The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[All Darc]

The problem is that as long technology solve problems, the stupid human race manage to create new problems.

If we solve global resources as fuel fossil, using electricity, super batteries, hydrogen fusion, people will keep growing in number, and hunger will be a problem, and they will start vertical production of food with artificial light,m and require more energy, more space, more power plants.
Disease will be better solved, so it turn people to grow more, as less will die. Solve many diseases of old age as 75 years old or 80 years old? But they will live up 110 and there will be problems more dificult at such age.

Took Africa. Do you believe such cultures, agressive and less develope in mind and industry, will in short term manage to get really better ? I don't think so. It will keep growing in number like crazy, and eveybody who courage to talk about birth controll politics will be labelled as nazist. Africa will grow and became in dependance of other countries for food and therapeutic drugs.

Technology evolve but people keep going more retard. Society (poor and rich countries) will be a monkey (no race intention here) driving Goerge Jetson's car.

It will be surprise if in future, with robots, many people live in a kind of virtual reality, connected on it, living virtual lifes, with computers with brain connections, and their bodies will be connected to machine to feed and collect excrements.

And I bet idiots will start to say that technology it's a kind of magic, since they will be so fool and technology so complicated, that they will not believe it is just technology.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

I saw an article by the AP calming there is an ipcc report saying that global warming may pause for up to 11 years.
I thought that was kind of odd, with all the CO2 china is pumping out.

I sped through,and set aside an article which expressed an opinion,that during an 11-year solar cycle,solar irradiance was reduced 0.01%,and throttled global warming,at zero temperature increase,even though carbon dioxide loading increased.
I haven't 'studied' the article,but when you mentioned an 11-year observation,this article came to mind.

[freebeard]

All Darc —

The problem is that as long technology solve problems, the stupid human race manage to create new problems.

"If you want to teach people a new way of thinking, don't bother trying to teach them. Instead, give them a tool, the use of which will lead to new ways of thinking."

R. Buckminster Fuller

https://azquotes.com/author/5231-R_Buckminster_Fuller

And I bet idiots will start to say that technology it's a kind of magic, since they will be so fool and technology so complicated, that they will not believe it is just technology.

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

Arthur C. Clarke

https://jimwestergren.com/my-favorite-quotes/

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Oil companies admit the climate is changing but insist man has nothing to do with it.
Admitting they are the cause is financial suicide.
Then every 2 bit world country is going to try and sue them for perceived damages.

I say the plant started warming 14,000 years ago and hasn't stopped and that the climate has been changing for at least the last 2.5 billion years and has never stopped.

From Losing Earth:
*In 1968 oil companies figured climate change effects were 38-years out,and that by the time things showed up on the radar screen,the current generation of employees would all be retired.
*Henry Shaw emphasized to Exxon executives,that cost of inattention will rise in step with the Keeling curve.
*In 1978,and Exxon internal memo warned that only 5-10 years remained before policy action would be necessary.
*1st Congressional hearing on carbon dioxide was April 3,1980.
*October,1980,only way to avoid worst,stop burning coal.
*'' William Elliott of NOAA doubts that any scientific report,no matter how ominous it's predictions,would persuade politicians to act.
*" President Carter calling for a $80-billion synfuels program.
*'My God,with $80 billion,you could have a photovoltaics industry going that would obviate the need for synfuels forever.' Anthony Scoville,Congressional Science Consultant.
*'I think there is a transition period,... We are not going to stop buning fossil fuels and start looking toward solar or nuclear fusion and so on.We are going to have a very orderly transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources.'Henry Shaw,Exxon (Mobil).
*'If the changes don't occur for a decade or more,those in attendance can't be blamed for failing to prevent them,so what's the problem? David Slade,Director,Office off Carbon Dioxide Effects,D.O.E.
*November,1980,General Electric Corporation & Zapata Offshore Oil Company,elected to White House.
*January,1981,Reagan declares war on solar energy.
*American consumers respond with:
Broncos,Blazers,Suburbans,F-150s,Troopers,Samurais,Sidekicks,Land Rovers,Dakotas,Rams,Sierras,Roadmasters,Caprices,T own Cars..................
*October 19,1983,Bush's William Nierenbeg,Chairman,Committee,National Academy of Sciences argues,first,take immediately action against carbon dioxide,then reverses himself,arguing no urgent need.
*Exxon throws it's hands up,revises it's position.If Academy isn't freaking out why should they.
*Duane LeVine's Exxon internal strategy paper on 'uncertainty'.
*Exxon' Working Group on Global Climate Change,created by Duane LeVine.
*Exxon goes on to spend $30-million on disinformation campaign against climate change.
*with help from API,Global Climate Coalition,US Chamber of Commerce,Competitive Enterprise Institute,14-other trade associations (coal,gas,electric power,automakers)
We don't need no stinking planet!

