Climate emergency!

[imdoo'n]

now i can't say if these fellows are the most credible or not, but they sure seem like a lot of the scientists around,.




https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/worl...tories-to-massive-climate-petition/ar-AAJZO4B

 

[X-it]

likely the best evidence, but is it enough to get the global picture or just that area?

Well this is cores taken from the sargasso sea floor, kind of off of florida for a 3000 year span, backing up temperatures similar to greenland

 

[imdoo'n]

Well this is cores taken from the sargasso sea floor, kind of off of florida for a 3000 year span, backing up temperatures similar to greenland

View attachment 222290

ok it doesn't back up the graph by jk at all. looks like temps now at 0, are way lower than 500 yrs, 1000yrs and 2500yrs ago. so something must be seriously wrong with something with someones graphs, please help by correlating the 2 graphs, as they sure don't make sense. at present time, the temps are very low compared to your graph and high co2 at the same time. something sure don't add up. shouldn't temps be off the charts?

 

[X-it]

These are all done by scientist they are extremely accurate, no bull sh!t. These were the temperatures back then...way warmer. Backed up by ice cores and ocean sediment cores.

 

[imdoo'n]

These are all done by scientist they are extremely accurate, no bull sh!t. These were the temperatures back then...way warmer. Backed up by ice cores and ocean sediment cores.

so were the temps caused by global warming(CO2)? if so our temps right now should be way up there?


anyway i don't think there is any concern at all now! what with the new corona virus circulating since Dec 1, 2019. don't worry climate change may be the least of anyone's problem.

 

[X-it]

In 5 years from now when the temperatures start to plummet. There will be a lot of nitwits scratching their heads as to why.

 

[imdoo'n]

ok i misunderstood what you were trying to say. i agree with the temperature model, just couldn't get it to work with the co2.

seems about every 8 yrs or so something else is going to get us. these stories are made up science.


im thinking that the climate change wasn't getting the desired effect, so they let the corona virus out of the bag!!!!

 

[DaveB]

The real question is, How many are willing to give up their creature comforts, hobbies and their way of life to reduce the CO2 100ppm?

Did industrialization cause the increase? Maybe, I dunno need way more data other than charts that has huge potential for error and corruption in them.
Regardless, that industrialization has provided us with our way of life. Want to change? Than start watching the little house on the prairie, and prepare for the new way of life.

And to add for the 10,000th time: CO2 is not pollution. CO2 is plant food. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/04/dr-vincent-gray-on-historical-carbon-dioxide-levels/

Reducing garbage, single-use plastics, etc: good. Reducing CO2 in the atmosphere: bad.

 

[X-it]

so were the temps caused by global warming(CO2)? if so our temps right now should be way up there?


anyway i don't think there is any concern at all now! what with the new corona virus circulating since Dec 1, 2019. don't worry climate change may be the least of anyone's problem.

These is only one person who has made a weather model that has a 97% accuracy rate... it has nothing to do with CO2 though. That is Valentina Zharkova a professor in mathematics, physic and Electrical Engineering with a BSc/MSc in applied mathematics and astronomy and a phd in Astrophysics graduating with honors.

 

[snopro]

There is lots of science on this. Problem is there is science that goes both ways. I think....I mean I know its a taxation scheme. Pay a tax to save the world makes you feel real good.

 

[Cdnfireman]

Like everything else, follow the money. Watch who benefits the most from the massive government subsidies, and what industries get exemptions from carbon taxation. And note who benefits the most from the companies that are exempted.

 

[jhurkot]

There is lots of science on this. Problem is there is science that goes both ways. I think....I mean I know its a taxation scheme. Pay a tax to save the world makes you feel real good.

Here is the thing, why do the people that use a product have to pay for its consequences? I really disagree with making the end users pay a tax for something that they literally HAVE to use. It doesn't make sense to me when you have an industry that makes that much money. Read this article and then ask yourself "who should be paying".

https://travellingjezebel.com/dubai-porta-potty/

 

[snopro]

Here is the thing, why do the people that use a product have to pay for its consequences? I really disagree with making the end users pay a tax for something that they literally HAVE to use. It doesn't make sense to me when you have an industry that makes that much money. Read this article and then ask yourself "who should be paying".

https://travellingjezebel.com/dubai-porta-potty/

I got half way through and said to myself …..WTF? Has Johnny lost his mind. I really don't see the point bud of how chitting on a supermodel has anything to do with climate change. Maybe someone can explain it to me? I'm just starting my first coffee of the morning so maybe things will be clearer in 15 minutes? Lol

 

[lilduke]

I got half way through and said to myself …..WTF? Has Johnny lost his mind. I really don't see the point bud of how chitting on a supermodel has anything to do with climate change. Maybe someone can explain it to me? I'm just starting my first coffee of the morning so maybe things will be clearer in 15 minutes? Lol

LMAO did you read the part about shoving live salmon up ur ass?


I think he's pointing out just how much $ these Arab oil barons have and what kind of people they are..

 

[snopro]

LMAO did you read the part about shoving live salmon up ur ass?


I think he's pointing out just how much $ these Arab oil barons have and what kind of people they are..

Yeah I get that lol. I guess my mind went numb part way through. HaHa!

 

[Got boost want snow]

The whole climate change emergency is just another way for turdrope to push his hand further into our pockets. We pay so friggen much in tax now and this is a way to grab more. If any of the money taken was going to research of new advancements then I wouldn't mind so much. And it is supposed to be a neutral tax. I get to pay and never see a dime back anywhere. A total money grab.my rant hahaha

 

[X-it]

CO2 has always trailed warming and cooling by 500 years, it never was driver of it. So what was??? Well the show down is coming to your city near you starting as early as this year and lasting for 30 years. Featuring in this corner the CO2 gang, made up of thieves and school kids. Runaway CO2 will cause Runaway temperatures. VS Well no one has ever heard of them, made up of PHD's and putting their reputations on the line, the temperatures are set to fall for the next 30 years, Let the event begin and see who is full of sh!t. This could not have come at a better time.

