Climate change deniers killed Texas children

[Lockback]

And you posting is raising people's blood pressure as they have to face the reality of a failed educational system that creates morons who somehow thing they can make that connection.

Tell us, O smart one, just where did the global warming people tell us how much the water in the floods would increase. Actual numbers please.

 

[Mushroom]

And you posting is raising people's blood pressure as they have to face the reality of a failed educational system that creates morons who somehow thing they can make that connection.

Tell us, O smart one, just where did the global warming people tell us how much the water in the floods would increase. Actual numbers please.

Oh, you can't ask a Religious Fanatic to actually quantify their claims and produce things like "facts" and "science". You simply have to believe anything they say and do not dare dispute them ever.

Does not mater if they are a Climate Fanatic, an Anti-Vaxxer, or a Young Earth Creationist. They all are absolutely convinced they know The Truth, and everybody else is a shill of somebody.

Every time I hear somebody in discussions like this screaming "Shill!" or "Denier!", it makes me think of people screaming "Heretic!" or even "Witch!". Is just a name they use to try and stop any actual discussion that conflicts with their beliefs.

 

[ReinyDays]

... but LA storms allow singing in the rain ... yup, that's Debbie Reynolds, Princess Leia's mommy ...

 

[Robert Urbanek]

Really? Got any actual proof to that?

Has "global warming" somehow magically changed the volume of water that comes down in rainstorms? Has it somehow magically changed the ground in desert areas so it sheds even more water? Has it somehow magically changed the hydrodynamics of water so it behaves differently?

There is a technical term for what you just said, and that's "bullshit".

This is why I hate when religious fanatics jump into a topic about science and start spouting off their beliefs as if they are facts. You presented not a single shred of actual proof, just your beliefs.

Now here for example is a real fact. The flash flood brought up by the OP? That is the 10th highest death toll of a flash flood in the last 200 years. And the others that make up the ranking of the 15 deadliest flash floods?

The most recent was in 1976. That was 49 years ago.

You see, that is the danger of simply making things up and assuming that nobody will actually check up on your claims. Because you have people like me that actually do take the time and effort to do research, and I love destroying fantasies that people make up to support their beliefs.

Yes, there were more deaths in the past because there was no kind of warning system like we have today.

I'm still trying to figure out how it is both causing droughts and increasing rainfall both at the same time.

Climate change impacts global weather patterns, leading to more frequent and intense extreme weather events. Floods and droughts are the primary hazards caused by climate change, for the number of events, people affected, and global economic impacts.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590252024000291

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Yes, there were more deaths in the past because there was no kind of warning system like we have today.

Climate change impacts global weather patterns, leading to more frequent and intense extreme weather events. Floods and droughts are the primary hazards caused by climate change, for the number of events, people affected, and global economic impacts.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590252024000291

So what are you going to do about?

 

[Mushroom]

Yes, there were more deaths in the past because there was no kind of warning system like we have today.

Climate change impacts global weather patterns, leading to more frequent and intense extreme weather events. Floods and droughts are the primary hazards caused by climate change, for the number of events, people affected, and global economic impacts.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590252024000291

And that is a complete and utter failure, as it uses the IPCCs definition of a "drought". Which encompasses shortfalls in water due to human population.

That is a change in definition that has not a damned thing to do with actual rainfall, but population exceeding the water available in a region. Not a damned thing to do with "climate change". We actually have records by Spanish monks when Alto California was part of Spain. And at that time rainfall was actually slightly less than it is in the modern era. And there was absolutely no "drought" beyond the cyclical El Niño - La Niña cycle that has existed there for thousands of years.

The only reason California is in a drought now is because there are now 40 million people living in a freaking desert. The same with most of the SW US, there are simply more people living there than the natural rainfall can support. It has not a damned thing to do with "climate change".

And if you know anything about the El Niño - La Niña cycle, that has indeed been going on for millions of years. It was only recognized in the 1960s, but the cycle long predates even then. Studying Spanish records shows the exact same patterns in the 1600s.

Climate records of El Niño go back millions of years, with evidence of the cycle found in ice cores, deep sea muds, coral, caves and tree rings. El Niño means the Little Boy, or Christ Child in Spanish and was first noticed in the 1700’s by Spanish fishermen off the coast of South America near Peru and Ecuador. It was so named because it typically occurred around Christmas.

https://www.noaa.gov/understanding-el-nino

And here is a fascinating look at Spanish records in the era of Alto California. Written back in 1931.

https://cepsym.org/history/RainfallStreamRunoffSoCA_since1769.pdf

And the most amazing thing is, the patterns if extended from the 1700s into the modern era are exactly the same. Rainfalls are only fractionally higher, at in hundredths up to tenths of an inch per year. In other words, the affects are minimal at best, and even trying to claim they were caused by humans has absolutely no basis in fact.

You can look at all those charts and graphs published in 1931 based on records from the 1700s, and see the exact same El Niño - La Niña cycle that is happening to this day.

You are not pushing science, you are pushing religion. Just because you believe in something does not make it real. And just because somebody claims something does not make it real.

But want to end the "drought" in California? That's actually amazingly simple to do. You simply have to either kill or force about 2/3 of the population of the state to leave.

That's it. Because there was absolutely no worry about "drought" when the population of the state was at 15 million. With more than enough water for agriculture, industrial and the population. But with a current population of over 40 million, there is simply no longer enough to go around. Even though the amount of rainfall has not changed.

Total Seasonal Rainfall 1877-Present for Downtown Los Angeles, California

Almanac facts, information and trivia about Los Angeles County, its people, cities and communities.

www.laalmanac.com

Drought and Historical Rainfall in California | Chris Polis, ByteMuse.com

You se, this is the difference between Science and Faith. People who believe in science can actually back up their claims, and not simply by going "Trust me, bro".

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Climate scientists have been warning us for years that climate change from greenhouse gases will cause catastrophic flooding. Research suggests that atmospheric rivers are getting bigger, more frequent and more extreme, due to climate change; and the damage they cause is getting worse.
Atmospheric Rivers: Inside the giant 'sky rivers' swelling with climate change

Yet, the climate change deniers keep saying the crisis is a hoax and “move along, nothing to see here.”

Undoubtedly, the climate change deniers have led many to be complacent about flooding, particularly in red states like Texas. Thus, it should be no surprise that the pigheadedness of the deniers led to the deaths in the July 4th flooding in Central Texas.

On November 10, families of some of the little girls and counselors who died in the flood filed lawsuits against Camp Mystic and its operators, accusing the camp of wrongful death, gross negligence, and intentionally inflicting emotional distress.

Jeff Ray, legal counsel for Camp Mystic, stated, “We intend to demonstrate and prove that this sudden surge of floodwaters far exceeded any previous flood in the area by several magnitudes, that it was unexpected . . . “ But it was expected, according to climate scientists. Perhaps the Camp Mystic operators should have been prosecuted for negligent homicide but don’t expect justice in a MAGA state.

And if lies about climate change lead to deaths, should the liars be prosecuted?

Kindly keep your religious beliefs to yourself

 

[CrusaderFrank]

No modern flood comes close the Great Flood of 1862, when the Central Valley, all 300x65 miles of it, was turned into a lake.

Your claim is utter bull poo.

The AGW Cult is ruthlessly dishonest

 

[Mushroom]

The AGW Cult is ruthlessly dishonest

Just like anti-vaxxers, 9/11 truthers, flat earthers, young earth creationists, anti-nuclear groups, and so many others.

Any time you hear people demand the silencing of anybody that does not agree with them, that is absolutely not science. Because science in reality thrives because of dissent. New discoveries are only made because somebody broke with the consensus.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Just like anti-vaxxers, 9/11 truthers, flat earthers, young earth creationists, anti-nuclear groups, and so many others.

Any time you hear people demand the silencing of anybody that does not agree with them, that is absolutely not science. Because science in reality thrives because of dissent. New discoveries are only made because somebody broke with the consensus.

Einstein was a Newtonian gravity denier

 

[Mushroom]

Einstein was a Newtonian gravity denier

Hell, he was even skeptical about his own discoveries.

While theorizing General Relativity, he took it to extremes that predicted black holes. However, he refused to believe that something so perverse could actually exist to never published those parts of his theorizing.

And it was not so much that he was a "gravity denier", he simply thought there was much more involved than what Newton had realized. And with knowledge of the Universe at the time of Newton, things like "Gravitational Lensing" was not really possible in his theories. As in his formulas light had mass that is obvious, but he had no concept of how much massive bodies could distort space-time.

 

[EMH]

Just like anti-vaxxers, 9/11 truthers,

You believe official version of 911?

You believe Murderous Fraud Vax was "safe and effective?"


No wonder you won't respond to "Land near the Poles." You aren't into truth....


Do you agree that "Earth has been warming for the past 150 years?"

 

[ReinyDays]

Einstein was a Newtonian gravity denier

It was the Planet Mercury who was the gravity denier ... and he acted alone in the universe ... everything else followed Newton's Law of Gravity to the Tee ... a good lesson for us all, even the smallest voice can speak truth ... or as it's put in the Bible "out of the mouths of babes" ..

Mercury will be visible in the evening skies on July 4th, 2026, look to the west just after sunset ... never look at the Sun directly ... this would be a good time to scream racial insults at him ...

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Climate scientists have been warning us for years that climate change from greenhouse gases will cause catastrophic flooding. Research suggests that atmospheric rivers are getting bigger, more frequent and more extreme, due to climate change; and the damage they cause is getting worse.
Atmospheric Rivers: Inside the giant 'sky rivers' swelling with climate change

Yet, the climate change deniers keep saying the crisis is a hoax and “move along, nothing to see here.”

Undoubtedly, the climate change deniers have led many to be complacent about flooding, particularly in red states like Texas. Thus, it should be no surprise that the pigheadedness of the deniers led to the deaths in the July 4th flooding in Central Texas.

On November 10, families of some of the little girls and counselors who died in the flood filed lawsuits against Camp Mystic and its operators, accusing the camp of wrongful death, gross negligence, and intentionally inflicting emotional distress.

Jeff Ray, legal counsel for Camp Mystic, stated, “We intend to demonstrate and prove that this sudden surge of floodwaters far exceeded any previous flood in the area by several magnitudes, that it was unexpected . . . “ But it was expected, according to climate scientists. Perhaps the Camp Mystic operators should have been prosecuted for negligent homicide but don’t expect justice in a MAGA state.

And if lies about climate change lead to deaths, should the liars be prosecuted?

Trump killed them.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Trump killed them.

Actually Trump is killing the centers of brain dead climate change propaganda centers that were making a living from, now they have to produce real reproducible science to get any funding which means many will vanish instead as they have no playstaion climate models that works as they are NOT reproducible in form, they are made up guesses with a smattering of real data and a lot of made up data in it.

You are a proven science illiterate, you prove it every day as your empty inpept replies amply demonstrates.

 

[Mushroom]

now they have to produce real reproducible science to get any funding which means many will vanish instead as they have no playstaion climate models that works as they are NOT reproducible in form

And that has been a huge issue with me in this area for decades. If the results can not be reproduced, then it is not science.

I still remember the furor over "Cold Fusion" over 35 years ago, and how many jumped on the bandwagon. Claiming it was the energy of the future, that that was how mankind was going to change everything. End the Energy Crisis, make cheap affordable power for people globally.

Then people actually tried to reproduce the results. And failed. And even more tried to reproduce the results, and also failed. Tens of millions of dollars were wasted to reproduce the results, and all of them failed. And now it is completely debunked, but for some reason there are still people that believe in it, and even that it is real but was covered up by governments, corporations, or multiple other shadow groups.

