Climate Change Defamation

[Gil Dobie]

Should call it fear of change. When the climate warms and ice melts, the move to Antarctica begins.

[Caribbean Hen]

So the model weighting could be open to interpretation

Of course. It’s called science.

I’m uninterested in going down this road again. It’s been travelled for over a decade. I’ll let you believe in whatever conspiracies and ask outdated question as you like. Just don’t be surprised when they’re laughed at or ignored.

Your attitude is exactly why people like me are not convinced

Be a better diplomat for your cause

[kalm]

Of course. It’s called science.

I’m uninterested in going down this road again. It’s been travelled for over a decade. I’ll let you believe in whatever conspiracies and ask outdated question as you like. Just don’t be surprised when they’re laughed at or ignored.

Your attitude is exactly why people like me are not convinced

Be a better diplomat for your cause

Well I didn’t realize you were sincerely looking to me as a diplomat for OUR cause. I’m flattered and I promise to point you in the right direction going forward as long as you accept the theories and best science from real experts in the field.

[Caribbean Hen]

Your attitude is exactly why people like me are not convinced

Be a better diplomat for your cause

Well I didn’t realize you were sincerely looking to me as a diplomat for OUR cause. I’m flattered and I promise to point you in the right direction going forward as long as you accept the theories and best science from real experts in the field.

Science is never settled

[kalm]

Well I didn’t realize you were sincerely looking to me as a diplomat for OUR cause. I’m flattered and I promise to point you in the right direction going forward as long as you accept the theories and best science from real experts in the field.

Science is never settled

Sure. And that’s not remotely what I said.

[GannonFan]

Climate change, and the debate whether it's happening or not (answer, it is) doesn't matter anymore. The only thing that does matter is what we do about it, i.e. how much can we limit the scope of the climate change (and at what cost) and how much can we just adapt to living with (again, at what cost). That's where the real discussion should be and hasn't really been thought out very well. Saying we have climate change (and again, we do), is the easy work, the harder work is what to do as a result.

We learned recently that some things, like mandating a switch to all electric vehicles in a short period of time, just isn't going to work. The battery technology isn't there yet, the electrical infrastructure (both generation and local distribution - i.e. charging stations), isn't there, and there's plenty of work to review in terms of what net impact is there to emissions given the significant issues of extraction of metals used to make the batteries. We could do all that work, spend all that money, and in the end find out we didn't change the actual emissions that are behind the climate change.

Power generation is another area. Thanks ironically to environmentalists who should be in favor of things to help with climate change, we've held off nuclear power generation for 50 some years now, making the climate change worse. How quickly we can pivot to not only implementing more nuclear power (more, but more of the smaller reactors that have developed over time), along with the renewables like wind and solar, will go a long way to reducing the amount of climate change.

But in the end, we need much better appreciation at the government level of what the issue is and how we address the issue, especially in terms of what's possible. Unfortunately, we've spent a lot of money with pretty negligible impacts to the climate, so going forward we need to be a lot better about spending wisely. We'll see if government is capable of that.

[UNI88]

Climate change, and the debate whether it's happening or not (answer, it is) doesn't matter anymore. The only thing that does matter is what we do about it, i.e. how much can we limit the scope of the climate change (and at what cost) and how much can we just adapt to living with (again, at what cost). That's where the real discussion should be and hasn't really been thought out very well. Saying we have climate change (and again, we do), is the easy work, the harder work is what to do as a result.

We learned recently that some things, like mandating a switch to all electric vehicles in a short period of time, just isn't going to work. The battery technology isn't there yet, the electrical infrastructure (both generation and local distribution - i.e. charging stations), isn't there, and there's plenty of work to review in terms of what net impact is there to emissions given the significant issues of extraction of metals used to make the batteries. We could do all that work, spend all that money, and in the end find out we didn't change the actual emissions that are behind the climate change.

Power generation is another area. Thanks ironically to environmentalists who should be in favor of things to help with climate change, we've held off nuclear power generation for 50 some years now, making the climate change worse. How quickly we can pivot to not only implementing more nuclear power (more, but more of the smaller reactors that have developed over time), along with the renewables like wind and solar, will go a long way to reducing the amount of climate change.

But in the end, we need much better appreciation at the government level of what the issue is and how we address the issue, especially in terms of what's possible. Unfortunately, we've spent a lot of money with pretty negligible impacts to the climate, so going forward we need to be a lot better about spending wisely. We'll see if government is capable of that.

[BDKJMU]

Climate change, and the debate whether it's happening or not (answer, it is) doesn't matter anymore. The only thing that does matter is what we do about it, i.e. how much can we limit the scope of the climate change (and at what cost) and how much can we just adapt to living with (again, at what cost). That's where the real discussion should be and hasn't really been thought out very well. Saying we have climate change (and again, we do), is the easy work, the harder work is what to do as a result.

We learned recently that some things, like mandating a switch to all electric vehicles in a short period of time, just isn't going to work. The battery technology isn't there yet, the electrical infrastructure (both generation and local distribution - i.e. charging stations), isn't there, and there's plenty of work to review in terms of what net impact is there to emissions given the significant issues of extraction of metals used to make the batteries. We could do all that work, spend all that money, and in the end find out we didn't change the actual emissions that are behind the climate change.

