• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Climate change ?

NextGen Climate acts politically to prevent climate disaster and promote prosperity for all Americans.

Join our fight to bring climate change to the forefront of American politics.​

...ten thousand frenchmen can't be wrong, but they can coerce the government to destroy its economy from within.
 
If you're going to trust anyone in this... trust a multinational with a $54 billion dollar turnover.....

As greenhouse gases build up in the earth’s atmosphere, our planet is getting warmer. Extreme weather conditions, droughts and rising sea levels, are already affecting the environment and our livelihoods. These aren’t natural hazards; they’re manmade by us through non-renewable energies.

We all contribute to climate change every day, but that doesn’t mean we can’t also act now to limit the impact on wildlife, agriculture and global economies, not to mention human life.
Click to expand...

https://brightfuture.unilever.co.uk...U0SaUVlsTxyX04BbsjDq_Tx73QAUmFYLSAaAv4j8P8HAQ
 
jefboyardee said:
they can coerce the government to destroy its economy from within.
Click to expand...

The idea that addressing climate change has a negative impact on economies is another of example of the climate denial industry making claims that are totally and utterly wrong. I know they (understandably) hate evidence, but if they were to make an exception and actually consider reality, just for a change, they would see that it is actually clear that governments are actually destroying their economies by sticking with the (heavily subsidised, in the case of the US) 19th century carbon-based economic model.

Developments in clean power generation mean that many technologies - wind, solar, tidal etc - are already near/at price parity with old style generators. This despite the irony that the greater the success of renewables, the cheaper carbon-based alternatives become as reduced demand pushes down prices. Fortunately, clean energy prices continue to fall as they benefit from R&D and economies of scale.

Another economic benefit of clean energy production in a time of high unemployment is that it creates more jobs than the old style carbon-based generation it replaces.

The developed economy that has gone furthest and fastest down the road to addressing climate change is also the most consistently successful economy of the last 70 years: Germany.

In Germany, they continue to subsidise clean power production and consequently have one the cleanest electricity generation industries in the world. Far from the German economy suffering from increased electricity prices, it is actually benefiting from prices that have plummeted so far, the old style generators are petitioning the government to introduce price controls to stop prices falling further. Even paying the subsidy, electricity in Germany costs substantially LESS now than they did before the clean up.

One thing the climate change denial industry has right is that lower power costs are generally better for an economy. They're just completely wrong about how economies can achieve those lower costs.
 
Who would have thought that dumping 1.3 billion pounds of industrial waste would cause a problem when added to 254 million tons of other waste.... unless you have a plan of getting rid of it properly....
skleroz.gif
 
Cold sun rising

New studies flip climate-change notions upside down

This past summer the cold didn't let up, with more temperature records across the US and rare summer snows seen in Canada, the US and China. Birds have migrated early in the last two years. Antarctic sea ice set a new record in 2013 and it was broken again in 2014. Not even Thailand was immune. In 2014 Bangkok hit its coldest low in 30 years, while 63 lives were lost in the North.​
 
Jeff... are you actually reading the stuff you've copied and pasted into this thread. ... your 'new study' quoted here was the one that you copied and pasted here in July and then refused to talk about....
 
No, I read parts of them and pass them along just to be contributive. This particular article rings my bell because it addresses the one thing I've repeatedly pointed at for climate change – the effing sun.

The sun is completely responsible for the surface temperatures on its planets but is not capable of emitting the exact same level of energy constantly, nor is it likely to care about that.

Resultant variations caused by the sun are what people like you claim to be man-caused climate change. You can throw me all the 'proof' you want, it means nothing to me... fire away.

I do agree with claims that excessive pavement causes summer temperatures in urban areas to rise, but that's not relevant in this argument.
 
Last edited:
jefboyardee said:
No, I read parts of them and pass them along just to be contributive. This particular article rings my bell because it addresses the one thing I've repeatedly pointed at for climate change – the effing sun.

The sun is completely responsible for the surface temperatures on its planets but is not capable of emitting the exact same level of energy constantly, nor is it likely to care about that.

Resultant variations caused by the sun are what people like you claim to be man-caused climate change. You can throw me all the 'proof' you want, it means nothing to me... fire away.