And the thing is, their research is really not all that hard to reproduce. Simple give them double blind data from a time in the past without telling them when, and see if their forecasts then match what was in the historical record. It's rather simple, but that is something they seem completely unable or unwilling to do.

And as long as they are not able to reproduce their results, I have no choice but to consider their "forecasts" to be as scientifically real as Cold Fusion. Without replication, it's nothing but smoke and mirrors.

And especially as a hell of a lot of scientists that actually work in fields like climate modeling are simply not real.

Fifty years into the project of modeling Earth's future climate, we still don't really know what's coming. Some places are warming with more ferocity than expected. Extreme events are taking scientists by surprise. Right now, as the bald reality of climate change bears down on human life, scientists are seeing more clearly the limits of our ability to predict the exact future we face. The coming decades may be far worse, and far weirder, than the best models anticipated.

This is a problem. The world has warmed enough that city planners, public-health officials, insurance companies, farmers, and everyone else in the global economy want to know what's coming next for their patch of the planet. And telling them would require geographic precision that even the most advanced climate models don't yet have, as well as computing power that doesn't yet exist. Our picture of what is happening and probably will happen on Earth is less hazy than it's ever been. Still, the exquisitely local scale on which climate change is experienced and the global purview of our best tools to forecast its effects simply do not line up.

Climate Models Can't Explain What's Happening to Earth | Department of Geography

Check out this article from The Atlantic highlighting Justin Mankin and Alex Gottlieb's research on rising temperatures.

geography.dartmouth.edu

The atmosphere is about 0.8˚ Celsius warmer than it was in 1850. Given that the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has risen 40 percent since 1750 and that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, a reasonable hypothesis is that the increase in CO2 has caused, and is causing, global warming.

But a hypothesis is just that. We have virtually no ability to run controlled experiments, such as raising and lowering CO2 levels in the atmosphere and measuring the resulting change in temperatures. What else can we do? We can build elaborate computer models that use physics to calculate how energy flows into, through, and out of our planet’s land, water, and atmosphere. Indeed, such models have been created and are frequently used today to make dire predictions about the fate of our Earth.

The problem is that these models have serious limitations that drastically limit their value in making predictions and in guiding policy. Specifically, three major problems exist. They are described below, and each one alone is enough to make one doubt the predictions. All three together deal a devastating blow to the forecasts of the current models.

Flawed Climate Models

The relationship between CO2 and temperature is more complicated than the polemics suggest.

www.hoover.org

any recent climate models have been predicting dire global changes. The problem is climate forecasters currently ignore decades of scientific best-practices that would offer more accurate predictions.
Thankfully, there are attempts to rectify the truly dodgy methodology that has been used to crank out forecasts of 21st-century climate.

An important new climate paper published in Nature Climate Change, written by Viktoria Eyring of the University of Bremen and 28 co-authors from around the world, does just that.

That’s sorely needed. Here’s why:

Weather forecasters know that some models work better than others in specific situations, and they tend to rely on the versions that work best, depending upon the forecast problem. When the issue is a potential big snow along the eastern seaboard, forecasters usually lean upon the model from the European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasting (the “Euro” model). When diagnosing shifts in jet stream patterns a week or 10 days ahead, they may place more weight on the American Global Forecast System model.

But the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change simply averages up the 29 major climate models to come up with the forecast for warming in the 21st century, a practice rarely done in operational weather forecasting. As dryly noted by Eyring and others “there is now evidence that giving equal weight to each available model projection is suboptimal.”

https://www.cato.org/commentary/are-climate-models-overpredicting-global-warming

 

[westwall]

That applies to hate hoax 107 too, since every Zionist Fascist is too chicken to fly a motorized paraglider for us...



and we're waiting for you to fly a 757 at 600 mph with its nose 8 feet above ground....

Stop polluting science threads with your bullshit.

 

[EMH]

Stop polluting science threads with your bullshit.

