Human Pollution.

[Unkotare]

...

It goes on and on as humans are overpopulated w......

No, we are not.

 

[Unkotare]

.... large cities are cesspool of unhappy crime hell holes they become when there are too many humans packed into a small area.

...said someone since there have EVER been cities.

 

[dimensional]

It wouldn't be the first time. That is if that happened. An option? It is what it is and will be what it will be despite your objections.

Oh, it will happen all right. And unlike other instances, it will be humans that caused it. Next, if everybody started worshiping the Holy Hitler, it wouldn't happen at all.

 

[ding]

Oh, it will happen all right. And unlike other instances, it will be humans that caused it. Next, if everybody started worshiping the Holy Hitler, it wouldn't happen at all.

Only time will tell.

 

[dimensional]

Just out of curiosity, in what sort of social environment do you live: suburbs, urban, rural, wilderness, outer space?

I would say it is outer space. There at least seems to be a vacuum inside his skull.

 

[dimensional]

Only time will tell.

No. I will tell. For me, it is like dropping a watermelon off a tall building. I know exactly what the outcome will be.

 

[ding]

No. I will tell. For me, it is like dropping a watermelon off a tall building. I know exactly what the outcome will be.

The sky is not falling, Chicken Little.

 

[dimensional]

The sky is not falling, Chicken Little.

Sure it is. What I speak of in all of my travesties of justice threads is just one aspect of it.

 

[Unkotare]

Oh, it will happen all right. ....

You seem to be hoping.

 

[Unkotare]

No. I will tell. For me, it is like dropping a watermelon off a tall building. I know exactly what the outcome will be.

Does that make you feel important?

 

[ding]

Sure it is.

No. It's not.

 

[dimensional]

No. It's not.

Yes it is. Does the word "Unsustainable" mean anything to you? How many straws will it take to break the camels back. It is best to not find out.

 

[ding]

Yes it is. Does the word "Unsustainable" mean anything to you? How many straws will it take to break the camels back. It is best to not find out.

Yes, it does mean something to me. It's unsustainable to replace fossil fuels with batteries. Do the math.

But if you really want to prove what you believe is unsustainable, then show me that math. Because I can show you the math that proves replacing fossil fuels with batteries is unsustainable.

 

[Unkotare]

"Overpopulation" is a false crisis that some were fed as children and cannot let go despite reality.

 

[Crick]

Yes, it does mean something to me. It's unsustainable to replace fossil fuels with batteries. Do the math.

But if you really want to prove what you believe is unsustainable, then show me that math. Because I can show you the math that proves replacing fossil fuels with batteries is unsustainable.

Don't skip over the fact that your math concerns only lithium-potassium ion batteries.

 

[ding]

Don't skip over the fact that your math concerns only lithium-potassium ion batteries.

Of course I won't. I'm not a monster.

 

[Crick]

Of course I won't. I'm not a monster.

Considering what you and your ilk will do to my children and theirs for many generations, yes, you are all monsters.

 

[ding]

Considering what you and your ilk will do to my children and theirs for many generations, yes, you are all monsters.

Correlation does not prove causation. The geologic record is littered with examples of warming and cooling trends that were not cause by CO2 or orbital forcing. The only correlation between temperature and CO2 on a planetary scale that is known with any certainty is from the time before the industrial revolution. Prior to the industrial revolution CO2 was a proxy for temperature. This is a fact that no one disputes. Since that time man's emissions have broken the correlation between temperature and CO2. We know this with 100% certainty because we are 2C cooler than in the past with 120 ppm more CO2.

The native state of our planet with its current land mass and ocean configuration is to cool. They have mistakenly correlated the recent warming trend to CO2 despite the geologic record being littered with warming and cooling trends that were not caused by CO2 or orbital forcing. Arguing that there can be no other causes for the recent warming trend is disingenuous. The geologic record is littered with examples. This is especially true ever since the planet transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an icehouse planet 3 million years ago. Climate fluctuations and environmental uncertainties are hallmarks of our bipolar glaciated world which has different glaciation thresholds at each pole.