 

[Summitric]

Y'ALL NEED TO WATCH THIS HOUR AND HALF DOCUMENTARY BY MIKE EMBRY FROM CALGARY... IT'S ON SUPERCHANNEL, AND A GOOD WATCH:
https://calgaryherald.com/entertain...il-industry-boosting-doc-about-climate-change

[h=1]Calgary director Matt Embry offers oil industry-boosting doc about climate change[/h]
ERIC VOLMERS
Updated: October 25, 2019 Calgary Herald




A new documentary boosting the province’s oil and gas industry by local filmmaker Matt Embry is likely to hit a positive chord with some Calgarians feeling alienated by this week’s national election results.
Global Warning, which debuted Oct. 20 on Superchannel and will screen publicly on Sunday at the Globe Cinema, purports to offer a “a much-needed, balanced and hopeful approach to the climate change debate.” But it also pushes buttons that tend to rally the city’s energy-industry boosters, whether it be suggesting environmental activists and government policies have deepened Calgary’s economic downtown, attempting to make the case that the science behind man-made climate change has yet to be settled or even pillorying the green activism of A-list actor Leonardo DiCaprio.

​

“My goal was to create a balanced film and get both sides of this highly polarized debate, to get their positions out there,” says Embry. “I think the conclusions we made in the film don’t easily fall into those two camps. I think that’s an important voice that needs to be heard. I don’t want to say that I’m pro-oilsands. I’m definitely pro-industry, I’m pro-economic development, but I’m also pro-environment. I think you can be both and I think that’s a voice that has to get out there.”



Embry says he began planning the documentary in 2008 and admits he had no idea “how polarizing” the debate actually was until he was immersed in it. The film takes him from empty office towers in Calgary to the oilfields of Texas and a congressional hearing in Washington D.C. He also visits Germany, where one scientist casts doubt on the country’s success with renewable energy programs. But Embry does interview people on both sides of the debate, embedding himself with activists from Climate Action Network and Greenpeace and visiting First Nation elder and environmentalist Ray Owl.

“One of the things we really wanted to demonstrate was to get a deep understanding of the First Nations issues that also surround this,” Embry says. “There are other issues, constitutionally, that also need to be dealt with. There are relationships that need to be created and fostered and grown in a different way to allow industry to go forward successfully.”

In the film, we hear congressional hearing testimony of Robert Watson, a British chemist and high-profile proponent of the idea that human activity has contributed to global warming and a loss in biodiversity. But much more time is dedicated to Patrick Moore, Ian Clark and Fritz Vahrenholt, scientists whose theories about climate change are, by their own admission, in the minority.

“I don’t think any of those scientists in our film deny that climate change is happening,” Embry says. “I think the question is whether C02 is the major driver. And those are two different conversations that have really been mixed into one. And, I think, in the scientific community, science is never over. People say the science is settled, but science is never settled. The idea of consensus can be dangerous.”

Moore is a particularly controversial figure, a former member of Greenpeace who made headlines recently by comparing the environmental movement led by teenage activist Greta Thunberg to Hitler Youth.

“There’s no question he’s a polarizing figure,” Embry says. “I think getting access to someone like that for us was really interesting. He brought us behind the scenes at the congressional hearing. He was able to get us right in the room.”

Embry says he did approach climatologist Michael Mann, director of the Program on Climate Science, Awareness and Solutions, James Hansen and activist David Suzuki, but says they all declined to participate in the film. He did convince former politician and conservative radio host Danielle Smith to participate. She offers a teary tribute to oil and gas workers who have lost their jobs and suggests they are being held back by “governments making decisions that are standing in the way of the economy getting back on track.”

She’s far from an unbiased observer, but Embry said he wanted her historical perspective and wasn’t bothered by her considerable political baggage.

If Global Warning proves to be controversial, it will not be the first film by Embry to ruffle feathers. Past documentaries include Living Proof, a personal film that chronicles his own experiences with multiple sclerosis and targeted not only the pharmaceutical industry but also charities such as Multiple Sclerosis of Canada. But Embry says Global Warning is not meant to be divisive. Quite the opposite.

“My goal is hopefully those two sides can start coming together and working together instead of it being an us versus them,” he says. “The one thing I want to get across is that you can be pro-environment and pro-industry. It’s not an either/or. As Canadians, we need to be really careful about the economic consequences if we shut off the taps to oil and gas and what that means politically, culturally, economically on a global scale. We need to be aware that other countries aren’t operating that way.”

There will be a free public screening of Global Warning on Sunday, Oct. 27 at 10 a.m. at the Globe Cinema. It is also available on demand on the Superchannel.

 

[X-it]

Here is the thing, why do the people that use a product have to pay for its consequences? I really disagree with making the end users pay a tax for something that they literally HAVE to use. It doesn't make sense to me when you have an industry that makes that much money. Read this article and then ask yourself "who should be paying".

https://travellingjezebel.com/dubai-porta-potty/

jhurkot the government is paying 50 million for climate change news, i am pretty sure they will not pay for mine. https://www.blacklocks.ca/govt-pays-for-climate-news/

 

[X-it]

Well here is some records being broken, there are so many of them it has to blink them on a map. Warning this will offend some peoples beliefs.


https://electroverse.net/count-the-cold-records-over-the-past-24hrs/