I do agree with claims that excessive pavement causes summer temperatures in urban areas to rise, but that's not relevant in this argument.
Click to expand...
Yep, for the deniers, facts don't matter, so what's the point?

But what the hell, I'll throw this out there anyway.

www.scientificamerican.com/article/2015-may-just-be-hottest-year-on-record/

After 2014 was declared the warmest year on record, a Climate Central analysis showed that 13 of the 15 warmest years in the books have occurred since 2000 and that the odds of that happening randomly without the boost of global warming was 1 in 27 million.
 
psionandy said:
Jeff... are you actually reading the stuff you've copied and pasted into this thread. ... your 'new study' quoted here was the one that you copied and pasted here in July and then refused to talk about....
Click to expand...

jefboyardee said:
No, I read parts of them and pass them along just to be contributive. This particular article rings my bell because it addresses the one thing I've repeatedly pointed at for climate change – the effing sun.
Click to expand...

Jeff, Thank you for answering my question.

Hmm... if you're not reading what you've posted.... and you're not reading any replies to itv... then I'm wondering what you're actually contributing here?

It might just be easier to post a link to the mailing list(s) you subscribe to so that people who are interested could read (or not) the articles that you're posting here directly.


And for anyone else that did read the information in Jeff's repost.... here's what was posted to the original article.


psionandy said:
No, We Aren’t Heading Into a "Mini Ice Age"
http://io9.com/no-we-aren-t-heading-into-a-mini-ice-age-1717779657



Jim Wild is Professor of Space Physics at Lancaster University.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
Click to expand...
 
I don't understand.. how 100's of millions of people creating heat (cars and stuff) .. for years...
polluting the air.. for years...

NOT have some global warming effect?? and that it keeps building up???
where does all that heat go??
 
This is more believable to me than man-made carbon measurements:

Nikola Tesla: Father of HAARP and Electromagnetic “Climate Change”

Using electromagnetic radiation to modify the weather was an original concept of Nikola Tesla.

When Tesla died in 1943, the FBI seized his scientific papers and notes. After WWII weather modification and space weapons became a mission of the military and US government agencies to become much of what President Eisenhower warned about as the “military-industrial complex”.

In 1958 the military reported success with using Tesla’s concept of electromagnetic “beams” directed at the ionosphere to control the weather.

The history of weather modification and the inappropriately abrupt concern about “climate change” began essentially at the same time in the 1950′s with the National Weather Modification program formalized by NASA in 1966.​
 
Sorry... I just assumed that you read what you posted.... And, in the absence of any further commentary, that you agree with the stuff you copy and paste.

The article you posted also tries to link climate change directly with the work started by Tesla.

On the basis that you're now refuting that section of the article... Are you now acknowledging that climate change is a thing?
 
Last edited:
No, I'm not accepting or rejecting the concept of climate change. All I know is that it's just basically just as cold here right now in the Arizona mountains as it was when I moved here twenty years ago, and gets just as hot in the summer.

I do think it's perfectly reasonable, albeit pointless, to argue these tiny differences until the end of time, but proposing that deniers be prosecuted practically proves that it's all sham.

I am very skeptical of the purported causes of the alleged issue. I am not skeptical of my previous sun energy fluctuation explanation, and less skeptical of the crazy haarp manipulations just mentioned.
 
"and there are those that also know it.. and because of greed / power / money...
they are tryingtheir best to confuse the general public to stay blind to it.
for their own self gains."

Let me start by saying that I belong to neither of the two categories, but am a skeptic about the degree of the man-made component to Climate Change. I don't, off hand, know of anybody who has gotten filthy rich as a Denier, but A.G. has certainly prospered to the degree of hundreds of millions of $$'s being a Warmer. Moreover, the hypocrisy he exhibits flying his private jets all over, and the abuse to the cause in living the high-life in his mansion, is sickening.

As for proposing prosecuting those (Denier's) who disagree with one's particular viewpoint, it is tantamount to living in a neo-fascist totalitarian state. Next, would we be prosecuting those belonging to minority religions or political parties? I would not have expected such a proposal from a mostly Left-leaning, P.C., objective, tolerant segment of people.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom