Jump to content

The Climate thread

Laxtonto

By Laxtonto
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

bolverk
bolverk

Now apply that way of thinking to other topics: You want me to stop treating minorities like shit when people in other countries can treat their minorities like shit? You want me to pay

CooterBrown
CooterBrown
mop
mop

what a thread.   the thread i jumped on back in like 2008 or something started with a claim that the Arctic would be ice free by the summer of 2012.  this didn't happen. in fact, while 2012

Posted Images

hookemATL

hookemATL 12,294

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Humble Beast said:

Lol. The Clinton are firing things back up just weeks after their pervy henchman Podesta takes over administration of Biden’s green new deal. If that doesn’t tell you how shady this whole deal is, then I don’t know what to tell you.

 

 

BIG IF TRUEEEEEE!!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28,931

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Humble Beast said:

Lol. The Clinton are firing things back up just weeks after their pervy henchman Podesta takes over administration of Biden’s green new deal. If that doesn’t tell you how shady this whole deal is, then I don’t know what to tell you.

 

 

You just told us you’re a moron. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Fastbreak

Fastbreak 4,056

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

… don’t you know earthly riches are a sign of God’s favor?”

It says it right in the Bible.

"He who has more, and has skin of white, will be the best. Fuck those who are not as fortunate or dark." Isaiah Thomas 36:11

"It's better to go to heaven with a stack of cash than to be a camel's needle point, because that's for fags." Joshua Tree 10:16

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RomaVicta

RomaVicta 30,604

Posted
Posted
On 9/16/2022 at 6:02 PM, Biff Tannen said:

I've been saying for a couple of years now that Ford is going to come out on top when this is all said and done.  They were the first major manufacturer to fully embrace the EV revolution and they dove in head first.  I'm very interested to see what happens when the electric F150 comes out.

I was around for the 70s Energy Crisis. The conventional wisdom was that Americans would "never give up their love affair with big gas guzzling cars." Wrong-o! Toyota went from being an amusing anomaly to the giant it is today. Looks like Ford learned. Good for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
elfenix

elfenix 34,753

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I was around for the 70s Energy Crisis. The conventional wisdom was that Americans would "never give up their love affair with big gas guzzling cars." Wrong-o! Toyota went from being an amusing anomaly to the giant it is today. Looks like Ford learned. Good for them.

counterpoint: full size truck sales and girth growth since the 70s

Edited by elfenix
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RomaVicta

RomaVicta 30,604

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, elfenix said:

counterpoint: full size truck sales and girth growth since the 70s

There's no doubt about the re-emergence of absurd size and poor efficiency. Interestingly, it coincides with the doing away with the requirement to include MPG in ads and the different classification given to trucks no matter if you use them to drive into the office or haul tools to a site.

Still, the emergence of the smaller, more efficient and even more comfortable foreign cars surprised American carmakers. They thought they could turn out the same shit and make huge money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fastbreak

Fastbreak 4,056

Posted
Posted
 
 

Right in the center of that is where I didn’t my 6-11 years of life. My dad was a HS football coach in Englewood and then Fort Myers.

Luckily, I moved to Austin at the end of that run…
 
 

Right in the center of that is where I didn’t my 6-11 years of life. My dad was a HS football coach in Englewood and then Fort Myers.

Luckily, I moved to Austin at the end of that run…
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EuroHorn

EuroHorn 3,295

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

I’ve used cotton bags for years. The same ones. But somehow that’s worse than using thousands of plastic bags? What?

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/09/to-tote-or-note-to-tote/498557/
 

“Cotton tote bags, by contrast, exhibited the highest and most severe global-warming potential by far since they require more resources to produce and distribute.“

 

thanks for your contribution!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38,130

Posted
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, EuroHorn said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/09/to-tote-or-note-to-tote/498557/
 

“Cotton tote bags, by contrast, exhibited the highest and most severe global-warming potential by far since they require more resources to produce and distribute.“

 

thanks for your contribution!

All those studies measure net energy used in production for the claim of what is worse 

https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2020/04/30/plastic-paper-cotton-bags/

So, yes, cotton bags require more energy to be produced…but they are renewable and biodegradable, and don’t pollute the environment. Soooooo yeah, whoever says plastic bags are better are morons. 
 