Power generation is another area. Thanks ironically to environmentalists who should be in favor of things to help with climate change, we've held off nuclear power generation for 50 some years now, making the climate change worse. How quickly we can pivot to not only implementing more nuclear power (more, but more of the smaller reactors that have developed over time), along with the renewables like wind and solar, will go a long way to reducing the amount of climate change.

But in the end, we need much better appreciation at the government level of what the issue is and how we address the issue, especially in terms of what's possible. Unfortunately, we've spent a lot of money with pretty negligible impacts to the climate, so going forward we need to be a lot better about spending wisely. We'll see if government is capable of that.

[Caribbean Hen]

Climate change, and the debate whether it's happening or not (answer, it is) doesn't matter anymore. The only thing that does matter is what we do about it, i.e. how much can we limit the scope of the climate change (and at what cost) and how much can we just adapt to living with (again, at what cost). That's where the real discussion should be and hasn't really been thought out very well. Saying we have climate change (and again, we do), is the easy work, the harder work is what to do as a result.

We learned recently that some things, like mandating a switch to all electric vehicles in a short period of time, just isn't going to work. The battery technology isn't there yet, the electrical infrastructure (both generation and local distribution - i.e. charging stations), isn't there, and there's plenty of work to review in terms of what net impact is there to emissions given the significant issues of extraction of metals used to make the batteries. We could do all that work, spend all that money, and in the end find out we didn't change the actual emissions that are behind the climate change.

Power generation is another area. Thanks ironically to environmentalists who should be in favor of things to help with climate change, we've held off nuclear power generation for 50 some years now, making the climate change worse. How quickly we can pivot to not only implementing more nuclear power (more, but more of the smaller reactors that have developed over time), along with the renewables like wind and solar, will go a long way to reducing the amount of climate change.

But in the end, we need much better appreciation at the government level of what the issue is and how we address the issue, especially in terms of what's possible. Unfortunately, we've spent a lot of money with pretty negligible impacts to the climate, so going forward we need to be a lot better about spending wisely. We'll see if government is capable of that.

you didn't mention China so none of that will make any difference at all until they, and the newly formed Biden generated axis of evil are onboard, and with horrible Biden leading the country down the tubes for the past 4 years everyone is going to have to get past WW3 before any serious global climate change can be discussed ... 25 years or so is an optimistic prediction

you cant seriously force EV's on people when China and Russia are flipping Biden the bird

[kalm]

Climate change, and the debate whether it's happening or not (answer, it is) doesn't matter anymore. The only thing that does matter is what we do about it, i.e. how much can we limit the scope of the climate change (and at what cost) and how much can we just adapt to living with (again, at what cost). That's where the real discussion should be and hasn't really been thought out very well. Saying we have climate change (and again, we do), is the easy work, the harder work is what to do as a result.

We learned recently that some things, like mandating a switch to all electric vehicles in a short period of time, just isn't going to work. The battery technology isn't there yet, the electrical infrastructure (both generation and local distribution - i.e. charging stations), isn't there, and there's plenty of work to review in terms of what net impact is there to emissions given the significant issues of extraction of metals used to make the batteries. We could do all that work, spend all that money, and in the end find out we didn't change the actual emissions that are behind the climate change.

Power generation is another area. Thanks ironically to environmentalists who should be in favor of things to help with climate change, we've held off nuclear power generation for 50 some years now, making the climate change worse. How quickly we can pivot to not only implementing more nuclear power (more, but more of the smaller reactors that have developed over time), along with the renewables like wind and solar, will go a long way to reducing the amount of climate change.

But in the end, we need much better appreciation at the government level of what the issue is and how we address the issue, especially in terms of what's possible. Unfortunately, we've spent a lot of money with pretty negligible impacts to the climate, so going forward we need to be a lot better about spending wisely. We'll see if government is capable of that.

you didn't mention China so none of that will make any difference at all until they, and the newly formed Biden generated axis of evil are onboard, and with horrible Biden leading the country down the tubes for the past 4 years everyone is going to have to get past WW3 before any serious global climate change can be discussed ... 25 years or so is an optimistic prediction

you cant seriously force EV's on people when China and Russia are flipping Biden the bird

China and the US are both at or near the top in carbon footprint. In a per capita basis, we’re probably very similar when you consider how much manufacturing we outsourced to the over the past 30 years or so plus the population difference.

I agree it needs to be global. And beyond just two or 3 countries. For us, it needs to transcend party and administration, and also requires a huge cultural shift in urban planning, reliance and lifestyle of the single occupancy gas fueled car, manufacturing, food sourcing, etc.

This requires smart regulation and alternative energy resources. It needs to be a worldwide shotgun approach.

[houndawg]

Of course. It’s called science.

I’m uninterested in going down this road again. It’s been travelled for over a decade. I’ll let you believe in whatever conspiracies and ask outdated question as you like. Just don’t be surprised when they’re laughed at or ignored.

Your attitude is exactly why people like me are not convinced

Be a better diplomat for your cause

Don't the have schools teach science on your floating island of garbage?

