ice caps to absorb solar heat and save us all. I'm sure there was lots of money to be made if that plan would've moved forward.

It's always about the money, always.

how much money was spent to promulgate this hoax?





you've swerved into a great point for our argument...humans are among the most adaptable species on Earth (maybe coyotes beat us).

even if you are 100 percent right (you're NOT!), humans will figure out how to deal with a new climate. and we won't need no stinking government to tell us how to do it.

And AGAIN, climate change is being pushed by the same party that's killing beaver trapping in Oregon. Heck, they are even claiming the beavers are saving the planet. That should make you feel better.

Nice one!

Again, I wish the politics of it would be left out and just deal with the science. The science is solid.

I do understand natural weather cycles and of course that has been going on since forever. I actually had meteorology and oceanography courses back in my University days. We called our meteorology class "weather guessing 101".

So what are you true believers going to do about climate change?

Personally, I think it's too late. Action should have been taken when scientists first brought it to our attention. Even if the US and European countries curbed our carbon emissions to the levels that they want China and India won't play along....

Put your seatbelt on, world is going to be rocking pretty hard here .

how much money was spent to promulgate this hoax?


It was our money, taxpayers, money spent, it always has been.

Maybe if those making the most noise would have led by example instead of taking private jets to climate conferences.

For those who think it’s entirely a hoax - how do you know for sure?

there is no established scientific cause and effect relationship.

there is a bought and paid for "consensus" among government-sponsored "scientists".

read any of those conclusions...they are peppered with what I call weasel words such as "might", "could", "may", etc. etc.

and you still didn't address the IPCC officials that the article quotes.

when those in charge of the indoctrination openly admit what they're doing, why won't you believe them?

Is it possible the IPCC officials could have been paid large sums to say those things?

Not entirely a hoax, I think. We could definitely clean up our act some.
But I don't see John Kerry living in a one room effeciency apartment and riding a bicycle. The Obammy's haven't altered their lifestyle to save the planet. Other than telling me to change my ways, they haven't done a (This word is unacceptable on Trapperman) thing. It might be a little easier to take seriously if the climate change leaders weren't such hypocrites.

They've been getting ice core samples of past weather and the environment for years.
As old as the ice caps have been around.
Alot of information on our changing climate in those.
Studying tree rings is another example of studying the climate.
Globalists want one thing, and that's total control.
Look at what happened when Europe became the European Union.
Not as many members now are there?
Total control is just like the Covid pandemic , a scare tactic study, to see just how many will follow and do as told!
Same as the European Union experiment .

Which to you guys seems to be the bigger draw; "to control things" or to protect the trillions of dollars the fossil fuel interests rake in? Seems pretty clear who stands to benefit the most from persuading the public to their point of view.

Is this not obvious?

fossil fuel's "trillions of dollars" represent a lot of expensive infrastructure that provide safe, reliable sources of energy-dense products that make modern living possible.

if fossil fuel companies are so selfish, why are developing countries allowed to continue to use their evil products? why don't THEY just put up windmills?

Stop telling the truth, White.

Is there a model out there that includes the impact of the suns changing cycles and slightly shifting poles of earth?
I believe it's also human arrogance to think that we can impact the planet enough to end it
Our civilization is on the downhill side of it's time on this planet
And the planet will be still be here long, long, long after this version of human existence has passed

Easy .....it's just plain foolish , to think man can change any significant temperature to the earth

35 yrs of countless wheel barrels of money .....zero effect

If the globe really warmed by any measurable amount over the last 35 years we'd all be dead

Many records over the last 150 yrs still not broken

it's common sense, if you actually THINK about it.

and if you examine all of the different environmental "crises" over the last 50-60 years, the proposed "solutions" to every last one of them involve the developed countries giving up their competitive edge, while allowing every third world country to continue polluting in the same manner that they are decrying.

I guess you guys are just smarter than the phD's that have devoted their lives to studying these things. I'll just shut up then.

it's okay to be a dupe, beaverpeeler...we still love you.

I wonder how devoted they'd be ifn they got no pay check ?

Being that they hope their kids and grandkids have a moderately inhabitable planet to live on...I'll bet devoted enough.

Oh, forgot I was gonna shut up. LOL!

that would be much more care than the Algore and Obama-types demonstrate. they still fly on private planes and own oceanfront mansions...Rules for thee, but not for me!

Burning fossil fuels bad?

Guess Canada didn't get the memo, they're letting the forests burn with so much smoke you can see it from litter space, yet it's to expensive to put out. Go figure.

Wouldn’t the planet be more habitable if it was greener?

I’m always intrigued by somebody taking a definitive stance on something like this. You can follow the money on either side, and it takes you down a misleading path no matter the direction.

That said, I think it’s absolutely foolish to think humans can’t impact the planet in a meaningful way. What’s the percentage of land area that has been developed by humans for any reason? That used to be some form of habitat that no longer takes place in natural cycles.

In my 35 years I’ve personally seen signs of a changing climate. Multiple entire mountainsides of Alaska Yellow Cedar dead, glaciers that have sped up their recession exponentially (it’s been measured), I’ve personally fought wildfire, and a significant lack of snowfall during late deer season/Christmas compared to when I was a child. That’s just to name a few.

Are we impacting the Earth? Absolutely. Are we impacting it enough to end civilization? I donno. Haven’t been around for thousands of years, but it sure seems like we’re speeding things up.

Here’s my question to the climate change naysayers - what percent of Earth’s land area can be developed before humans cease to exist?

Use to be glaciers where you live Leroy, and they were gone before there were enough people here to have a square dance.

What happened to them?

They receded slowly.

Why?

Because the earth warms and cools in natural cycles, slowly, over long periods of time. Nobody is refuting that.

Do you believe humans can impact the Earth and affect natural cycles?

Slightly

I don't believe we can change what's happening to any great amount.

Good point. I would say humans are slightly speeding up the natural warming of the Earth.

And as the world becomes more developed then I think that rate of warming will increase.

Not sure how I feel about greenhouse gases. However, trees and vegetation naturally reflect UV light and shade the surface of the Earth. Pavement absorbs UV and heats the surface of the Earth. As we trade more vegetation for pavement I think we’ll see that increase. What’s your take?

It’s measured and irrefutable that big cities are, on average, warmer than, say, a small rural town. Why is that?

Now imagine all land area taken up by big cities across the globe and you’re saying we can’t impact the Earth in a substantial way?

Not measurably by any normal use of resources and renewable resources to sustain human life.....the planet is here for us to use ....


Can you give us examples of intentional destruction that will permanently damage the earth's ability to sustain human life....? Leroy brown

Big cities

Vegetation gone forever = increased UV absorption and warmer temps
Interrupted water cycles — would you drink well water in Portland?
Dirty air from increased vehicle exhaust and lack of vegetation filtering air — would you breathe directly from a car exhaust?
Where do you grow food?
What animals live there?

Can you prove and give specific examples that humans can’t speed up the Earth’s natural cycles? Politics and money aren’t answers.

Nothing is forever....anything man made will return to the earth eventually.....our simple and extremely short lives are nothing

Since apparently I’m the only one answering questions, I’m going to assume you drink Portland well water.

Why would I drink portland well water .. ? My well isn't in portland



The pnw has some of the cleanest water in the us

That’s not the question. Would you drink Portland well water?

I don't know so much about man's ability to destroy nature, but we can certainly move it around, in which it is about adaptation. The years of the dust bowl is an example of maybe not causing but certainly speeding it up. Without some conservation the heartland would move down the Mississippi faster than what it is. Still it is just moving things around, but I doubt many farmers in Iowa and Illinois would like to relocate to the Delta, lol.