They require less energy!

but it’s wiping out the fish because they can’t breath plastic 

But they require less energy to produce, which helps my argument, win win!

Edited by Neonmoon
  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PenelopeWitherspoon

PenelopeWitherspoon 19,307

Posted
Posted (edited)
48 minutes ago, Humble Beast said:

 

The media was saying that catastrophic weather events are getting more frequent.  While the number of overall storms might be steady, the severity is getting worse and worse.  You little twitter only talks about numbers and does not talk about how much more severe these things are.    

As a poster, you are horrible.  You keep getting crowdsourced, and you keep coming back.  How much are you getting paid to spread misinformation and falsehoods, Comrad?

Edited by PenelopeWitherspoon
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Humble Beast

Humble Beast 258

Posted
Posted
On 10/3/2022 at 8:49 AM, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

The media was saying that catastrophic weather events are getting more frequent.  While the number of overall storms might be steady, the severity is getting worse and worse.  You little twitter only talks about numbers and does not talk about how much more severe these things are.    

As a poster, you are horrible.  You keep getting crowdsourced, and you keep coming back.  How much are you getting paid to spread misinformation and falsehoods, Comrad?

 

19 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

Support for @PenelopeWitherspoon statement.

https://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/global-warming-and-hurricanes/
 

But you already know this and chose to lie by omission.

From your link Willfully,

“In summary, it is premature to conclude with high confidence that human-caused increases in greenhouse gases have caused a change in past Atlantic basin hurricane activity that is outside the range of natural variability, although greenhouse gases are strongly linked to global warming.”

 

All that paper had were more model projections.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PenelopeWitherspoon

PenelopeWitherspoon 19,307

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, Humble Beast said:

 

From your link Willfully,

“In summary, it is premature to conclude with high confidence that human-caused increases in greenhouse gases have caused a change in past Atlantic basin hurricane activity that is outside the range of natural variability, although greenhouse gases are strongly linked to global warming.”

 

All that paper had were more model projections.

Just stop.  Do us all a favor and STOP POSTING.  You bring absolutely nothing here other than lies and misinformation.

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 17,415

Posted
Posted
On 9/18/2022 at 9:40 AM, Bullneck said:

 

 

so the clown asks a question and then spends the rest of the time answering and interrupting.   She could have walked away or decided to interrupt everything this clown said going forward.   "LALA I am not listening to you"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PenelopeWitherspoon

PenelopeWitherspoon 19,307

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, YChang said:

Humble you can be cautious about policy and economic shifts with how we adapt to climate change without purposely being such a contrarian ass. Why are you this way? 

Cause he is a troll.  He always has been.  He has been banned MULTIPLE times (GRHorn, Immaculate Vibes).  

  • Fuck You 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Humble Beast

Humble Beast 258

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, YChang said:

Humble you can be cautious about policy and economic shifts with how we adapt to climate change without purposely being such a contrarian ass. Why are you this way? 

I don’t see how I’ve been an ass on this one. 
 

These are big changes to make. If they’re being sold under false or exaggerated pretenses then I think it’s worth calling out.  
 

1 hour ago, Nivek said:

Who gives a shit what an MD has to say about climate science?   

It’s his initials. Says so in his profile. 
 

2 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Just stop.  Do us all a favor and STOP POSTING.  You bring absolutely nothing here other than lies and misinformation.

The media spreads misinformation here. I was correcting it. Evidently it is quite upsetting.  Here’s a good summary.

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PenelopeWitherspoon

PenelopeWitherspoon 19,307

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Humble Beast said:

I don’t see how I’ve been an ass on this one. 
 

These are big changes to make. If they’re being sold under false or exaggerated pretenses then I think it’s worth calling out.  
 

It’s his initials. Says so in his profile. 
 

The media spreads misinformation here. I was correcting it. Evidently it is quite upsetting.  Here’s a good summary.

 

 

And posting the same shit again.  You have completely missed the whole fucking point.  It isn't just increased frequency, WHICH THERE ARE MORE CATASTROPHIC WEATHER EVENTS HAPPENING, OPEN YOUR FUCKING EYES, NUMBSKULL, but also increased severity.  Your MD guy is only talking about Hurricanes (Atlantic) and counts.  

Get fucked.  You deserve every neg you get.

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Humble Beast

Humble Beast 258

Posted
Posted
On 10/3/2022 at 8:49 AM, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

The media was saying that catastrophic weather events are getting more frequent.  While the number of overall storms might be steady, the severity is getting worse and worse.  You little twitter only talks about numbers and does not talk about how much more severe these things are.

No actually that link to the NOAA page addresses that. 
 

15 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

And posting the same shit again.  You have completely missed the whole fucking point.  It isn't just increased frequency (actually no), WHICH THERE ARE MORE CATASTROPHIC WEATHER EVENTS HAPPENING, OPEN YOUR FUCKING EYES, NUMBSKULL, but also increased severity (no).  Your MD guy is only talking about Hurricanes (Atlantic) and counts. (Isn’t that what we’re talking about here?)

Get fucked.  You deserve every neg you get.

 

  • Fuck You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Willfully Horn

Willfully Horn 8,266

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

All that paper had were more model projections.

Yeah, no.

“The IPCC AR6 presents a strong body of scientific evidence that it is unequivocal that humans have caused the earth’s climate to warm, with a likely human contribution of 0.8 to 1.3 degrees Celsius to global mean temperature since the late 1800s”. 
 

Warmer temps >warmer water > stronger storms. 
 

  • Tropical cyclone intensities globally are projected to increase (medium to high confidence) on average (by 1 to 10% according to model projections for a 2 degree Celsius global warming). This change would imply an even larger percentage increase in the destructive potential per storm, assuming no reduction in storm size. Storm size responses to anthropogenic warming are uncertain.

Anecdotally, we can confirm their high confidencevptojection. Tampa Bay was sucked dry by Ian. Second time on tecord. Both instances happened within several years on each othe.

Clumate change deniers will have a new furcle in Hell, carved out for them specifically to keep the lowlifes separate from the merely damned.

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Humble Beast

Humble Beast 258

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

Yeah, no.

“The IPCC AR6 presents a strong body of scientific evidence that it is unequivocal that humans have caused the earth’s climate to warm, with a likely human contribution of 0.8 to 1.3 degrees Celsius to global mean temperature since the late 1800s”. 
 

Warmer temps >warmer water > stronger storms. 
 

  • Tropical cyclone intensities globally are projected to increase (medium to high confidence) on average (by 1 to 10% according to model projections for a 2 degree Celsius global warming). This change would imply an even larger percentage increase in the destructive potential per storm, assuming no reduction in storm size. Storm size responses to anthropogenic warming are uncertain.

Anecdotally, we can confirm their high confidencevptojection. Tampa Bay was sucked dry by Ian. Second time on tecord. Both instances happened within several years on each othe.

Clumate change deniers will have a new furcle in Hell, carved out for them specifically to keep the lowlifes separate from the merely damned.

 

 


You’re not actually proving anything. 

Again, there is no proven connection between the one degree of warming and storm severity or frequency. Everything on NOAA site is model projections into future. 
 

I’ve never disputed the 1 degree warming number. I’ve had people here claim 2.5 degrees of warming already, though. 

Edited by Humble Beast
  • Fuck You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 17,415

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

It’s his initials. Says so in his profile. 

 

Thanks for the clarity, but it does seem like he should have known that would have been a logical leap.  His MA in Anthropology and an undergrad in something called Peace and Global Studies.  This background though hardly makes him an expert.  He might believe in global warming, but that doesn't mean he understands it.   

Science is difficult.  It requires quite a bit of education both formal and ongoing.   It is not readily accessible anymore than me reading Iggy Peck Architect and then designing the next major suspension bridge.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 17,415

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Humble Beast said:


You’re not actually proving anything. 

Again, there is no proven connection between the one degree of warming and storm severity or frequency. Everything on NOAA site is model projections into future. 
 

I’ve never disputed the 1 degree warming number. I’ve had people here claim 2.5 degrees of warming already, though. 

