Climate change movement isn’t about climate, it hates the West.

[ReinyDays]

You have precisely ZERO "sea level rise" which is why your side cannot show us a photo of anything sinking.

To get a sea level rise, you need a net ice melt, and you don't have that, and the Co2 Fraud has never had that.

When you get to be a big boy ... and get into High School ... you'll learn about something called "thermal expansion" ...

Does your religion forbid the use of altimeters? ... [sigh] ... we're expecting 6 foot rise in sea levels here this morning ...

 

[Crick]

When you get to be a big boy ... and get into High School ... you'll learn about something called "thermal expansion" ...

Does your religion forbid the use of altimeters? ... [sigh] ... we're expecting 6 foot rise in sea levels here this morning ...

Pictured Rocks?

 

[EMH]

When you get to be a big boy ... and get into High School ... you'll learn about something called "thermal expansion" ...

Does your religion forbid the use of altimeters? ... [sigh] ... we're expecting 6 foot rise in sea levels here this morning ...

LOL!!!

Wow, you've just discovered where the Moon is....

As for an ACTUAL OCEAN RISE, you need MORE WATER, and YOU DO NOT HAVE THAT since THERE IS NO ONGOING NET ICE MELT ON PLANET EARTH....

 

[ding]

Pictured Rocks?

If the entire atmosphere is only 44% effective at trapping its theoretical GHG effect because of weather, why do you believe an increase of 280 ppm of CO2 would be 450% effective at trapping its theoretical GHG effect?

 

[BackAgain]

Just STOP Breathing! Peer-Reviewed Study Says Human Breathing ‘Contributes to Global Warming’ – Published in PLOS ONE

The peer-reviewed study published Wednesday in the Public Library of Science’s journal PLOS One investigated greenhouse gas emissions of methane and nitrous oxide in human breath, which allegedly “…

www.climatedepot.com

Stop that selfish breathing.

I expect our liberals to lead by example.

Is that so much to ask?

 

[Crick]

From the study​

Abstract​

Exhaled human breath can contain small, elevated concentrations of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), both of which contribute to global warming. These emissions from humans are not well understood and are rarely quantified in global greenhouse gas inventories. This study investigated emissions of CH4 and N2O in human breath from 104 volunteers in the UK population, to better understand what drives these emissions and to quantify national-scale estimates. A total of 328 breath samples were collected, and age, sex, dietary preference, and smoking habits were recorded for every participant. The percentage of methane producers (MPs) identified in this study was 31%. The percentage of MPs was higher in older age groups with 25% of people under the age of 30 classified as MPs compared to 40% in the 30+ age group. Females (38%) were more likely to be MPs than males (25%), though overall concentrations emitted from both MP groups were similar. All participants were found to emit N2O in breath, though none of the factors investigated explained the differences in emissions. Dietary preference was not found to affect CH4 or N2O emissions from breath in this study. We estimate a total emission of 1.04 (0.86–1.40) Gg of CH4 and 0.069 (0.066–0.072) Gg of N2O in human breath annually in the UK, the equivalent of 53.9 (47.8–60.0) Gg of CO2. In terms of magnitude, these values are approximately 0.05% and 0.1% of the total emissions of CH4 and N2O reported in the UK national greenhouse gas inventories.

Conclusions​

The measurements carried out in this study allow us to estimate UK-scale emissions of approximately 1.04 (0.86–1.40) Gg of CH4 and 0.069 (0.066–0.072) Gg of N2O emitted in the form of human breath. Based on a sample population of 104 volunteers, we estimate that the methane producing (MP) population in the UK is 25% for those aged less than 30 years, and 40% for those aged over 30 years of age. We have found no correlation between diet and emission of CH4 and N2O in breath and recommend if future studies wish to assess this in more detail, that rigid dietary regimes are implemented to reduce the effect of heterogeneity of emissions in a given population. While emissions of CH4 and N2O account for only 0.05% and 0.1% of the total emissions in the UK national greenhouse gas inventories, respectively, we would urge caution in the assumption that emissions from humans are negligible. We report only emissions in breath in this study, and flatus emissions are likely to increase these values significantly, though no literature characterises these emissions for people in the UK. Assuming that livestock and other wild animals also exhale emissions of N2O, there may still be a small but significant unaccounted for source of N2O emissions in the UK, which could account for more than 1% of national-scale emissions.

 

[JBG]

The truth is the nan made climate change movement isnt about saving the planet, it is about destroying Western Civilization……

True and I posted 32 times the fakers have apparently used a voodoo god to make predictions since 32 times said predictions were not true.

You could not me more right. I happen to believe there are ulterior motives, such as restricting consumption and growth. I think that some wanted, all along, either depopulation or a return to more primitive lifestyles. During the 1950's John Kenneth Galbraith penned a book called The Affluent Society. The book foreshadows the "environmental" movement, taking the position that we as a society is frivolous in its consumption and should be investing more in people. Remember, this was the era that the Interstate Highway system was opening, the era of tail-fin cars, and the beginning of frequent international travel. The book subliminally reflects, in my view, a certain "Puritan ethic" of guilt for doing well, which has grown with time.

This foreshadowed by other authors and thinkers, such as Travels with Charley: In Search of America by John Steinbeck. In Travels Steinbeck rails against conspicuous consumption and other signs of affluence. One of the opening paragraphs of The American Way of Death by Jessica Mitford reads:

Much has been written of late about the affluent society in which we live, and much fun poked at some of the irrational "status symbols" set out like golden snares to trap the unwary consumer at every turn. Until recently, little has been said about the most irrational and weirdest of the lot, lying in ambush for all of us at the end of the road- -the modern American funeral.]
This line of thinking from academia and elsewhere has seeped into the culture, and pops up in policy decisions such as recycling of garbage (largely useless for a variety of reasons), suppression of "ozone emissions" by refrigerators and air conditioning, plastic bag bans, (and now even paper bag, see Reusable Bag Glut Creates New Environmental Issue; Solve One Problem, Create Another), and other measures that make life more difficult without much if any offsetting gain. Put simply, this line of "thinking" is unmoored from reality.

The same is true of Europe's manic move away from nuclear and fossil fuels. It had to be reversed. I wish so much oxygen were not being wasted on the effort to go "green." These objections to wind power are unsurprising. Green energy is besides the point. Go to wind, the whales won't like it. Who knows what the bogeyman with solar is to be?

The "climate change" types call freedom "freedumb." What they don't like is Western affluence. The West's affluence has been in their sights as a target for the longest of time. Many of politically liberal views are ashamed of affluence. Jimmy Carter, in his "Crisis of Confidence" speech of July 15, 1979, often called the "Malaise" speech, stated in part (link):

In a nation that was proud of hard work, strong families, close-knit communities, and our faith in God, too many of us now tend to worship self-indulgence and consumption. Human identity is no longer defined by what one does, but by what one owns. But we've discovered that owning things and consuming things does not satisfy our longing for meaning. We've learned that piling up material goods cannot fill the emptiness of lives which have no confidence or purpose.

Earlier examples are the "sumptuary laws" from Elizabethan England. I came across this from Friends Divided: John Adams and Thomas Jefferson by Gordon S. Wood. The word "sumptuary" means "relating to personal expenditures and especially to prevent extravagance and luxury" and sumptuary laws means laws "designed to regulate extravagant expenditures or habits especially on moral or religious grounds." (link to source).

There is a strain that goes back before the start of European civilization in America that sees a positive value in self-abnegation. I did not realize that this went back beyond the days of John Adams and further, to Puritan times. I had thought that this philosophy of life seeped into the U.S. via books such as the 1950's classic by John Kenneth Galbraith, The Affluent Society. This foreshadowed by other authors and thinkers, such as Travels with Charley: In Search of America by John Steinbeck. In Travels Steinbeck rails against conspicuous consumption and other signs of affluence. Going back to ancient Greek time, there was a philosopher named Epicuris, who believed (link to source) that was decidedly the opposite from Puritanism, for convenience called epicurean-ism. I did not think of any modern connections in thought, Indeed, I had thought that this line of thinking was recent, a response to post-War prosperity.

In summary, I rather believe that Sumptuary Laws in 18th Century England morphed into Puritanism and modern wearing of the hair-shirt. I believe that the rebellion against that kind of thinking results in surprise phenomena such as Reagan's election over Carter in 1980 and Trump's 2016 election; people who want a better living standard sometimes rebel against pedantic lectures.

 

[Robert W]

You could not me more right. I happen to believe there are ulterior motives, such as restricting consumption and growth. I think that some wanted, all along, either depopulation or a return to more primitive lifestyles. During the 1950's John Kenneth Galbraith penned a book called The Affluent Society. The book foreshadows the "environmental" movement, taking the position that we as a society is frivolous in its consumption and should be investing more in people. Remember, this was the era that the Interstate Highway system was opening, the era of tail-fin cars, and the beginning of frequent international travel. The book subliminally reflects, in my view, a certain "Puritan ethic" of guilt for doing well, which has grown with time.