Nature had its own ways, such as lightning strikes to burn off the prairies for fertilization and new growth.

Then there is "do gooders" over doing their thing such as tree huggers and letting the old undergrowth pile up and add to the forest fires.

Or the animal rights not caring about what numbers an area can sustain a healthy population. Yes I believe man can make a difference, but eventually nature corrects itself.

A lot is self regulating as in animal care. If farmers neglect their animals there will be no profit and there will be a wise up period either for the better or for getting out.

one of the tricks the man-made global warming folks use is to place thermometers near the city heat islands. not every thermometer, mind you; but skewed that way, not random.

listen, I dislike cities more than most

but a quick google search tells me that approximately 0.8 percent of earth's landmass is covered by concrete and asphalt.

and about 71 percent of the earth's surface is covered by water.

so, less than 1 percent of the 29 percent of earth's surface is concrete/asphalt.

The land area is what we’re focused on, since that’s where the vegetation grows and that’s what’s keeping us alive. So one percent of 29 percent is almost 3.5% of the Earth’s land area. Maybe that number is too small to matter, maybe it’s extremely meaningful.

I didn’t ask if you liked big cities, but I’m glad you point that out. Why don’t you like them?

you better check your math...1 percent of the earth's land mass is not 3.5 percent of earth's land mass.

https://youtu.be/8455KEDitpU

Lol read that wrong. Either way, you’re saying numbers don’t matter. If 100% of the land mass is concrete/asphalt then do we impact the Earth?

The benefits of fossil fuels GREATLY outweigh any negative(real or imagined) effects on the planet

The “climate crisis” folks are anti human, and their goal is to reduce the overall human population

Just plain evil!!

You get your news from YouTube.

I’ve personally experienced several things that would suggest humans have an impact.

I use fossil fuels every day. Always have, always will, and I enjoy using them.

Do you think humans can impact the Earth and its natural cycles through our use/development of the land?

that is a Straw Man Argument and won't fly here.

try again.

50%?

did you watch the youtube video I just posted, or do you wish to remain ignorant?

Will you ever answer one question or will you continue to rely on a guy from YouTube that nobody has ever heard of?

really? you're asking a hypothetical question that is ridiculously overblown (by a factor greater than fifty TIMES)?

if that's all you got...

doesn't mean his points aren't valid.

I never heard of you, but you seem to think your viewpoints are valid.

LOL.

Youtube and social media is where a lot of the hissy Tman experts "learn." And Newsmax, OAN and Fox.

did you watch it?

refute his points! show me how wrong I am!

Still better than some liberal infested college.

White, I’m not doubting climate cycles. I’m asking you - do you think humans are capable of impacting these cycles? And if not (because you’ll dig your heels in) how are you certain? Posting somebody else talking in a YouTube video doesn’t count as an answer.

I'm not certain if humans can impact natural cycles or not.

and neither are the alarmists (if they were truthful)

but because of the absolutely DRACONIAN/EXPENSIVE changes to society that they are promoting, THEY are the ones with whom the burden of proof lies.

and Common Sense (not so common these days) argues against their Chicken Little scenarios.

the video that you and BC choose to ignore talks about how the graphs that the Alarmists use to create fear are manipulated to "prove" their point.

when Obama sells his oceanfront properties for pennies on the dollar, and Algore drops his carbon credit schemes, and the UN says EVERY country must reduce their emissions by the same exact percentage; you can get back to me.

Common Sense, isn't it?

I watched the video. He talks about cherry picking of timeframes, but he did the same thing and only looked back 100 years or so.

The data these “alarmists” are looking at are averages from thousands of years compared to averages in the last 60 or whatever your YouTube genius is arguing against.

We can only look at averages and relativities because we aren’t here long enough to say for certain of anything.

What I can say is, I have personally witnessed entire hillsides - hundreds of acres of Alaska Yellow Cedar at specific elevations - that were completely dead. They survived the extreme heatwaves of 100 years ago, so why are they dead now? Perhaps the heat shift has been too quick for the trees to adjust?

what is your proof they died from the heat? I'm betting insects.

It’s been studied thoroughly and proven that lack of snow depth insulation in winter has allowed the fine root hairs to freeze, thus preventing water/nutrient uptake during the growing season.

I’ll look for a YouTube video that describes how plants live.

we are coming out of an Ice Age. not surprising that temps are getting warmer than it was. Context, my Friend...context.

and if "we aren't not here long enough to say for certain of anything", how can you be so certain that this warming is a catastrophe in the making? or worthy enough to allow a handful of elites to completely change our Society. That IS what they're saying/working towards!

linky?

I'm willing to learn..

If only we would have payed more taxes those trees would still be alive.

Lol you guys probably crushed debate team in high school.

If you’ve read anything I’ve said, I’ve never claimed the world is ending. What I’ve stated the whole time is that I think it’s foolish to believe humans CAN’T have an impact on the planet. Nobody has given me solid proof to think I’m wrong.

I’ll find you some links, White. It’s a huge concern for the timber industry of SE Alaska given the high values of the yellow cedar to the export market.

https://www.fs.usda.gov/r10/natural-resources/forest-health/yellow-cedar-decline

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow-cedar_decline

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/...est-health/declines/yellow-cedar-decline

Lots of information out there if you Google “yellow cedar decline”

I believe in climate change. We don’t have anything to do with it and it’s arrogant of mankind to think that we do. Put that in your pipe and smoke it along with the local weed.

Heck of an argument. But why couldn’t humans impact it?

I appreciate the links, Leroy. and over the next few days, will delve deeper into them (heading to Church in a few).

but this one snippet from US Forest Service in 1993 is intriguing...

"Ecological studies.
Our studies on the ecological aspects of cedar decline suggest that extensive tree mortality began a little over 100 years ago in about 1880. Our evidence also suggests that decline began at about the same time on all sites where it now occurs --thus it has not spread to any new sites since onset. The boundaries of decline have spread slightly at some sites, but typically by not more than 300 feet in the last century. Where decline has spread locally, its spread has been out of bogs (muskegs) upslope to trees growing on somewhat better drainage. Cedar decline is highly specific to certain sites, characterized by having poor drainage. Less commonly, cedar decline occurs on steeper hillsides where soils are very shallow and underlaid by bedrock. But yellow-cedar trees growing with other conifers on more productive sites with better drainage away from bogs have not experienced cedar decline. We predict that the problem will not develop in such forests."

I’d be happy to hear about what you uncover. It’s a challenge I dealt with from a professional standpoint and something that lead me to think about human impacts from a personal standpoint.

what is your profession?

Next time you fly get a window seat. Human alterations are everywhere.

I can see those [dang] windmills from 35,000 feet.

This thread mirrors the one that was on here a while back about the C-19 jabs. Same thought process with the same people. Left-right, red-blue. Odd? Not really!

It doesn't work that way. You need to make your case and you haven't. You're parroting cherry-picked talking points off the internet like everyone else. You don't have the requisite background or knowledge to assess the data and arguments from those who have done the actual work. And I know all this because you're bloviating about "climate research" with trappers on an internet forum.

Jkeith, I’m playing devil’s advocate and asking questions. So far, no good answers. Just politics, YouTube, “follow the money”, and just like you just said - “you’re not qualified”. You just chimed in on a trapping forum, so your response doesn’t mean a hill of beans. And you STILL haven’t provided a reason why human’s are incapable of influencing the Earth.

Follow along Leroy brown.....

During the 3rd and 4th industrial revolutions we had no measurable global warming . Any extraction and use of natural resources and its supposed detriment to the earth were offset by its production . See photos below.

Environmental nazism, and clean air acts are responsible for reducing man made UV blockers .