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

I have, multiple times.
You and Neil ignore it every time.
Go back 20 to 150 pages on this post to find it.

I have such little time each week on the computer,it would be a big favor if you would either re-post the data,or give a link.Otherwise,I just slip further behind.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by sendler

But they are correct in their understanding of the relationship of energy and economy where they realize that our current debt based system cannot tolerate any major reduction in access to energy that curtails the growth that is necessary to cover the long term interest payments without which the world monetary system will crash and wipe out all savings and starve a billion people.
.
Unless we find a whole new way toward an equitable de-growth society.

We'll all annex one another and end up with Star Fleet Command in charge of the whole planet.
One flag.
One currency.
No currency markets.No currency speculation.
We'll have the entire planet for collateral.
All Earthlings will own at least an apartment,or cottage.They can trade or swap,or whatever,but they can never be without shelter.
They'll be fed.It may not be Surgeon Black Caviar,but they'll have nutrition.
There won't be any obesity.
There won't be any heart disease.
There won't be any property tax.
No usury.
They'll be so much disposable income available,that money issues will be meaningless.
We won't need entitlements,as everyone's basic needs will be met.
No inflation.
To much to list,but don't worry about debt.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

The soviets didn't want to push that button.
At the time of the Cuban missile crisis they had less than 1,600 nuclear weapons in inventory, the US had more like 10,000. The Russians didn't have a reliable icbm delivery system, we did. Their bombers probably couldn't have made it over the main land, we didn't have to send bombers.

That may have been true,although they had nuclear torpedoes we knew nothing about.
In an act of certain suicide,one sub might have taken out the Atlantic fleet,and the rest,worked their way up the Eastern seaboard, sending hydrogen bombs into the coastline.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I thank the Soviets for nothing. They're lucky they didn't push the button. Flying a recon jet over a country isn't an act of war. They had their spies too, and they still do. That's not an act of war either.

They didn't know what kind of bird it was.We had flown B-47 bombers before.
We violated their sovereign territory,an act of war,recognized under international law.They would have been well within there rights to go to MAD.
We sold them their radar,we thought we knew their surveillance capabilities,and were wrong about what they actually had,and never thought they'd produce a SAM which could reach the blackbird.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

So giving people the energy and chemicals to grow, fertilize, kill pests to produce more food and transport water and food is a crime?

Well when the next Carrington event wipes out all access to most if not all fossil fuel energy for a few months to a few years we will how evil they are.

Debunking? More like spinning.
In the begining the science was pure. But the data was not showing what they wanted to see or the data wasnt showing change fast enough, so they lied and of course they got caught now they just have to lie more and faster, more often to cover for the original lie, rendering all their work as junk science.
Now the climate data is so skewed we won't know there is actually something wrong with the climate until after global crop failures and mass starvation has already started.

Speaking of lieing, how's that "putting global warming on trial" thing going?
Maybe we could take it all the way to the Supreme Court .

Since you do have a computer,you might GOOGLE all the 'record' weather events so far for 2018.
All of these might be construed as prima facie evidence for climate change.Like Yutu.It was a world record storm for the Northern Marianas.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Everyone alive now owes our good fortune to those who have mightily leveraged the countless miracles afforded by using fossil fuels. Never has it been a better time to be a human than now, and that's almost entirely due to fossil fuels.

A crime against humanity would be to have a great resource, and keep it locked away.

They have no OBLIGATION to tell anyone anything. If I'm a fork maker, I don't have to tell my forking investors the infinite ways you could possibly be harmed with a fork. My job would simply be to make the most desirable forks for the least cost possible.

Show me 1 measurable metric in which humanity as a whole has suffered by use of fossil fuels (wealth, longevity, infant survival, travel, free time, etc).

It's some sort of twisted fad to hate everything that is good, to identify what is black as white, and to self-loath, and I'm not having any of it.

You might consider those who died from rapidly-intensifying storms which 'came out of nowhere' recently.
With less anthropogenic carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,additional heat which made it into the Gulf of Mexico,might have dissipated into space,leaving cooler Gulf waters.Since it didn't,there was more available heat energy for hurricanes like Michael and Yutu.