Is it Game Over on the climate front?

[Genava]

Now you're predicting global temperature forecasts from a chart that goes back to 1980? Really?

Did I say that?

[Basil II the B.S]

Thats because their populations are ginormous.
Their PER CAPITA contributions are nothing compared to western countries.

Climate action requires globalism. No one will sacrifice their economic growth when others are winning.
But we are too far from getting into such rational debates seeing the partisan stupidity of "woke" climate change deniers....

Oh I know this game: the issue is too important to leave it to national govt->we need experts->issue is not political-> experts can't be held accountable in any way.
Except that experts consistently mess up, see other areas, like the ECB and when they do, there's no way you can remove them, because and I quote Juncker, there's no democratic choice against treaties.

What's climate action anyway? We saw it with Macron: triple regressive tax to cripple the standard of living of the bottom 80% who can't afford electric cars, can't rely on public transport all the time because they live outside big cities and those are infrequent and have old cars anyway. But hey, so long that the globalist elite can pat its back at Davos for ''saving the world'', it's all good.

Besides, the climate movement is now a full blown religion, as evidenced by the Greta Thunberg phenomenon:
-unlikely Messiah, she's innocent and pure, you can't criticize her, otherwise you are a bad person;
-bizarre diets (insects etc.);
-public self-flagellation (Extinction Rebellion smashing stuff, just not the stuff of the rich);
-''The end is nigh!'' speeches.

And I'm not even starting with the worst of bizarries, those deserve an upcoming own thread.

However, don't worry, I have a solution. True conservatives care about self-preservation and that includes the environment. If you are truly worried that the world is going to end however, it's a whole other story: you can make your public demonstrations, speeches and all of that, however at the end of the year you pay a 100% income tax above 20k and a 50% wealth tax, the revenue will be used for environmental energy research. This is because the climate crowd comically coincides with the jet-flying-world-polluting Davos crowd and demands ''collective sacrifices''. Since they are the most worried and they can pay the most, then they will be the first to radically decrease their own standard of living to save the planet. Evasion of such tax will be interpreted as crime against the environment, a global mandate of arrest, and punished with a lifetime in jail and seizure of all properties.

Deal? Otherwise it's all bs.

[Genava]

Besides, the climate movement is now a full blown religion, as evidenced by the Greta Thunberg phenomenon:

Well, this is something inherent to political movements I think. This is political dogmatism. The far-right is not an exception either...

True conservatives care about self-preservation and that includes the environment.

Yes, but where are they hiding?

-unlikely Messiah, she's innocent and pure, you can't criticize her, otherwise you are a bad person;

There is a little of sense behind it because the critics are not the problems. The hoax and fake news about her are the problems. For example the whole story about her "seeing the CO2 coming out from chimney" is a BS that every media (left and right) has repeated brainlessly. It comes from a bad traduction, from the german edition of her mom's book. She wrote a metaphor and a reference to the fairytale of "The Emperor's New Clothes" and an ignorant journalist used this to get the sentence out of its context and discredit her. Doing this to a child is morally wrong. But this is not really from deniers (although they overly spread the rumors), this is something from the journalists themselves. A good example of the wrongness of modern medias.

I am not very comfortable about her exploitation as a political figure but I think that we need to get to the emotional side of the discourse to address the issue to everyone because the politics of climate change has failed. We tried the rational arguments for literally decades. From the Charney report in 1979 made by the National Research Council highlighting the consensus about the issue we tried to make the politicians and political zealots aware of that. It didn't work.

There was even a TV spot in 1958 about climate change: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-AXBbuDxRY

[B. W.]

The dems who run California and who bought into the global warming scam so thoroughly that they spent money intended for the maintenance of Oroville Dam because they thought they were in a drought that would last for centuries. Now they have a huge problem. The largest earthen dam in the US is in poor condition and the lake it is holding back is at 890 feet of water; just nine feet from capacity.

Now they are facing another round of storms and late season snowfall in the mountains. Let me repeat that: I said late season snowfall in California!

Don't try to tell me that this is associated with global warming and that it was predicted because it wasn't. Instead, the global warming folks have consistently stated just the opposite...can anyone say "an inconvenient truth".

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...t_of_snow.html

[Daruwind]

The dems who run California and who bought into the global warming scam so thoroughly that they spent money intended for the maintenance of Oroville Dam because they thought they were in a drought that would last for centuries. Now they have a huge problem. The largest earthen dam in the US is in poor condition and the lake it is holding back is at 890 feet of water; just nine feet from capacity.

Now they are facing another round of storms and late season snowfall in the mountains. Let me repeat that: I said late season snowfall in California!

Don't try to tell me that this is associated with global warming and that it was predicted because it wasn't. Instead, the global warming folks have consistently stated just the opposite...can anyone say "an inconvenient truth".

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...t_of_snow.html

Sight. Because locally you have some extreme even contradicting current theory, it is setting precedent for whole planet? Really?

Higher temperature means higher amount of water evaporation which means higher precopitation in certain areas....combine it with mountain range at right place and you have snow.

I don´t really know if it is due to global warming or extreme weather just this year but making assumption from one year is bad science/statistics.

[B. W.]

Sight. Because locally you have some extreme even contradicting current theory, it is setting precedent for whole planet? Really?

Higher temperature means higher amount of water evaporation which means higher precopitation in certain areas....combine it with mountain range at right place and you have snow.

I don´t really know if it is due to global warming or extreme weather just this year but making assumption from one year is bad science/statistics.

You're singing to the choir. I was merely pointing out that the warmists are on record saying this is not supposed to happen.

[Daruwind]

You're singing to the choir. I was merely pointing out that the warmists are on record saying this is not supposed to happen.

Dumb people are everywhere as are self proclaim experts. ;-)

I sadly admits there are fanatics on both sides and if some are making such simplification as global warming= no snow,droughts....well. But it only reinforce the need to explain the truth. Earth is warming up and humanity seems to be culprint for such quick change. Well the worst thing that could happen is that we will be wrong...

[Genava]

You're singing to the choir. I was merely pointing out that the warmists are on record saying this is not supposed to happen.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/fe...sing_cost5.php
https://www.nap.edu/read/21852/chapter/3

[B. W.]

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/fe...sing_cost5.php
https://www.nap.edu/read/21852/chapter/3

I got it. No matter what happens ANG proponents are right. If there's more Hurricanes it is Global warming. If it is less Hurricanes it is global warming. etc., etc.

Meanwhile antarctic sea ice is increasing which isn't supposed to be happening..oh wait, it could be...let me pull out another chart.

http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogs...sing-peer.html

http://www.co2science.org/articles/V17/N2/C1.php

[Daruwind]

I got it. No matter what happens ANG proponents are right. If there's more Hurricanes it is Global warming. If it is less Hurricanes it is global warming. etc., etc.

Meanwhile antarctic sea ice is increasing which isn't supposed to be happening..oh wait, it could be...let me pull out another chart.

http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogs...sing-peer.html

http://www.co2science.org/articles/V17/N2/C1.php

https://skepticalscience.com/increas...termediate.htm

Anyway, your logic is quite faulty. Global warming is not about that all places are undergoing the same changes. Because locally the conditions are conterintuitive does not invalidate whole theory. Every place on Earth is basically unique combinations of parameters and conditions. Don´t poin at extreme examples. Show us theory that explaines everything we are seeing plus your extreme conditions ;-)

[Common Soldier]

You're singing to the choir. I was merely pointing out that the warmists are on record saying this is not supposed to happen.

Actually, Climate Change proponents have said to expect extremes of climate change, and that can include localized areas of cooling, even as the rest of the earth warms up. For example, if the the Greenland glaciers were to melt, it could result in a shutdown of the Atlantic current that keeps Europe warmer than it otherwise would be. Warm water from the Gulf Stream cools, and becoming colder. The water becomez denser and sinks, promoting an ocean current. If fresh water melted glaciers were to flood the northetn waters, thus reducing the salinity and hence density of the water (the greater the salinity, the denser th water), the water would no longer sinks as it cools, thus shutting down the current. As a result, Europe would become cooler, even though the rest of the world was warming. (The Atlantic current keeps northwestern Europe warmer than it otherwise would be. I seem to recall.manynyearz ago attending a talk about where you had a cycle where glaciers in the US would melt, and flood the ocean with fresh water, shutting down the ocean current, resulting it it getting colder again and the glaciers reforming, then eventually melting again as the ocean current started back up, causing a cycle of glaciers forming and melting up they melted for good.


Increased precipitation due to global warming could lead to increased local snowfall and actual glacier expansion in some areas, and perhaps local cooling, while the glacier shrinks in other areas as it gets warmer. The effects of warming can be complex, and counterintuitive.

That does not mean the Climate Change proponents are correct, but it means that you can't look at just a couple of examples , you have to look at the overall picture, not just one locale.

[NorseThing]

So how are nearly two dozen pages on this topic mostly about the science have anything to do with the 'game'? The game seems to be letting rich people to have a tax dodge to 'help' combat climate change. It is not simply when they want to get a tax subsidy on a very expensive auto. Or a tax subsidy on their using a not so cost effective consumption of electric power. It is also about the tax dodges in the companies the produce these noncompetitive products. The wonderful thing about all tax dodges is that only the wealthy benefit.

The game is also getting your people elected to office. Work the game from both sides. Support whatever green ideal you want. Oppose whatever green ideal you wish. So the game is far from over. Debate and discuss until the sun sets on forever, this game will not end.

[Basil II the B.S]

You forgot the other part: you should radically lower your standard of living so that they can take credit for saving the planet. As shown by Macron's environmental policy. That's why my ''skin in the game'' tax: are you really, really worried about climate change ending the world? Do you make public speeches about it? Great! 100% income tax above 20k a year and 50% wealth tax. If you evade, you lose everything and go to jail for the rest of your lifetime for crimes against the planet. Revenue is used for environmental purposes. Radical solutions for radical problems.

[Genava]

I got it. No matter what happens ANG proponents are right. If there's more Hurricanes it is Global warming. If it is less Hurricanes it is global warming. etc., etc.

Global warming is about the increase of the global temperature through an increase of the greenhouse effect. Winter won't disappear, snow won't disappear and cold air won't disappear. Climate and weather are linked by probability distribution of occurrence, changing the climate is simply changing the distribution as in the picture. Stop your bad faith. North Sahara has sometimes snow falling in, it doesn't disprove that it is a desertic climate.

Meanwhile antarctic sea ice is increasing which isn't supposed to be happening..oh wait, it could be...let me pull out another chart.

Antarctica is a continental ice sheet with several kilometers high. How a trend in surface for sea ice is a pertinent indicator? Antarctica is circled by strong wind and it is something known from the ice cores that Antarctica took longer to react to any changes in global temperatures. Nonetheless, the ice volume of Antarctica is decreasing:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[NorseThing]

You forgot the other part: you should radically lower your standard of living so that they can take credit for saving the planet. As shown by Macron's environmental policy. That's why my ''skin in the game'' tax: are you really, really worried about climate change ending the world? Do you make public speeches about it? Great! 100% income tax above 20k a year and 50% wealth tax. If you evade, you lose everything and go to jail for the rest of your lifetime for crimes against the planet. Revenue is used for environmental purposes. Radical solutions for radical problems.

i never heard about that. If you have a link, it would be great.

I did find it interesting that tariffs are becoming political weapon though:

[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.95)]The threat in French President Emmanuel Macron’s remarks last week was easy to miss. But if he follows through, its effects wouldn’t be.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.95)]More than 40 minutes into a meandering press conference, Macron reiterated his goal to put fighting climate change at the center of his government’s policies as well as those of the European Union, calling for a “carbon tax on borders” for the bloc.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.95)]“The success of this transition goes through our European commitment, our capacity to defend at the European level the need to achieve a carbon price,” he said, according to a translation.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.95)]Macron did not get into specifics, but such a measure would likely mean a carbon tax in E.U. member countries coupled with a fee on imports from non-E.U. countries that don’t have their own carbon tax or another form of carbon pricing.[/COLOR]

http://time.com/5582034/carbon-tarif...europe-macron/

I like tariffs (not specific such as on steel) to help balance the trade imbalances, but the use of tariffs as a weapon for other purposes such as propoes by Marcon is probably just political rhetoric. At least I hope this is mere political rhetoric.

[B. W.]

Someone shows a couple of satellite photos and frantically shouts "arctic sea ice is melting!" Looking at it over a time-frame of decades that argument doesn't seem so compelling:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhBVGMiCFFg

[Genava]

Someone shows a couple of satellite photos and frantically shouts "arctic sea ice is melting!" Looking at it over a time-frame of decades that argument doesn't seem so compelling:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhBVGMiCFFg

Congratulation, you have discovered winter in 2019.

As shown by Macron's environmental policy.

It should be put in a longer context of decreasing quality of life: https://www.connexionfrance.com/Fren...ially-affected

[Basil II the B.S]

i never heard about that. If you have a link, it would be great.

I did find it interesting that tariffs are becoming political weapon though:

http://time.com/5582034/carbon-tarif...europe-macron/

I like tariffs (not specific such as on steel) to help balance the trade imbalances, but the use of tariffs as a weapon for other purposes such as propoes by Marcon is probably just political rhetoric. At least I hope this is mere political rhetoric.

Hm? I think you misread my post. What I described is my own radical proposal, instead of Macron's one since it failed. Macron simply slapped a flat tax on petrol, which hits primarily those who can't afford electric cars and those who can't rely on public transport. In short, everyone except Macron's core electorate, which are upper class urban voters. That was dumb and has caused 26+ weeks of protests in France. Now since, it's upper class urban voters who are the most vocal about climate change and the one who can actually pay for renewable transitions, I put the two things together. It's also a way to make them responsible for their own political advocacy.

It should be put in a longer context of decreasing quality of life: https://www.connexionfrance.com/Fren...ially-affected

That is absolutely true, but it's also consequence of ''globalization'' policies Macron is doubling down on. The 3 great evil of Western economies are: tax havens (result of free movement of capital), outsorucing (sort of same cause) and immigration (free movement of people).

[Genava]

Richard Alley talk about Earth history of climate changes.

[Basil II the B.S]

What's your take on this thing?
https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0

To make it clear, it was 1989 and the UN predicted global disasters by 2000 if climate change was not kept in check. Afaik, by 2001 noone really cared nor saw anything. The one global disaster during those years was 9/11.