This is my theory and it's not any more ridiculous than thinking we can tax our way out of a globe that is supposedly warming .

It's a theory that's overlooked by paid scientists, backed by a left wing nutt agenda.


So put that in your pipe and smoke it .....


We need more of this ......just look at India

Thank you for reiterating your politically-motivated tax theory, FunAntiGov

How in the world does a Google AI-generated snippet derived from an unknown source prove anything? Lol

How does it not ...lol


It's my theory....I'm sticking with it ......you can bang your head on the the table and follow the money to a bogus claim all you want

As much fun as I’m having going in circles with you cerebral types, I’m going to take the BP route and bow out. I’m worried this is like watching CNN or FOX news - stare at it long enough and you’ll believe it.

Here's one for the road , Leroy brown..



Even the geese are loving the man made UV blockers



BTW you certainly haven't proved me wrong

Then how do people get sunburnt on cloudy days?

Got any more brain busters?

It’s a good thing you guys aren’t beaver, BP would have you on a board.

Okay, I’m done….maybe

What ?

It doesn't eliminate the sun .....obviously......we'd all be dead

Except the climate change folks won’t let him trap beaver anymore…..

Ultra violet rays go through the clouds .
Cloudy days the sun doesn't reflect back into the sky.
That's why it's colder on clear nights, there's no cloud cover to hold the heat down.

I know. He keeps calling those smokestacks UV blockers. Maybe he’s being facetious

from one of the links Leroy posted..."Most of the trees that have died within the last century, and continue to die, regenerated during the Little Ice Age (1400-1850). Heavy snow accumulation is thought to have occurred during this period, giving yellow-cedar a competitive advantage on low-elevation sites in Southeast Alaska. Trees on these sites are now susceptible to exposure-freezing injury under warmer climate conditions. An abnormal rate of yellow-cedar mortality began around 1880, accelerated in the 1970s and 1980s, and continues today. These dates coincide with the end of the Little Ice Age and a warm period in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. On a finer temporal scale, recent analysis of 20th century weather station data from Southeast Alaska documented increased temperatures and reduced snowpack in late winter months, in combination with the persistence of freezing weather events in spring (Beier et al. 2008)."

"From the time crown symptoms appear, it takes 10 to 15 years for trees to die, making it difficult to associate observations from aerial surveys to weather events in particular years. Mortality has subsided somewhat in the last three decades."


so, during the Little Ice Age, many of these trees got their start as seedlings due to a competitive advantage from a heavy snow pack. as the Little Ice Age came to a close in 1850 (before widespread Industrial Age pollution), these trees began to decline (spiking in 1880). the decline accelerated 45-55 years ago and continues today.

where is the cause and effect nexus with human activity?

why would mortality have subsided somewhat over the last three decades? that doesn't make sense in the global warming paradigm.

I'm sure there is tons of MY TAX MONEY being spent to make sure that people think that man made climate change is scientific fact and that the science is settled. Which of course, neither is true.

You don't need to be an expert on anything to recognize faulty reasoning.

1) You're equivocating on your challenge to "provide a reason why humans are incapable of influencing the Earth." Nobody would make that claim. Human beings obviously alter their environment, thus impacting the earth to some degree, but so do beavers and locusts, carp, bacteria and so on.

Is it possible that humans have caused climate change? Yes, but it's also possible that I will be the first human being to step foot on Mars. You're using the possibility of one thing to argue for the probability of another. That leap from possibility (which has such a low bar) to probability is an equivocation.

2) The burden of proof is on you to show that human action, rather than normal cyclical climate patterns, is a significant cause of climate change, which is the assertion you’re trying to make. Neither you nor the scientific community have sufficiently made that case.

No politics needed!

Very well articulated, JKeith.

Below is a link that discusses the natural CO2 production and also the increased creation of CO2 and how the planet can not keep up with the production and remove the CO2 fast enough to maintain natural levels.

Bryce

https://www.google.com/search?q=is+...19CWEoo&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

1. I’ve asked if humans are capable of influencing these cycles. Finally, someone (you) admitted that it’s possible. And like I’ve stated several times already, the cycles are natural. In this case, I think it’s reasonable that humans have accelerated the cycles. Humans interact with the world in a much, much more complex way than a carp.

2. Like I’ve also stated, I’ve witnessed things that would suggest the acceleration influence is real. But I guess since I haven’t personally measured glaciers and core sampled the earth’s crust I’m not allowed to have an opinion or an open mind.

you can have as open of a mind as you like (some have such an open mind that their brain falls out).

but when a political movement says we have to upend centuries of economic practice to save the earth, they better come up with absolutely unimpeachable, real evidence that meets the Common Sense Smell Test (not faulty computer models, etc.) AND that treats every country the same.

I don’t make policy - foreign or domestic. Maybe Jkeith can provide us with some of his scientific papers to help influence policy and taxation since he’s so convicted on his pedestal.

Leroy, when you are reviewing the "scientific" papers that support your position, do me a favor...count how many times they use what I call weasel words: "may cause", "might result in", "likely to", "could lead to" etc. etc.

those aren't scientific conclusions...they are scare tactics.

do scare tactics have any place in a truly Scientific Paper?

The only way to know for sure is for man to leave the planet, climate zealots go first, after all the worlds going to end soon anyway.

Rat, I think it’s fair to say that nobody truly knows. But it seems foolish to me, as a land steward and outdoorsman who cares about the wild world I spend a lot of time in, to dig your heels in and say with absolute conviction that humans couldn’t impact our climate.

Again, big cities are a prime example of humans impacting temperatures and weather patterns in their “microclimate”. This is studied, measured, and proven.

But I’m not going to Mars. I’m going to write my Senator to push higher taxes on Jkeith, white marlin, and AntiGov so we can finally solve this problem.

Man probably has some slight, miniscule, impact on climate, but not enough to bankrupt the US. The real behind the scenes folks pulling the strings on the climate emergency are in it for the money. Oh and thanks for not mentioning me to your Senator, I pay enough taxes.

And of course nobody wants excessive taxation with no clear path to resolution. Isn’t that true for most of our tax money? For what it’s worth, I’m glad to not see Greta Thunberg in the news anymore.

On the other hand, I am for doom trolls, like Greta Thunberg and Al Gore, receiving as much publicity as possible. Sunshine is truly the best disinfectant.

.04%………

Hey they made headlines, made money and walked away with all of it, while not proving anything.
Shades of PETA, HSUS, and ASPCA! All scams that the ignorant fall for!

These same scientists I heard speak of Covid jabs and other BS a couple years back got their entire playbook from their mentors, the climate change expert scientists. Look at the billions of people they buffaloed a few years ago, many on here btw, into believing that their friend was trying to kill them and everyone else if they refused the jab…. I somehow am still here typing without the fake crap pumping thru my system.. just my point of view. I am not a Lemming, if that is above your head, look up what that means…. I’ll sleep well tonight knowing that at one time T Rex’s and later on Wooly Mammoth’s walked where my home is now, and I sure didn’t make things change, that’s up to the big guy…..

Funny how the same group of people always land on the same side regardless of past experience.

I think it’s funny how somebody can challenge a single idea and get lumped into a bunch of other crazy nonsense. Wonder if that still makes me the lemming?

Naw , you're just looking for an argument that you know won't go anywhere.

What does drinking polluted water from a well in Portland have to do with climate change ?

Climate change is real (natural cycles), it’s taken advantage of politically, and yes there is tax abuse but that’s all taxes.

I simply asked questions when I first jumped in here. And then I suggested that humans had the ability to affect and speed up natural cycles.

