Paul Krugman...On Climate Change: What A Joke

[cnm]

Please look at the article and tell me where Krugman even hopes to make a case for Global Warming.

He's making a case about denial. Didn't you read the article?

 

[Muhammed]

I don't want to hear more bullshit about whether humans are causing climate change. I am not convinced and the proponents are like a cultish religious group, all-in with faith in their prophet, Al Gore. It's pointless to argue with them about the alleged science.

What I want to hear is their proposed solution and a detailed explanation of how their approach will be effective and fair while not sending our economy into the shitter.

If the solution is more taxes -- FUCK OFF. Taxation does not change climate except that it makes the world slightly warmer because we're all PISSED OFF.

If the solution is to completely cripple commerce and production -- FUCK OFF!!!

I just need to hear solutions. That will tell me the truth.

Actually the guy who founded the IPCC, Maurice Strong, was a proponent of the deindustrialization of America. That would obviously not be good for the US economy.

 

[cnm]

Oh you must have new data from

There's always new data, it's collated every month I think...

Global Temperature

 

[cnm]

Actually the guy who founded the IPCC, Maurice Strong, was a proponent of the deindustrialization of America.

Jesus. The loonies come out of the woodwork. Next you'll be citing wattsupwiththat.com

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the leading international body for the assessment of climate change. It was established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1988 to provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of knowledge in climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic impacts. In the same year, the UN General Assembly endorsed the action by WMO and UNEP in jointly establishing the IPCC.
IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change​

 

[BlindBoo]

Deniers deny and fear mongers monger.

He plays on the same old fears that have little basis in Climate Science when it comes to the effects of global warming on hurricanes.

" In the Atlantic, it is premature to conclude that human activities–and particularly greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming–have already had a detectable impact on hurricane activity. Reduced aerosol forcing since the 1970s probably contributed to the increased Atlantic hurricane activity since then, but the amount of contribution, relative to natural variability, remains uncertain. There is some evidence for a slowing of tropical cyclone propagation speeds globally over the past half century, but these observed changes have not yet been confidently linked to anthropogenic climate change. Human activities may have already caused other changes in tropical cyclone activity that are not yet detectable due to the small magnitude of these changes compared to estimated natural variability, or due to observational limitations.

Global Warming and Hurricanes – Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory

Stop hyperventilating and lets come up with an economically viable plan to sequester the extra carbon from the atmosphere.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Here we have dickweed Krugman commenting on Climate Change.

This is Mr. PhD (economics) doing nothing more than spouting the same bullshit we've heard for years.

Why is Krugman once again making statements about shit he knows so little about ?

Thomas Sowell was so right.

Opinion | Donald and the Deadly Deniers

Here is an example...this is his bullshit conclusion that has nothing to do with the patsy arguments he tries to make in the article.

One way to think about what’s happening here is that it’s the ultimate example of Trumpian corruption. We have good reason to believe that Trump and his associates are selling out America for the sake of personal gain. When it comes to climate, however, they aren’t just selling out America; they’re selling out the whole world.

Is the left really this stupid ?

The entire Global Warming/Climate change hysteria is an attempt to transfer massive amounts of wealth to the elite, China, and 3rd World Countries.
People like Gore will make billions if his carbon credit plan is universally accepted. The Chinese will not do anything to weaken their economy and no plan for a reduction of green house gases apply to 3rd world countries.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Oh you must have new data from

There's always new data, it's collated every month I think...

Global Temperature

So you going to tell me that came from Denmark's weather satellite?

And once again how can you compare today with 1880 when we were only recording less then 5% Area of the earths temperature?

Ya know local weather....


.

 

[Muhammed]

Actually the guy who founded the IPCC, Maurice Strong, was a proponent of the deindustrialization of America.

Jesus. The loonies come out of the woodwork. Next you'll be citing wattsupwiththat.com

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the leading international body for the assessment of climate change. It was established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1988 to provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of knowledge in climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic impacts. In the same year, the UN General Assembly endorsed the action by WMO and UNEP in jointly establishing the IPCC.
IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change​

And Strong was the director of the UNEP which created the IPCC.

It isn't very wise to let your enemies dictate your energy policies.

 

[Muhammed]

Deniers deny and fear mongers monger.

He plays on the same old fears that have little basis in Climate Science when it comes to the effects of global warming on hurricanes.

" In the Atlantic, it is premature to conclude that human activities–and particularly greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming–have already had a detectable impact on hurricane activity. Reduced aerosol forcing since the 1970s probably contributed to the increased Atlantic hurricane activity since then, but the amount of contribution, relative to natural variability, remains uncertain. There is some evidence for a slowing of tropical cyclone propagation speeds globally over the past half century, but these observed changes have not yet been confidently linked to anthropogenic climate change. Human activities may have already caused other changes in tropical cyclone activity that are not yet detectable due to the small magnitude of these changes compared to estimated natural variability, or due to observational limitations.

Global Warming and Hurricanes – Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory

Stop hyperventilating and lets come up with an economically viable plan to sequester the extra carbon from the atmosphere.

Why?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Note to mods (Dont Taz Me Bro)

This thread belongs in politics.

It is not a thread on global warming.

It is a thread about the lefts willingness to follow morons who know something about something (in this case economics) when they speak on shit they know nothing about (in this case global warming).

Krugfucker also mouths off about health care (again no knowlege).

Please put it back in politics.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Oh you must have new data from

There's always new data, it's collated every month I think...

Global Temperature

So you going to tell me that came from Denmark's weather satellite?

And once again how can you compare today with 1880 when we were only recording less then 5% Area of the earths temperature?

Ya know local weather....


.

Guys, you want to argue global warming....go ahead.

This thread is about how the left will stick it's lips on Krugman's lilly white ass and swallow whatever bullshit he spouts despite the fact he knows nothing at all about it.

He's a true con artist.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Please look at the article and tell me where Krugman even hopes to make a case for Global Warming.

He's making a case about denial. Didn't you read the article?

No, he's not making a case at all.

He's farting out a few POV, none of which are relevant and drawing some dumbass conclusion.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

It's not my opinion.

Is the left really this stupid ?

You posted it.

I'll take that as a yes.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Oh you must have new data from

There's always new data, it's collated every month I think...

Global Temperature

So you going to tell me that came from Denmark's weather satellite?

And once again how can you compare today with 1880 when we were only recording less then 5% Area of the earths temperature?

Ya know local weather....


.

Guys, you want to argue global warming....go ahead.

This thread is about how the left will stick it's lips on Krugman's lilly white ass and swallow whatever bullshit he spouts despite the fact he knows nothing at all about it.

He's a true con artist.

Kind of hard to do so when the link is behind a pay wall like I already said and you couldn't even copy and paste part of the story..


(I use up my freebeis on the first of the month )

 

[MarathonMike]

Here we have dickweed Krugman commenting on Climate Change.

This is Mr. PhD (economics) doing nothing more than spouting the same bullshit we've heard for years.

Why is Krugman once again making statements about shit he knows so little about ?

Thomas Sowell was so right.

Opinion | Donald and the Deadly Deniers

Here is an example...this is his bullshit conclusion that has nothing to do with the patsy arguments he tries to make in the article.

One way to think about what’s happening here is that it’s the ultimate example of Trumpian corruption. We have good reason to believe that Trump and his associates are selling out America for the sake of personal gain. When it comes to climate, however, they aren’t just selling out America; they’re selling out the whole world.

Is the left really this stupid ?

Paul Krugman is a clown who lost his seat in the Queen's Court when Hillary lost. He is just as bad an economist as he is a climate scientist.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Here we have dickweed Krugman commenting on Climate Change.

This is Mr. PhD (economics) doing nothing more than spouting the same bullshit we've heard for years.

Why is Krugman once again making statements about shit he knows so little about ?

Thomas Sowell was so right.

Opinion | Donald and the Deadly Deniers

Here is an example...this is his bullshit conclusion that has nothing to do with the patsy arguments he tries to make in the article.

One way to think about what’s happening here is that it’s the ultimate example of Trumpian corruption. We have good reason to believe that Trump and his associates are selling out America for the sake of personal gain. When it comes to climate, however, they aren’t just selling out America; they’re selling out the whole world.

Is the left really this stupid ?

Paul Krugman is a clown who lost his seat in the Queen's Court when Hillary lost. He is just as bad an economist as he is a climate scientist.

If he's a climate scientist, then Donald Trump is Black (and Lizzy Warren is an indian).

 

[gtopa1]

So explain to me how this happened before we had cars, coal burning plants, all the high level CO2 emissions that is suppose to be the cause of climate change?

From the article. Didn't you read it? Researchers are not sure what caused CO2 levels more than four times that of present, but consider it evidence that too much CO2 can cause global warming.

Researchers are not sure what caused the sudden boost of carbon dioxide that set the greenhouse effect on broil. Possible culprits could be huge releases of methane from the ocean, gigantic continent-sized burning of trees, or lots of volcanic eruptions.

What's troubling is that this suggests that the current projections that say the Earth will grow warmer by several degrees over the next century may be on the low end, said the study's lead author, Appy Sluijs of the Institute of Environmental Biology at Utrecht University in the Netherlands.

Also, the findings are proof that too much carbon dioxide — more than four times current levels — can cause global warming, said another co-author, Henk Brinkhuis of Utrecht University.
Study: North Pole Once Was Tropical​

But really, what I like best about your post is that you'll happily accept scientists' findings on conditions 55 million years ago while rejecting their findings on the present day. Must be a rightard.

Idiot never heard of Continental Drift?? What are you? A flat earther??

Greg

 

[healthmyths]

So explain to me how this happened before we had cars, coal burning plants, all the high level CO2 emissions that is suppose to be the cause of climate change?

From the article. Didn't you read it? Researchers are not sure what caused CO2 levels more than four times that of present, but consider it evidence that too much CO2 can cause global warming.

Researchers are not sure what caused the sudden boost of carbon dioxide that set the greenhouse effect on broil. Possible culprits could be huge releases of methane from the ocean, gigantic continent-sized burning of trees, or lots of volcanic eruptions.

What's troubling is that this suggests that the current projections that say the Earth will grow warmer by several degrees over the next century may be on the low end, said the study's lead author, Appy Sluijs of the Institute of Environmental Biology at Utrecht University in the Netherlands.

Also, the findings are proof that too much carbon dioxide — more than four times current levels — can cause global warming, said another co-author, Henk Brinkhuis of Utrecht University.
Study: North Pole Once Was Tropical​

But really, what I like best about your post is that you'll happily accept scientists' findings on conditions 55 million years ago while rejecting their findings on the present day. Must be a rightard.

I haven't rejected that the climate is changing. I'm just asking this question?

 

[skookerasbil]

In your opinion the left must consist of the whole world apart from US dumb fuck rightards.

But the rightards are winning son.... and decisively so on climate change. It's not even debatable for a moment.

Absolutely nobody cares what Krugman says.... morons like him have been talkin like this for two decades yet the left has not moved the ball a single yard. It's actually quite stunning even to me.... all this stuff about the decided science hasn't mattered for dick.

 

[healthmyths]

So explain to me how this happened before we had cars, coal burning plants, all the high level CO2 emissions that is suppose to be the cause of climate change?

From the article. Didn't you read it? Researchers are not sure what caused CO2 levels more than four times that of present, but consider it evidence that too much CO2 can cause global warming.

Researchers are not sure what caused the sudden boost of carbon dioxide that set the greenhouse effect on broil. Possible culprits could be huge releases of methane from the ocean, gigantic continent-sized burning of trees, or lots of volcanic eruptions.

What's troubling is that this suggests that the current projections that say the Earth will grow warmer by several degrees over the next century may be on the low end, said the study's lead author, Appy Sluijs of the Institute of Environmental Biology at Utrecht University in the Netherlands.

Also, the findings are proof that too much carbon dioxide — more than four times current levels — can cause global warming, said another co-author, Henk Brinkhuis of Utrecht University.
Study: North Pole Once Was Tropical​

But really, what I like best about your post is that you'll happily accept scientists' findings on conditions 55 million years ago while rejecting their findings on the present day. Must be a rightard.

Idiot never heard of Continental Drift?? What are you? A flat earther??

Greg

Would it matter if it did all melt one year? Here’s the point everybody seems to be missing: the Arctic Ocean’s ice has indeed disappeared during summer in the past, routinely.
The evidence comes from various sources, such as beach ridges in northern Greenland, never unfrozen today, which show evidence of wave action in the past. One Danish team concluded in 2012 that 8,500 years ago the ice extent was “less than half of the record low 2007 level”.
A Swedish team, in a paper published in 2014, went further: between 10,000 years ago and 6,000 years ago, the Arctic experienced a “regime dominated by seasonal ice, ie, ice-free summers”.

This was a period known as the “early Holocene insolation maximum” (EHIM). Because the Earth’s axis was tilted away from the vertical more than today (known as obliquity), and because we were then closer to the Sun in July than in January (known as precession), the amount of the Sun’s energy hitting the far north in summer was much greater than today. This “great summer” effect was the chief reason the Earth had emerged from an ice age, because hot northern summers had melted the great ice caps of North America and Eurasia, exposing darker land and sea to absorb more sunlight and warm the whole planet.

The effect was huge: about an extra 50 watts per square metre 80 degrees north in June. By contrast, the total effect of man-made global warming will reach 3.5 watts per square metre (but globally) only by the end of this century.
Barring one especially cold snap 8,200 years ago, the coldest spell of the past ten millennia was the very recent “little ice age” of AD1300-1850, when glaciers advanced, tree lines descended and the Greenland Norse died out.

It seems that the quantity of Arctic sea ice varies more than we used to think. We don’t really know how much ice there was in the 1920s and 1930s — satellites only started measuring it in 1979, a relatively cold time in the Arctic — but there is anecdotal evidence of considerable ice retreat in those decades, when temperatures were high in the Arctic.
An ice-free Arctic Ocean has happened before