That is science, and to deny it is to deny science.

Hypocritical treasonous liar, you are.

Repeat the "experiments" of 107 and 911 or admit both were hate hoaxed frauds....

 

[EMH]

And that has been a huge issue with me in this area for decades. If the results can not be reproduced, then it is not science.

I still remember the furor over "Cold Fusion" over 35 years ago, and how many jumped on the bandwagon. Claiming it was the energy of the future, that that was how mankind was going to change everything. End the Energy Crisis, make cheap affordable power for people globally.

Then people actually tried to reproduce the results. And failed. And even more tried to reproduce the results, and also failed. Tens of millions of dollars were wasted to reproduce the results, and all of them failed. And now it is completely debunked, but for some reason there are still people that believe in it, and even that it is real but was covered up by governments, corporations, or multiple other shadow groups.

And the thing is, their research is really not all that hard to reproduce. Simple give them double blind data from a time in the past without telling them when, and see if their forecasts then match what was in the historical record. It's rather simple, but that is something they seem completely unable or unwilling to do.

And as long as they are not able to reproduce their results, I have no choice but to consider their "forecasts" to be as scientifically real as Cold Fusion. Without replication, it's nothing but smoke and mirrors.

And especially as a hell of a lot of scientists that actually work in fields like climate modeling are simply not real.

Climate Models Can't Explain What's Happening to Earth | Department of Geography

Check out this article from The Atlantic highlighting Justin Mankin and Alex Gottlieb's research on rising temperatures.

geography.dartmouth.edu

Flawed Climate Models

The relationship between CO2 and temperature is more complicated than the polemics suggest.

www.hoover.org

https://www.cato.org/commentary/are-climate-models-overpredicting-global-warming

Actually there is no warming in the atmosphere and that is the data, the actual data, from all sources on the subject.


Satellites and balloons, before being FUDGED in 2005

Key claim against global warming evaporates

Satellite and weather balloon data used to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening turns out to be based on faulty analyses, according to three new studies.

www.nbcnews.com

"satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling.

Scientists were left with two choices: either the atmosphere wasn't warming up, or something was wrong with the data"



tough choice there for the taxpayer funded fudgebaking liars, to admit CO2 doesn't warm anything, or fudge the data and continue to bilk the taxpayer.


The other is Surface Air Pressure, which rises when a planet warms. Mars and Earth both prove this. Earth SAP has been constant to 5 digits for decades... oopss.


This is Mars SAP which correlates almost perfectly to its highly elliptical orbit...

and then the question becomes, why are so many Pro ISRAEL RINOs accepting "warming" that never existed?

Why do they "agree" that CO2 causes "warming" when there is NO WARMING in the ACTUAL DATA?

Why can't they answer BASIC CLIMATE QUESTIONS, which they actually CENSOR...???

Thread 'Any honest media person with the courage to actually ask climate questions?'

Feb 12, 2024

Apparently not.

Not on Faux

Not on RAV or OANN


What questions will the media never ask?


1. Why does one Earth polar circle have 9+ times the ice of the other?
2. Why is there ice age glacier south of Arctic Circle on Greenland but no such ice age glacier north of Arctic Circle on Alaska?
3. If the oceans are "warming" why is the record decade for canes still the 1940s?
4. If the oceans are "rising" why can't we see one single photo of land sinking?
5. How did Co2 thaw North America and freeze Greenland at the same time?



The Co2 Fraud is bilking America out of $200 billion per...

• EMH
• Replies: 92
• Forum: Media

• 
• 
• 

The answer, of course, is that they are PART OF CO2 FRAUD, they want you to believe "warming," and like the W/911 Crowd, they care for ISRAEL not AMERICA...

 

[westwall]

That is science, and to deny it is to deny science.

Hypocritical treasonous liar, you are.

Repeat the "experiments" of 107 and 911 or admit both were hate hoaxed frauds....

Go **** yourself you ridiculous clod.