Only once every one of you nannies lost your mind did I decide to take a harder stance, cuz it ain’t a crime to think different or consider alternative ideas.

It was part of a greater point surrounding humans’ ability to impact the world and environment. Did you read the thread or just pick up where you wanted?

Leroy, you're just spinning your wheels with folks that believe anything that the government is for must be bad. Many will tell you they don't even believe man ever went to the moon!...It was all staged by the government.

Also there are the pick and choose science crowd. Willing to use advances in science that allow for life saving operations or cancer treatments, but if it doesn't fit their politics it must be a hoax.

Climate change is measurable and I truly believe only those that don't understand how mathematics and physics work will find fault. Or don't understand how a 2 or 3C warmer ocean will make much difference.

So, save your breath man! LOL

Funny how in 35 yrs of bs no one can say how much the globe has warmed.....I wanna see a number

Interesting breakdown of everyone's thought processes.
Yet neither one of you have shown any proof!
As far as not believing that man went to the moon?
Isn't that a liberal nonsensible belief?

OK Leroy Bob, I read it again and I can't figure out what. when, where, or why you pulled well water out to show a change in the climate. I remember when the neighbors dog lifted his leg on the well curb and my mom was not happy. While she felt it was unclean, I don't remember her thinking it was going to cause a 4th of July flood.
I missed your point, please enlighten me where I missed your point.

Agree on spinning your wheels with some of the Tman crew.

But, I'll take a different angle. I don't want or need the government telling me what to think. I do greatly value and believe in science, physics, math, actual education, real expertise and critical thinking (that's not stupid YouTube grifters asking stupid questions). I could keep going.

Oh yeah, people can and have harmed the planet. Fact.

True. Yet our planet has likely been much warmer in the past evidenced by the fossil record as well as much colder. I am not convinced we are the reason it has warmed in the last few years. I think it likely that another ice age will follow the warming.

What is the worst thing that man has ever done in your lifetime to destroy the earth. I'm thinking Chernobyl, but even that didn't cause a Silent Spring. I guess spitting on the side walk is no big deal, but just think if everybody did it, thus a new law is born, lol.

who says the current temperature is the ideal temperature?

on what basis do you make that claim?

We know it’s cyclical so I think we can expect this to be true.

Again, part of a greater point that we can impact large cities in several smaller ways, so why couldn’t that add up to impact the world in a very significant way?

But I’m done asking questions. It’s not allowed to have my own mindset around here, even if it’s just a slight variation of the whole.

I should follow my own advice and just shut up because nothing I have to add here will be of any value to naysayers. But.......

We humans have been around for a couple hundred thousand years. There has been significant climate change during that time all by natural cycles that had nothing to do with us. Ice ages and warming ups have occurred. But the big population explosion for humans has really happened in only the last 10,000 years. Part of that has had to do with the "Goldilocks" climate we have been experiencing since the last ice age. This has allowed hunting and gathering to be mostly replaced with the much more productive plant and animal agriculture.

Then the industrial revolution came around we started using vast amounts of cheap energy to fuel it. Stored carbon that took millions of years to accumulate was suddenly being released into the atmosphere.

At some point science was able to figure out how to measure atmospheric CO2 and we discovered that it was increasing. We know from ice core samples that there is a correlation between high levels of atmospheric CO2 and warmer global periods. The greenhouse effect. Atmospheric CO2 acts like a blanket to trap heat. As oceans begin to heat up and polar ice melts weather patterns are disrupted and larger hurricanes fueled by warmer water are more common.

All this has been predicted by scientists long ago. But the speed of the warming has actually been grossly underestimated. Most of the models did not account for a thawing permafrost to give up vast amounts of methane which is even worse that CO2 in trapping heat.

Atmospheric CO2 levels are double what they were 400,000 years ago and increasing faster than what normal climate change is capable of with the exception of catastrophic events like volcano eruptions or large meteor strikes.

This is as close as you can get to proving that man's activities are causing this acceleration of global warming. Scientists will always phrase things as "may" or "might" because it is so complex nobody can say definitively exactly how all this comes together. But there is complete accord with scientists worldwide that this is happening and we are responsible for it. Except for a handful of "Youtube" scientists that seem to get funding from the energy sector who are always shouting hoax! I once upon a time looked at funding for some the more notorious contributors and found they we're all financially supported by the fossil fuels industry.

I keep getting asked for proof. If you really had an open mind you can find "proof" or as close to it as allowed in the realm of math and science by looking this stuff up. And if you think of the physics of it all it does make perfect sense. Walk into a greenhouse if you don't believe me.

OK I'll shut up.

a correlation in time does not establish a scientific cause and effect relationship---Science 101

no matter how many times you say it does.

an example:

Suppose X is the daily temperature recorded, and Y is the number of visitors to a beach. Even though we observe that as temperature rises the number of visitors to the beach also increases (positive correlation), higher temperature do not directly cause more people to go to the beach: such a decision might be influenced by other factors like day of the week, whether it is holiday or not, whether special events are going on at that beach, and so on. Temperature may partly influence the decision to go to the beach, but it is not the direct cause. www.statology.org

And those plants do exceptionally well in that environment
Isn't that a contradiction to your ideas

Keep posting BP
Maybe you'll change your mind in the end

Yep. Jungle plants. Why do you think the temperate zone is feeding the poor in tropical countries?

Again you have it backwards
Just look up what's grown in tropical climates
They feed us

Sorry Charley. I'm an Ag guy.... chocolate and bananas aren't feeding the worlds masses.

You really think that's all that's grown in the tropical climate, your not much of an AG guy
And those countries stay poor because outside influence keeps them that way

Good rational post, beaverpeeler, and I am not asking for proof. In fact, let's just assume you are right on everything above.

If the industrial revolution and population explosion are the causes of climate change, then to fix it we would need to reverse both the industrial revolution and the population explosion. I don't see anyone stepping forward to voluntarily sacrifice their lives or their family to reduce CO2 levels. Neither do I see a significant majority of folks willing to go off grid and live in pre-industrial revolution conditions.

Perhaps a better way to look at this is from a cost/benefit perspective. The benefits of the industrial revolution are vast have been a tremendous improvement in everyone's way of life. The cost (if industrialization caused or contributed to this) may be living in the future on a somewhat warmer planet.

Perhaps a better approach than the futility of trying to reset things back to an earlier age, is to focus our efforts on trying to best adapt to the reality of what current weather conditions are. That would serve us well regardless if the warming pattern is caused by human activity or naturally ocurring.

8 billion humans on the planet has got to have a big effect

what's your remedy?

Uv filters ......easy peasy .....during the industrial revolution we had a good balance ....no global warming.

https://globalnews.ca/news/2934513/...r-an-unlikely-climate-change-experiment/

I believe AntiGov about the Industrial Revolution because he witnessed it firsthand.

It's not hard to comprehend.....you guys are overthinking it .....

I finished high school in the 70's, we were taught that any molten core planet will eventually overheat and go into whats called a supernova and explode, so who has been around long enough to determine that what we are witnessing is man made climate change and not the natural aging process of a molten core planet?

I believe in climate change. I also believe we can’t do anything about it. The planet was designed to heal itself.

I’m not refuting anything. Waste of time to disagree with the mob. I just wanted to call AntiGov old….

Question for you, beaverpeeler:
You keep talking about financial support from the fossil fuel industry to fund scientists skeptical of climate change. So, do you think there is a financial incentive for climate scientists, always looking to fund their research, to sensationalize the effects of climate change?

Second question: If, as I believe, there are financial incentives at play on both sides, then isn't a healthy dose of skepticism healthy?

I'm open to the possibility of man-made climate change, but I don't believe the science is truly settled on how dire the situation is.