Scientists come to opposite conclusions about the causes of recent climate change depending on which datasets they consider. For instance, the panels on the left lead to the conclusion that global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to human-caused emissions, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), i.e., the conclusion reached by the UN IPCC reports. In contrast, the panels on the right lead to the exact opposite conclusion, i.e., that the global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to natural cycles, chiefly long-term changes in the energy emitted by the Sun.

Both sets of panels are based on published scientific data, but each uses different datasets and assumptions. On the left, it is assumed that the available temperature records are unaffected by the urban heat island problem, and so all stations are used, whether urban or rural. On the right, only rural stations are used. Meanwhile, on the left, solar output is modeled using the low variability dataset that has been chosen for the IPCC’s upcoming (in 2021/2022) 6th Assessment Reports. This implies zero contribution from natural factors to the long-term warming. On the right, solar output is modeled using a high variability dataset used by the team in charge of NASA’s ACRIM sun-monitoring satellites. This implies that most, if not all, of the long-term temperature changes are due to natural factors.

Here is the link to the full paper.
ShieldSquare Captcha

 

[Crick]

Correlation does not prove causation. The geologic record is littered with examples of warming and cooling trends that were not cause by CO2 or orbital forcing. The only correlation between temperature and CO2 on a planetary scale that is known with any certainty is from the time before the industrial revolution. Prior to the industrial revolution CO2 was a proxy for temperature. This is a fact that no one disputes. Since that time man's emissions have broken the correlation between temperature and CO2. We know this with 100% certainty because we are 2C cooler than in the past with 120 ppm more CO2.

The native state of our planet with its current land mass and ocean configuration is to cool. They have mistakenly correlated the recent warming trend to CO2 despite the geologic record being littered with warming and cooling trends that were not caused by CO2 or orbital forcing. Arguing that there can be no other causes for the recent warming trend is disingenuous. The geologic record is littered with examples. This is especially true ever since the planet transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an icehouse planet 3 million years ago. Climate fluctuations and environmental uncertainties are hallmarks of our bipolar glaciated world which has different glaciation thresholds at each pole.

Scientists come to opposite conclusions about the causes of recent climate change depending on which datasets they consider. For instance, the panels on the left lead to the conclusion that global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to human-caused emissions, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), i.e., the conclusion reached by the UN IPCC reports. In contrast, the panels on the right lead to the exact opposite conclusion, i.e., that the global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to natural cycles, chiefly long-term changes in the energy emitted by the Sun.

Both sets of panels are based on published scientific data, but each uses different datasets and assumptions. On the left, it is assumed that the available temperature records are unaffected by the urban heat island problem, and so all stations are used, whether urban or rural. On the right, only rural stations are used. Meanwhile, on the left, solar output is modeled using the low variability dataset that has been chosen for the IPCC’s upcoming (in 2021/2022) 6th Assessment Reports. This implies zero contribution from natural factors to the long-term warming. On the right, solar output is modeled using a high variability dataset used by the team in charge of NASA’s ACRIM sun-monitoring satellites. This implies that most, if not all, of the long-term temperature changes are due to natural factors.

Here is the link to the full paper.
ShieldSquare Captcha

Okay. An ignorant monster.

 

[ding]

Okay. An ignorant monster.

How so? Correlation does not prove causation. The geologic record is littered with examples of warming and cooling trends that were not cause by CO2 or orbital forcing. The only correlation between temperature and CO2 on a planetary scale that is known with any certainty is from the time before the industrial revolution. Prior to the industrial revolution CO2 was a proxy for temperature. This is a fact that no one disputes. Since that time man's emissions have broken the correlation between temperature and CO2. We know this with 100% certainty because we are 2C cooler than in the past with 120 ppm more CO2.

The native state of our planet with its current land mass and ocean configuration is to cool. They have mistakenly correlated the recent warming trend to CO2 despite the geologic record being littered with warming and cooling trends that were not caused by CO2 or orbital forcing. Arguing that there can be no other causes for the recent warming trend is disingenuous. The geologic record is littered with examples. This is especially true ever since the planet transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an icehouse planet 3 million years ago. Climate fluctuations and environmental uncertainties are hallmarks of our bipolar glaciated world which has different glaciation thresholds at each pole.