The scientific method does not prove relationships.  Modeling is not just some willy nilly stab in the dark.  Modelling is used to predict the paths of storms, how aircraft will perform, and where failures in structures might come up.   Modeling is how geoscientists take data and build subsurface models for oil and gas capture/extraction.   Let's look at the past models for today's Link climate.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuco

Tuco 5,094

Posted
Posted
On 10/8/2022 at 6:20 AM, Slacks said:

Figure out how to get the people paid from it and they'll go green.... 

Responding to Slacks from the Ukraine thread. 

A couple things:

1. I interpret your statement here is that CO2 pollution is the currently the most economic approach in our economy.  In order for that to change, we need to figure out how change or system so being green is the more economic approach.  Fair enough.  The problem with pollution and the "free" market is that currently the system does not recognize the communal harm caused by the pollution.  [I fully admit to learning this perspective on Shaggy/Surly...Bozo maybe...don't remember.] Polluters are not paying for the harm they are causing.  The general public pays for it, and usually disproportionately those with lower means.  Globally, the poor fucks from Bangladesh can't just buy a new condo on higher ground.  They are just fucked.  Their lives are ruined.  They are paying the costs for the actions of the wealthy.  The free market is clearly not working here. 

So how do you change that. 

The carbon tax is one approach.  You assign a price for the damage carbon pollution is producing.  If the costs are impacting the decisions makers (from corporate CEOs to middle age suburbanites buying massive trucks to little old ladies trying to heat their homes), then the free market will actually work to produce more economically efficient decisions, like it's suppose to. In the most talked-about version, the dividend from the tax is then distributed back to everyone evenly.  If you consume less than your average schmuck, you get paid.  If you consume more than your average schmuck, you do the paying.  

As with all things, there is the concern about unintended consequences.  How do you handle imports and not fuck up current trade agreements?  And it always seems like anytime something like this is enacted, corporations figure out ways to extract value without helping the planet, either through unintended loopholes or through intended ones that lobbyists get paid for. But, obstacles can be overcome and likely problems do not negate the overall advantages.  Canada has implemented this.  What's politically viable there can be here, although it may take us longer.  

2. We never really had this criteria for stopping pollution before.  When the rivers were fucking burning, people didn't say "well, gee, that's terrible, but we won't change it unless we can make sure the current polluters are compensated."  Smog.  DDT.  Acid rain. We have a full history of just saying enough of this shit and stopping it at the source.  Without compensation.  I don't accept that the new criteria is that we have to compensate current polluters.  

3. Can you imagine what the current price of gas would be without federally mandated efficiency requirements, without alternative fuel research on federal dollars, without credits for electric cars, etc.? The environmental movement saves people money.  It just does a shit job of taking credit for it because it's not really the main goal. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 46,170

Posted
Posted

At first I felt bad.  Then I read the article.  Seems like a case of fucking around and finding out to me.

Quote

COALINGA, Calif. — The residents of this sun-scorched city feel California’s endless drought when the dust lifts off the brown hills and flings grit into their living rooms. They see it when they drive past almond trees being ripped from the ground for lack of water and the new blinking sign at the corner of Elm and Cherry warning: “No watering front yard lawns.”

The fire chief noticed it when he tested hydrants in August — a rare occurrence as Coalinga desperately seeks to conserve water — and the first one shot out a foot-long block of compacted dirt. The second one ejected like a can of Axe body spray.

The schools superintendent could only think drought on the first day of school when a 4-year-old fell onto unwatered turf, breaking an arm; or when the chain saws dropped three coastal redwoods outside Henry F. Bishop Elementary that had withered and died. Superintendent Lori Villanueva even lost a portion of her own right lung last year from a drought-aggravated illness, valley fever, that’s caused by breathing soil fungus whipped up off the dry ground.

But what lies ahead might be far worse for the 17,000 residents living amid the oil derricks and cattle farms on the western edge of the state’s Central Valley. Coalinga has only one source of water — a shrinking allotment from an aqueduct managed by the federal government — and officials are projecting the city will use up that amount before the end of the year.

That looming threat has left city officials racing between meetings in Sacramento and phone calls to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation seeking to increase their water supply. Some residents have begun stockpiling five-gallon water jugs in their homes, while many expect major spikes in their water bills. If Coalinga can’t find relief, it would be forced to buy additional water on the open market at exorbitant prices that could swamp the city’s budget.