First ever, for my location. LOL

We are doomed! LOL

https://weather.com/weather/alerts/...lCityId=f7cd6c9c88ca7119a40ace7e1f5cd504

They don't want to miss out on any funds

I don’t assume we do. Someone,not you,nor I,benefits from this narrative. The climate change agenda is a hoax, and it’s pushed by people that want to make money and force folks to switch gears and buy into green energy, sometimes by way of government mandates. I recognize the climate hoax as another wealth transfer scam. So…I don’t entertain ideas that the good people have to do the right thing and save the planet…. I see through that and suspect manipulation of the thoughts of the people for the gain of the globalists that are trying to control everyone.

You should check out the Superfund site list. Plenty of examples of man destroying the earth right here in the USA.

Let’s be clear - climate change is real. It’s indisputable and agreed upon by almost everyone on this thread. What’s being disputed is whether humans have influenced that change.

I have no doubts that politics have leveraged the situation for money and power. Certainly both sides, because that’s all those suckhole politicians are good for. It’s unfortunate but it’s reality.

I want to have a debate as to WHY humans couldn’t influence it. Human advancement has been exponential over the last 250 years. We alter the landscape everywhere we go, most often in a negative manner. Maybe it’s just a coincidence the world tends to be warming up, on average, in that timespan.

I agree with you Leroy that climate change is real…and I believe it is naturally occurring..it will happen whether we like it or not. There’s warm spells between ice ages…I’m not trying to fearmonger people to extract my dime….climate change is still weather.

We could talk about DARPA and weather control…on another thread

Climate and weather are two different things.

But yeah, it’s naturally occurring and the climate is changing.

I embrace it

What’s everyone’s stance on the greenhouse effect?

I don’t know what it is but I love my greenhouse and anyone can have one.

Greenhouses should be outlawed.

Rat Masterson hates vegetables. Let it be known.

Les - greenhouse effect is one of the leading theories behind how humans impact climate change. Idea is that the earth should be colder than it is, but because of specific gases (CO2, methane, water vapor) heat is held in and thus warms the earth.

I think that’s almost downright blasphemeous

Another theory is that we are living on the tail end of the last ice age….these are just theories…

We should expect it to warm up.

Why?

I have a theory you won’t give me an answer supported by anything

I’m not eager to believe man can take credit for climate change.

It’s natural

Nice if it were true. Go to the beach on a cloudy day and put no sunscreen on and see how that theory works for you. And CO2 measurements have been going up, up and away during the industrial revolution but it is just now becoming noticeable. But ice cores don't lie.

Just You tube.

Just trying to help.

LOL Still harping about climate change I see.
Whatever happens , is going to happen weather you stop using fossil fuels or not!
The earth will end it, same as it's done for billions of years.
It will rebuild and go on.
Remember only a rock lives forever!

I would like to see a report of the temperature of the planet on any given day. I'll let them pick the day.
We'll never see it, because the land, the ocean, and the atmosphere is so vast, complex, much of it unaccessible, and ever changing that it cannot be done.
The best they have to go on are miniscule random sampling data which is so minute that it fails to meet the standards of a valid scientific study.

Now that would be ridiculous to think a very slight reduction in solar rays would eliminate sun burn ......however a tenth of a degree in reduced temperature should appease " the sky is falling " crowd.......or would it ? Prolly just buy into another hoax

Antigov is bigger than me so I'll let him have the last word. LOL

better question...of the "greenhouse gases" present on earth, what are their relative percentages?

Mars' atmosphere is more than 95 percent CO2...why isn't it a million degrees there?

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/?intent=121

If everyone on the East and West coast held there breath for an hour. I think I would seen improvement.

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/?intent=121

The greenhouse effect is not some sort of new “phenomenon”. It was first theorized in the early 1800’s and the specific gases were theorized later in the 1800’s. Who was funding leftist whacko agendas in the 19th century??

It’s well documented that many of the historic weather stations don’t exist anymore, and they continue to report “estimates” based an historical data

The ones that do still exist were built back in day, outside of built up areas,,,,,,today they are surrounded by concrete/asphalt/ urban sprawl. Giving distorted temps

Recently it was in the headlines that Las Vegas recorded the highest recorded temperature ever,,,blew past previous records

For years the weather station was at the end of the runway in the sand/desert. The airport expanded, and surrounded the station with black asphalt,,,,

I'm not sure what you are showing here... but its easy to just draw a graph with no reference or source.

Yes, we have altered the landscape, but negative or positive depends on your perspective.

Modern agriculture has probably altered the landscape as much as anything. Folks who frequenty go to grocery stores for an incredibly diverse selection of affordable food would consider it a positive.

We have altered the landscape with transportation and utility corridors all across the country. Those of us who travel anywhere we want forr work or pleasure, or flick a light switch, or set a thermostat, consider it a positive.

I could go on........

If this has caused the planet to warm somewhat perhaps the benefits outweigh the cost.

The miniscule increase in Co2 is for a fact beneficial to growing food, still just a theory as part of global warming.

Fear of change is something a lot of folks grapple with, some of us, not so much.

I think this is a fair point. I’m not personally convinced we’re at catastrophic levels of change, but there are plenty of negative impacts to be considered. The first that comes to mind is our lack of safe ice to fish on the last half decade. I’d sure love to get that back regularly.

That kind of makes my point Leroy. Is safe ice for fishing, even if you could assure it, worth reversing the positive gains achieved during the industrial age. Contrary to what the Climate folks would tell you, the impacts of the industrial revolution will not be reversed by building a few windmills or changing all your light bulbs to LED. That is the real inconvenient truth.

while we were in Finland in March, we drove a dogsled down a frozen river.

hop a plane and go ice fishing.

Nothing wrong with wanting to ice fish. You can take a lap, white.

No ice for me ......hate cold .....love the hot desert and the transition to cooler mountain tops

So a warmer climate would be a blessing

Trumps EPA just eliminated Obama's climate change regulations.

Time to take the shackles off our companies!

What, now the worlds going to end tomorrow.

I'm sure the climate nuts will take it to court.

https://tfppwire.com/epa-moves-to-r...ules-in-major-shift-toward-deregulation/

I like his reporting. What the report he did on Wikipedia

If the world ends, I’m gonna say “told ya so”. Fair?

Did not read all the info placed here for such a question, however my opinion of green house effect is it's a ridiculous stab at getting attention for something no one can control or even guess what it affects at any one time !!

There are more volcano's going off now than have been done so in the last 30 years or so and no one is regarding that as a dismal salute to our future, and they throw off more ugly stuff in just a burb than our world can do in 100 years !

So if one is worried about Co2 and green house they sure have not done much research about how this world got so far in age with all them volcanos going off all over, some one or some how there is natural cleansing going on all the time to keep this green and blue planet going !!

Grit - the natural greenhouse gas effect was first proposed in 1824. The specific gases causing it were identified about 50 years later. 19th century scientists, no bias just pure curiosity and testing.

Again, it’s a real thing but not as severe as we’re led to believe.

There’s also these things called “plants” that pull CO2 from the air (or cleansing, so to speak) and use it during photosynthesis for plant growth.

Yes I'm aware of the process, and it's been the same thing up and down since it was known, which leads me to believe it just another type of info that is only out there for conjecture on why its there LOL

There are probably a hundred other things that could be attached to an info idea one why or another, but after this many years of knowing and the green house affect has not done anything more or less on this busy dirtball floating around, just makes me wonder how it keeps getting funded to keep saying the same thing over and over !!

Any of those computer models take into account the Earth's North Pole shift
from all of the dams?

I may have missed it, but what is the correct temperature of the earth supposed to be?