This foreshadowed by other authors and thinkers, such as Travels with Charley: In Search of America by John Steinbeck. In Travels Steinbeck rails against conspicuous consumption and other signs of affluence. One of the opening paragraphs of The American Way of Death by Jessica Mitford reads:

Very well done so you are a winner.

 

[elektra]

When asked what the ultimate goal of the IPCC is during an interview in his limo, co-founder of the IPCC, hardcore socialist Maurice Strong, flat out admitted that the goal is the de-industrialization of the USA.

They would have to pay politicians millions to do that

 

[JBG]

When asked what the ultimate goal of the IPCC is during an interview in his limo, co-founder of the IPCC, hardcore socialist Maurice Strong, flat out admitted that the goal is the de-industrialization of the USA.

Of Power Corp? That Robert Strong? How's his buddy Jean Chretien doing?

 

[Muhammed]

They would have to pay politicians millions to do that

They've already spent $billions, maybe even $trillions, pushing their big lie. Millions was just a drop in the fucking ocean.

They use the USA's own money against the USA.

It's total war.

 

[JBG]

To me, the most obvious indication that the global Left cares little about the climate is that they ignore the most simple and painless solutions, in favor of drastic "solutions" that will actually harm people, while giving more power to the Left.

The simple solution(s): Move to natural gas, wherever possible. Natural gas electricity generation has allowed the US to lead the world in reduction of greenhouse gases, and it is relatively painless, unless you live in West Virginia.

Where feasible, replace ICE vehicles and equipment with either electric or natural gas powered machinery.

Do all the "renewable" stuff you want, provided it doesn't require massive taxpayer-funded subsidies.

Promote Nuke.

Problem solved.

I echo your point in my lengthy post a few minutes ago. They are targeting affluence, not "climate." After all, in 2035 how is anyone to know what temperatures would have been without EV's? And as far as temperatures, www.timesmachine.com has an issue of the New York Times for years with newsworthy events of that date, going back to 1859. The temperatures today are comfortably within shouting distance of the temperature any of those random dates, unless those dates happen to fall within a heat or cold wave. For example, this year's selection was 12/20/1972. The forecast high that that for NYC was 48, the forecast low 37. Today's forecast high and low, 46 and 29. My first December 20, 1957 on the earth, forecast high, 56, forecast low, 50. My mother's first December 20, 1932 on the earth, high 40, low 25. My Dad's, 12/20/1925, high 43, low 38. So it goes.

There is no "emergency" other than the desire of world "leaders" to junket in Dubai.

 

[Muhammed]

When you get to be a big boy ... and get into High School ... you'll learn about something called "thermal expansion" ...

Does your religion forbid the use of altimeters? ... [sigh] ... we're expecting 6 foot rise in sea levels here this morning ...

When you pass 3rd grade science class you'll know what a tide is, moron.

 

[ReinyDays]

When you pass 3rd grade science class you'll know what a tide is, moron.

Nice strawman ... maybe you should learn Englishing from someplace other than the third-world shit hole you're from ...

HEY STUPID ... I said "sea level", not anything about average ... next time try reading with comprehension ... fucking moron ...

Tidal forces? ... you wouldn't know a vector component if it was stuck up your asshole a foot ... now would you ...

 

[elektra]

Tidal forces? ... you wouldn't know a vector component if it was stuck up your asshole a foot ... now would you ...

this is real funny

you are saying you would know a vector component stuck up your asshole

Just how many things up your ass can you identify

 

[Muhammed]

Nice strawman ... maybe you should learn Englishing from someplace other than the third-world shit hole you're from ...

HEY STUPID ... I said "sea level", not anything about average ... next time try reading with comprehension ... fucking moron ...

Tidal forces? ... you wouldn't know a vector component if it was stuck up your asshole a foot ... now would you ...

The pics you posted show the tide coming in, moron. They do not show thermal expansion.

You are as stupid as you are because you fail to admit it to yourself when you are wrong. Climategate was over ten years ago and you global warming doomsday cult dupes still cannot accept that you duped.

 

[skye]

 

[Crick]

View attachment 876916

Where did this ice go Skye?

 

[skye]

Summer and winter ^^^^ it's called different seasons!

 

[Crick]

Summer and winter ^^^^ it's called different seasons!

All those photographs were taken at the same time of year. That is not summer and winter. Glaciers don't come and go seasonally anyway. Those are glaciers disappearing. There are lots more of such photos if you're interested.