[Caribbean Hen]

Your attitude is exactly why people like me are not convinced

Be a better diplomat for your cause

Don't the have schools teach science on your floating island of garbage?

yea right, you're going to tell Puerto Rican kids about global warming? it's hot on the Isla and has always been

[Gil Dobie]

you didn't mention China so none of that will make any difference at all until they, and the newly formed Biden generated axis of evil are onboard, and with horrible Biden leading the country down the tubes for the past 4 years everyone is going to have to get past WW3 before any serious global climate change can be discussed ... 25 years or so is an optimistic prediction

you cant seriously force EV's on people when China and Russia are flipping Biden the bird

China and the US are both at or near the top in carbon footprint. In a per capita basis, we’re probably very similar when you consider how much manufacturing we outsourced to the over the past 30 years or so plus the population difference.

I agree it needs to be global. And beyond just two or 3 countries. For us, it needs to transcend party and administration, and also requires a huge cultural shift in urban planning, reliance and lifestyle of the single occupancy gas fueled car, manufacturing, food sourcing, etc.

This requires smart regulation and alternative energy resources. It needs to be a worldwide shotgun approach.

I have little confidence in this country doing enough to stop climate change, and less confidence with China or any other nation group. Adapting to the change is the best option at this point. Alternate energy will eventually be the norm, but too late to change anything but the distant future.

[kalm]

Don't the have schools teach science on your floating island of garbage?

yea right, you're going to tell Puerto Rican kids about global warming? it's hot on the Isla and has always been

That called weather.

It’s semi-arid in Valencia, always has been.

[kalm]

China and the US are both at or near the top in carbon footprint. In a per capita basis, we’re probably very similar when you consider how much manufacturing we outsourced to the over the past 30 years or so plus the population difference.

I agree it needs to be global. And beyond just two or 3 countries. For us, it needs to transcend party and administration, and also requires a huge cultural shift in urban planning, reliance and lifestyle of the single occupancy gas fueled car, manufacturing, food sourcing, etc.

This requires smart regulation and alternative energy resources. It needs to be a worldwide shotgun approach.

I have little confidence in this country doing enough to stop climate change, and less confidence with China or any other nation group. Adapting to the change is the best option at this point. Alternate energy will eventually be the norm, but too late to change anything but the distant future.

I get your pessimism Gil and adaptation is a part of all life.

I’m just not quite as pessimistic as you.

[Gil Dobie]

I have little confidence in this country doing enough to stop climate change, and less confidence with China or any other nation group. Adapting to the change is the best option at this point. Alternate energy will eventually be the norm, but too late to change anything but the distant future.

I get your pessimism Gil and adaptation is a part of all life.

I’m just not quite as pessimistic as you.

Lot of work to be done in a short time. Converting our supply chain of trucks, airlines and shipping. Only if it can be done by a generation with phones in their faces. And getting other countries on board.

[Caribbean Hen]

I get your pessimism Gil and adaptation is a part of all life.

I’m just not quite as pessimistic as you.

Lot of work to be done in a short time. Converting our supply chain of trucks, airlines and shipping. Only if it can be done by a generation with phones in their faces. And getting other countries on board.

This

China is training a whole generation on how to think and be able to function without cell phones* Bad news for all the soft spoiled dummies running around.

[BDKJMU]

https://redstate.com/bonchie/2024/11/25 ... g-n2182446

[Caribbean Hen]

New Biden water heater ban will drive up energy prices for poor, seniors: expert

The move in the final days of the administration will take non-condensing, natural gas-fired water heaters off the shelves by 2029 in a bid to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, which climate change advocates and President Biden say cause global warming.


Joey Rotten please go away ……

[kalm]

New Biden water heater ban will drive up energy prices for poor, seniors: expert

The move in the final days of the administration will take non-condensing, natural gas-fired water heaters off the shelves by 2029 in a bid to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, which climate change advocates and President Biden say cause global warming.


Joey Rotten please go away ……

Expert is my favorite source!

[BDKJMU]

New Biden water heater ban will drive up energy prices for poor, seniors: expert

The move in the final days of the administration will take non-condensing, natural gas-fired water heaters off the shelves by 2029 in a bid to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, which climate change advocates and President Biden say cause global warming.


Joey Rotten please go away ……

That’s alright, Trump’s DOE can overturn it.

[BDKJMU]

I'm shocked. This guy would never lie!

https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/in ... dium=email

The irony here is deep — The lawsuit Mann brought on the basis that he was intemperately accused of misconduct winds up revealing that Mann engaged in misconduct that was “extraordinary in its scope, extent, and intent.” It’ll be interesting to see what the climate science community does now.

Bump from Miscellaneous thread.

[Gil Dobie]

Euros are looking at a North Sea Wall to battle rising ocean levels.

[BDKJMU]

Euros are looking at a North Sea Wall to battle rising ocean levels.

Wait, according to liberals walls don’t work..

[UNI88]

Euros are looking at a North Sea Wall to battle rising ocean levels.

Wait, according to liberals walls don’t work..

And according to MAQA climate change is a hoax so sea levels aren't rising and a wall shouldn't be needed.