You didn't miss it because there is none.
That's sorta funny

My belief:

There is irrefutable evidence of very dramatic climate changes before man had any chance to influence it. Ice ages and warming cycles and all. Man couldn't have stopped it at any point then, or now!

God created this earth and put it in orbit around the sun. He put water, plants, animals, (and fossil fuels - (maybe a result of those dramatic climate cycles)) on it for HIS purposes - to bring about the immortality and eternal lives of man. He placed Adam and Eve here and gave them and their descendants dominion over the earth and it's resources. HE knew we would need vast quantities of a reliable energy source and He provided it. He wants us to use these resources wisely and with gratitude.

Scripture tell us the earth won't stay in this state forever but will be cleansed by fire and renewed. But until then we're good.

Genesis 8:22 - "While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease."

I try to use the resources God gives me responsibly and with gratitude. I'll keep my trust in God and my Savior Jesus Christ - not in the philosophies of man.

I agree. It was a scare tactic news feed I just saw. Tried to link to it, but I'm down to just a phone, and don't know how to.

Pretty ridiculous...

Please to excuse as I realize that y'alls life experiences as trappers, etc, make you a lot smarter than these know-it-all NOAA scientists.

Yep , all those dopes at NASA know nothing too Beaverpeeler. They’re likely just a bunch of overpaid libtards taking money to make stuff up about climate change. I’m sure the coffee shop gossip gang and YouTubers/podcasters more reliable.

Here is the whole thing in a nutshell, if you want to spend your money on saving the planet, have at it. I’ll spend mine how I see fit.

This is really a pointless discussion because nobody is going to do anything about it anyway.

So what is the correct temperature for the earth?

Its funny hearing all the naysayers of the podcasters/youtubers. Youtube and the internet in general might be a terrible place of procrastination and useless info, but it can also showcase some of the most brilliant minds that the earth has on many topics. Learning something there is just as valuable as your government sponsored info. It’s certainly more diverse with opinions and the viewer / listener can make up their own mind.

There’s an old saying “ if you trust the government,,,,,you haven’t studied history”

Since the beginning of governments(Roman times,,,) it should known by now that power eventually breeds self interests over public good


The “ climate crisis” is the prefect example

It's not necessarily about optimal temperature, but the most sensationalist voices worry about triggering a runaway greenhouse effect with a vicious feedback loop (as the earth heats up, more greenhouse gases are released, which heats the earth more and releases more greenhouse gases) that will turn us into Venus.

Venus has much more than 410 ppm of CO2 in its atmosphere and it wasn't put there by man burning fossil fuels, so I'm very skeptical that we're anywhere near triggering a runaway greenhouse effect. beaverpeeler has spoken specifically about permafrost thawing and releasing methane, but there have been periods in the earth's past that were warmer than now and the thawed permafrost didn't trigger a runaway greenhouse effect.

LOL. The Tman anti-science crew should post their education level and highest math and science classes. And grades.

If they could prove they cured acid rain, wouldn't that give them license to spend more of your money ?

More taxes , and up front fees will surely fix this imaginary issue ........especially with people eager to pay it

How close is Venus to a sun? Tough comparison

Some of the flat out dumbest people in the country have advanced degrees.

You can ask this question over and over and all you'll get is deflection because there is NO baseline temperature for the earth.

Deflection or flat out ignoring the question.

Venus has other differences besides that. Venus has no moon, it lacks a significant magnetic field, and it lacks tectonic plates.

They do say that the sun will become hot enough in a billion years for all our oceans to boil away, so we're going to have to figure something out by then.

Are you suggesting it should be a set temperature?

We know what temperatures are habitable and what temperatures are relative to averages gathered over hundreds of years.

Mars' atmosphere is 95 percent CO2...

Right. So would you say Venus is irrelevant given its many dissimilarities to Earth?

I hope I live long enough to see the boil. Would be a lot of excellent eating crab from the Pacific.

This is a discussion about climate change on Earth. You guys don’t have to keep posting random facts about other planets.

So... you're claiming that The Earth is increasing in temperature due to rising carbon dioxide concentrations.

I pointed out a place that has a lot higher percentage of CO2, yet is very cold.

Yes, but again, proximity to the Sun is a very important variable. Mars’ proximity is much further relative to Earth’s. Remember all the variables we have to keep in mind?

And like what was observed in the late 1800’s and still to this day, there are more gases than CO2 that are involved in the greenhouse gas effect.

Shouldn't matter if the prime variable is CO2. That kind of greenhouse effect would trap every photon that reaches the planet, accumulating over millions of years.

Climate change believers are gayer than a $3 bill....Driving their Toyota Prius or electric car, bunch of emasculated girly men fretting about their carbon footprint & saving the planet.

Climate change geeks wear skinny jeans, obsess about the environment, eat rabbit food, and get misty eyed listening to Elton John & Celine Dion.


Here's some settled science - If you eat beef, wear bib overalls, like burning coal to produce electricity, drive a pickup with a V8, have a Chris Stapleton CD, and hate AL Gore like no other....There's 100% chance your not gay. Lol

Like ^^^

I find it interesting that the Movement has targeted CO2 of all greenhouse gasses to choose from.
Do they not understand that ALL of the oxygen which we breathe comes from CO2 via photosynthesis by plant life mostly from the oceans?
Let's say that these politically motivated hacks one day find a way to get rid of CO2 and clumsily go too far and severely damage life on Earth, or kill every lifeform on Earth?
Far fetched you say? These people are willing to destroy the world economy, especially the US, for 2 degrees Fahrenheit.
I also find it interesting that these "scientists" are using Fahrenheit when everyone knows that scientists use Celsius.
Why, you might ask? It is simply because 2 degrees Fahrenheit equals 0.8 degrees Celsius. 0.8 just doesn't sell as well as 2.
Disingenuous cocka-doodle doos, these people are.

To study the climate and to have a credible opinion on climate change, you have to know the math and science. Sorry. But it's true.

I know you internet experts don't think actual education and actual expertise matter--but it does.

So, let's hear it. Highest math and science?

How did your "experts" do with managing COVID?

Man I was just thinking about that lol. Think of all the degrees in math and science who helped us.

Maybe there will be a shot for climate change you can get. Probably gonna take a few though….

Climate change is just a different name for wealth redistribution.

Not true. Look it up. Depends on a lot of things, specifically the wavelength. A lot of visible light passes through the atmosphere untrapped.

I suggest you write a letter to the scientists at NOAA and NASA and inform them of this. You may totally change their view of climate change.....


..and at the very least get a nice little chuckle and your letter pinned onto the coffee break room wall.

Mars also has an extremely thin atmosphere, a much smaller mass than the Earth to hold onto that atmosphere and is close to twice the distance from the sun than Earth is, braniac.

With a smaller mass, solar winds strip the atmosphere away causing it to be as thin as it is. It doesn't have near the blanketing and insulating effect as Earth's atmosphere- coupled with the fact that it is 50 million more miles away from the sun compared to the earth.. yeah, it's going to be colder. Man, you're a smart one.

When I want to feel like I'm way smarter then I really am I come to trapperman and read a thread like this one.

When I need a reminder of just how gullible people can be, I read threads like this.

It's becoming clear that this subject along with most other current affairs are divided along political party lines
There's a small bipartisan group just like in any subject today

Sooooo, you want to lower the Co2 levels and make America great again?

Just for the record, I believe the rise in co2 is so far a good thing. Plant life depends on co2 and the rise in co2 levels has helped the amazing yields in crops and has expanded the growing area, atleast north and will continue to do so.

Fence riders are scum

Pete and Repeat sat on the fence. Pete fell off, who was left ?