That was the grim scenario facing Mayor Ron Ramsey when he rapped his knuckles on the table and cursed at a City Council meeting in early August. Everyone but Ramsey had just voted to ban watering front yards and to ramp up penalties on overuse — measures they conceded would not save nearly what was needed. But it was more than Ramsey could stomach.

“It’s too much. Too fast,” Ramsey told the room. On top of that, he said, it wasn’t fair.

“Go to the state capitol and they got green grass, don’t they?” he said. “They can do it, but why can’t we?”

Coalinga, named for its history as a coaling station on a railway line, is a small Republican outpost in liberal California. The city had already defied state leadership in 2020, passing a resolution that declared all businesses essential to avoid mandatory pandemic closures. When it was time for the state to distribute covid-19 relief funds to municipalities, Coalinga didn’t get any.

The water shortage felt to some like another kind of retaliation.

“How do you not give farmers water when they feed everybody unless you’re trying to put them out of business?” asked Scott Netherton, owner of Coalinga’s lone movie theater and executive director of its chamber of commerce.

“It feels like we’re being singled out, small towns,” he said. “It’s like they’re trying to force them out to where you’ve got to move into the bigger cities.”

Coalinga’s brackish groundwater has never been a reliable option. Before a canal was completed in the early 1970s that connected Coalinga to a major aqueduct, the city relied on water delivered by train. After a 1983 earthquake that destroyed some 300 homes in town and spread concerns about water contamination, residents resorted to donations; Anheuser-Busch sent drinking water to Coalinga in beer cans and bottles.

But the drought has made residents question the very survival of their city.

“We’ve never been this bad where they said we’re going to run out of water,” Mayor Ramsey said.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 17,415

Posted
Posted
On 9/30/2022 at 1:18 PM, Neonmoon said:

All those studies measure net energy used in production for the claim of what is worse 

https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2020/04/30/plastic-paper-cotton-bags/

So, yes, cotton bags require more energy to be produced…but they are renewable and biodegradable, and don’t pollute the environment. Soooooo yeah, whoever says plastic bags are better are morons. 
 

They require less energy!

but it’s wiping out the fish because they can’t breath plastic 

But they require less energy to produce, which helps my argument, win win!

There is more to it than that.  Many are treated with some long-lasting pvc-based dyes which make them difficult to recycle.   The argument for plastic bags is that they are made from the byproduct of oil and gas, which is a sunk cost from a certain point of view.  The cotton must be grown, and harvested, pesticides are often used, and there is a bit of energy involved in that process.   So that is the perspective of the argument.

However,  your shitty canvas bag will degrade in a dump and leave some plastic residue.  While someones shitty plastic bags will just sit there and likely only break down into smaller plastics and become a future major source of surface water pollution and near-surface groundwater pollution.  So there is that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RomaVicta

RomaVicta 30,604

Posted
Posted
On 10/14/2022 at 2:07 PM, hookem2010 said:

Oceanic heat waves in the Bering Sea wiping out crabs

Don't worry, there are claims that hurricanes aren't more frequent. The whole climate change assertion is now defunct.

You see, it's as though there were bubonic plague deniers.

Maybe they heard someone say, "This plague that falls upon us will kill tens of thousands verily, and the disease will cause pain and discomfort until death. Children will dies as do adults. it's as contagious as wildfire in the King's Wood when the season is dry. Some catching the disease may spontaneously burst into flames!"

"This whole plague thing isn't a big deal. Nobody is bursting into flames. I don't even think it exists."

How can you defeat someone who calls this logic or intentionally obfuscates? Give them guest spots on conservative media outlets, of course.

Idiot World. Never forget!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 17,415

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

At first I felt bad.  Then I read the article.  Seems like a case of fucking around and finding out to me.

 

California's water management system is completely fucked up and completely favors industry rights above all else.  They don't give a flying fuck that the rates of subsidence are absolutely insane and their focus on high-water-use crops is insane.   Shifting weather patterns is part of climate change.   And Bill Maher's foolish idea of pipelining the excess water from flooding from mid/and eastern US to the western states is amusing though.  

Nice little article on California's water use one of the crazy points is that as urban use has declined, agriculture is ramping up more.   

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...