We should irrigate those crops with Brawndo. It has what plants crave.

Is this some sort of pissing contest? You're trying to gatekeep who's allowed to have an opinion on the Internet? We all have equal standing here on Trapperman.

Well he is a lawyer, so that makes him the smartest one of all of us!!

It's got electrolytes!

How old is the earth and how long have we been keeping ACCURATE records to the accuracy of today's standards. Forty years from now science will laugh at how we are keeping records now.

To say any of us know what is going on AND how to fix it, if there truly is a problem, is pompous. We don't know crap.

And all those scientists get money from funding. Ever heard the phrase, "Don't bite the hand that feeds you!"?

I mean let's add all this up and y'all pile on.

Covid
eggs
coffee
cholesterol
red meat
and on and on and on

For goodness sake, modern science in the era of the Spanish flu said sunlight and fresh air would cure it. We laugh at that now but we also know about the health benefits of Vitamin D.

Again, pompous to believe ANYONE KNOWS what is going on with the climate. We can see the past. NO ONE knows the future. And that has shown many a climate scientist to be an idiot.

^^^My IQ just went down a notch for just reading this post. LOL

Another scam by special interest groups and government to control and steal money from the populus. The earth has been in flux from day 1 and will continue when we are long gone. Man cannot comprehend geological time (millions of years) and if you studied physics, geology and thermodynamics, you could laugh at all the bs from the nay sayers.

Well I thought your IQ was pretty low before you read that post
Maybe you should seek medical advice

Good point. Beaver trapper and all.... LOL

This is one of the craziest, most ignorant things I’ve read on this site. And that’s saying something.

Blindly following one party is absolutely moronic, you sheep.

How was it ignorant to state that we are divided on subjects along party lines
Are you not paying attention to what is happening around you?
Just look at this thread as just one example

And where is Deputy Dog?
I got called a sheep by a user possibly wearing hip boots

Funniest thing I've seen you post. That's funny. I don't care who ya are. Lol

There's more than two ways to think about pretty much everything......

Meant for AntiBrains, not you.

I've never seen no plants grow out of no toilet.

This is one of the craziest, most ignorant things I’ve read on this site. And that’s saying something.

Blindly following one party is absolutely moronic, you sheep.[/quote]

We have the American party and the anti American party ....not hard to figure it out

You don't have to look any further than your own posts to see " ignorant " .

And again fence riders are the worst......it appears you must be their leader ...
.....what say u elroy brown ?..

Some folks minds are so open their brains fell out.

We are complete idiots if we don’t think humans impact the environment… that being said people need to know the difference between CO and CO2. This thread lacks the basics of science. Once we understand the difference between CO and CO2 we will never move on.
Modern humans have an impact on the environment, we will never know what are impact is. It’s complete ignorance thinking an action doesn’t have have a reaction

Well , hopefully you practice what you preach and pay your fair share .......and mine too

Every carrier I have had impacted the environment. I still have diesel and gas powered motors on most on everything I own. I will never say it’s a positive thing, we have to recognize our impacts

If anyone was involved in mining or forestry you would understand. We do are best

FunAntiGov, are you suggesting anybody that thinks humans impact climate are anti American? “But the taxes and the agenda” blah blah blah. Lumping somebody into a group because they disagree with you is ignorant.

It’s hilarious that somebody who is “Anti Gov” can be so blindly in love with a political party.

Anti-gov is right tho.

Right now there is American and anti-American, nothing in between.

https://youtu.be/RGztRPL3Wcc?si=L4hqnEFqUw69gxom

Well you didn't have far to go down so I wouldn't worry about it.

How old is the earth?

Exactly when was it "created"?

For the geniouses from the western parts of our nation.

This guy must be a Trump voter. MAGA!!!!

Or perhaps a British accent can make the medicine go down a wee bit easier.

I am sure both of these videos have the potential of helping those with IQ problems.

Maybe the infamous Al Roker has influenced some of you believers up in here

I've notice latley he is giddy from adding " climate change " to his forecasts...lol


" Well it's going to be bitter cold today in the north .......due to climate change "

And in the same forecast

" its going to be a real scorcher in the west .....due to climate change "



Lmao ..people eat this sht up

I didn't think any serious outdoorsman would get his weather from Al Roker. LOL.

Obviously I don't.....he's a libtard clown

You said you watch him. Right here.

You said I get my weather from him .....I don't


BTW, I think you pretending to be a lawyer has gone on long enough....

AG, you just described how he presents the weather. How could you know without having watched?

“I’m Anti Gov but I CAN’T stop talking about politics”. You’re weird, man.

He's not very smart and should stick to posts about chips and salsa.

Al Roker IS a complete moron. There is no disputing that.

I can agree with that!

He's he's just a mouth piece saying what they tell him to say. Most would too, if they were offered the same paycheck.

Kinda like all the govt-funded research for global warm----I mean "climate change"

… keep it civil

… don’t make radio 330

… carry on

97% of scientists agree with who funds them, follow the money!

Lol where you been ol hand? This train went off the rails 15 pages ago

Well, which is it?

Well, technically. It’s taxpayer funded. Not, government funded.

It can be either one. Those people made both of them up, so you can be wrong by choosing either one, or "correct" if you are fat and stupid.

[img]http://www.deanparisian.com/2025/08/biggest-scam-on-earth.html[/img]

Australians experience rare snow

The thing to remember about rapid climate change is it tends to cause erratic weather patterns. That can mean cold where cold is uncommon. It's all about warming oceans and changes in ocean currents caused by that.

I had both meteorology and oceanography classes back at Oregon State so I understand a little about that.

They call them the “snowy mountains” in NSW Australia,,,,they have actual ski resorts

FFS!!!!

Who's winning?

Well, the gw crowd has been predicting more frequent and more powerful hurricanes for at least a decade or so. They've been wrong so far.

The great thing about making catostrophic world ending predictions is that nobody gets too upset when you're wrong.

According to my years of exhaustive research, southern california and areas near the equator will experience minimal climate change.

Wondering when the next flat earth society meeting is. Hope nobody is late, you wouldn't want to miss anything.

I'm sure it starts right after the "There are more than two genders" meeting

Wondering if/when ANY of the catastrophic predictions made by the GW Alarmist crowd
will ever happen...

You must not watch the news much Marlin. Wildfire smoke, dying corral reefs, beetle infested dying forests, tornadoes running amok, floods, devastating hurricanes...geez what am I missing?

Do a little research... hurricanes aren't any more plentiful than early twentieth century.

Always had forest fires (they're down from the 1930's).

Always had floods.

Lots of beetle infestations before...

Google national hurricane center/ NOAA hurricane strikes by decade

BP,
You might as well give up with trying to convince this bunch to see things your way.

It's an insurmountable battle taking on so many individuals who can think for themselves, using common sense and logic and can see through the BS.

Given the statements you are making, it is clear to me that you have been misinformed by some very deceitful, and in my opinion, evil people who are doing this for only two purposes. Money and power. It is as simple as that.

These nefarious people should have went with predicting Global Cooling rather than warming. If they want to scare the populous with real devastation, they should have used the scare tactic of the ensuing New Man Made Ice Age.
They were able to make up Global Warming out of insignificant data, they could surely do likewise for Global Cooling. Maybe that is why y'all quit calling it Global Warming so you could more easily transition into a Global Cooling farce more seamlessly when the time comes.

The high temp today was about 35° lower than the high temp four days ago. Climate changed overnight.

No Chuck, the weather changed overnight. Climate is the average weather conditions over a length of time; ie: decades- centuries. Not 96 hours.

Correct. Climate is the average over 30 years.

Didn't any of you have science classes in high school?\

LOL

But, but, but... The Grand Old Party (whom I'm registered with, by the way) says global warming is a conspiracy and is a sham that's out to get us for our taxes.

It's crazy how some on the right side can be such rank and file blind followers, just as people on the left side can be.

There's evidence all around of a consistently warming earth if you can take the blinders off and stop looking at everything through elephant and donkey shaped glasses. It goes beyond disagreeing with something Al Gore said 1/4 of a century ago. At some point you're just being straight up asinine and obtuse to be a denier.

Artic and antarctic ice is diminishing. Less surface ice reflects less sunlight back into space. More open water absorbs more sunlight (and heat) and leads to rising ocean temperatures. As Beaverpeeler mentioned, reefs are bleaching. Permafrost is melting releasing naturally stored greenhouse gases. South American countries are wiping out swathes of rainforests that are one of the largest land based recyclers and converters of CO2. All these different scenarios are real and measurable happenings, and to deny their happenings or their impact on the planet is honestly a little bit radical.

Over the 45 or so years I've lived in Alaska, freeze up has come later and later, on average.
Pretty skeptical the warming was caused by us humans.

The high temp here today was 71*. I’ll take global cooling I guess….BTW, the but, but, but, statement is more easily applied to any number of bs stories used and propagated by the left, climate change included. Did the near decade long drought across the middle of our great nation in the 1930’s happen due the climate change also??? Seriously, are you attributing that great shift of weather patterns to a bunch of industries in their infancies in only a couple nations on earth? As soon as you can warp another taxpayer funded scientist to try and convince me of that, I may change. But I doubt it…. Go ahead, think on that…

Change, it happens. We can spend a fortune trying to stop it, but it ain’t stopping. Just try to keep from getting old and let us know how that works out for you.

None of that proves that humans are causing it. A correlation in time does NOT establish a scientific cause and effect relationship.

NY was covered with ice 10,000-15,000 years ago. It melted all on its own, climate change, but no one was here then.

What did your science classes have to say about drawing scientific conclusions from correlations in time?

LOL!

If you forget about politics for a bit and just consider raw science. We know that water vapor holds in heat right? We also know that the greenhouse gases do the same. Consider for a moment that every gallon of gas that gets burned produces 20 lbs of CO2 and then add in all the other fossil fuels being used and it starts to make sense.

You words not mine. There is a reason that 97% of the scientists that work in this field do believe that global warming we are seeing since the start of the industrial revolution is man caused... because nothing else makes sense. It's happening too fast for any other natural reasons to compute. You should look into it. In the history of the world there have been warm ups and cool downs all via natural means. None have happened this fast or even close to it. So far the models started in the 50's have actually been off...we're warming much faster than thought possible back then.

BP, if you send a YouTube video link they’ll listen.

BP, the correlation thing IS Science 101. Period. Full stop.

And it is easily proven.

Please to show how "correlation" has discredited man-caused global climate change. It would be odd that 97% of the scientists who support man-caused climate change flunked Science 101.

I think we get more heat change from this than some gas in the air.

https://phys.org/news/2016-09-temperature-earth-crust.html

Did you ever tell us your highest math and science classes? And grades?

What about you?

the main argument seems to be "man-made CO2 is increasing and the earth's temperature has been increasing, therefore: we're CAUSING it"

you got anything else, or is that pretty much it....a correlation in time?

Faucci has at least one doctorate. how did he do with Covid?

If " a pint is a pound the world around", then a gallon of gas is about 8 lbs. After being burned, HOW can it produce 20 lbs. of CO2? Something just don't sound right to me!

you don't have a medical degree or license to practice medicine anywhere do you? and yet, you question such experts' conclusions regularly. correct?

Don’t forget all the farting cows.

The combustion reaction takes oxygen from the atmosphere to form CO2. One carbon atom pairs up with 2 oxygen atoms, each a little more massive than the carbon atom, and carbon comprises most of the mass of the gasoline (as each carbon atom is much more massive than each hydrogen atom).

For octane:
2 C8H18 + 25 O2 --> 16 CO2 + 18 H2O

Actually, I'll answer my own question...he made crap up to fit his agenda.

I don’t know that it’s fair to compare Anthony Faucci, who is ONE criminal scientist, to thousands of climate change scientists.

Plus, I think he was asking for everyone’s personal education levels and grades.

Since you’re all so shy, I’ll go first. I have a B.S. in Forestry and graduated with a 3.5. I took many, many forestry and biology classes and my highest level of math was Calculus. If anybody would care to explain why I needed Calculus for forestry I’m still searching for the answer.

White, you’re a Forestry guy as well. Were you also required to take a ridiculous level of math?

Calc II was the highest I made it math. Mostly science classes in undergrad. Finished with a 3.5. Could have done better but work and, more likely, herbal studies resulted in a GPA ceiling.

If global warming is man made, then we know the cause.

If lawmakers are aware of this, why don't they mandate the fix? You know, stop what is causing it?

1. Why don't we talk about what is going on with the sun?
2. Why don't we look at history and see eons of weather patterns?
3. Why are we still driving gas vehicles and burning fossil fuel if this is what is gonna kill the earth?

Easy!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Again, not looking at history from whenever the planet was created to now shows how pompous and how stupid global warming alarmists are.

Amazed at how gw fruits WILL NOT talk about that. Absolutely WILL NOT!!! Yet these same fools point to science as their god and how 97% of all scientists believe in global warming.

Show me the survey of 97% of scientists with their names and degrees and who did their funding for their study and I will see if they are legit. I will bet my house, all vehicles and all firearms it is bogus!!!! I will bet there isn't even a survey!!

Any gw fruit willing to get me that "survey"? I'll wait. LOL!!!!!

You might want to research that 97% claim.

Back in the day, they called it operation “mockingbird”

Not sure what they are calling nowadays,,,,

New technologies take time to develop, but there have been breakthroughs in my lifetime with hybrid and electric vehicles.

Those most concerned about carbon footprints should be clamoring for us to build more nuclear power plants. What's the point of driving an electric vehicle if you're still using coal plants to generate the electricity to charge it?


Vector calculus and differential equations, along with linear and some abstract algebra. That doesn't make me an expert on climate change and there are plenty of disciplines where the average Trapperman poster can run circles around me.

I've found the working man to have a well-honed BS detector, based on intuition from practical, lived experience. That's why I don't want to shut them out of the conversation even if they don't have command of all the facts. They're still worth listening to.

The mask came off of the elite class during the COVID lockdowns showing they would weaponize "the science" to control us. I was initially on board with lockdowns for two weeks to "flatten the curve" but then two weeks came and went, and the lockdowns kept going on. Why should I trust these people who blatantly lied to me?

Neat.

But, can you roll a good J? That was my most significant accomplishment in college. Was also pretty good at growing things.

BC was/is a doper....lol!

I stayed at a Holiday Inn last night.

LOL. Alas, it is a "was"--planning on resuming in retirement someday!

…. He burnt up all his brain cells on the bong lol

Everybody knows the bong filters the bad stuff out.

Word.

[crickets]

Well said.
Al Gore didn't help matters with his imminent , fataltist lectures , either. No different than preachers who stated the " End is nigh! ", rhetoric.
And, as you mentioned , until nuke power is on the table, we're just making noise.

and if everyone on Earth is in peril, then everyone on Earth needs to do their part...same percentage of CO2 reductions for everyone.

pick whatever number "works" for you; but it's ONE number for all.

anything else is social engineering, not "saving the planet"

just found this...bet their vaunted theories/computer models didn't account for this possibility!

https://www.iflscience.com/an-encou...may-have-cooled-earth-in-a-big-way-80313