We will never convince the deniers.

[cnm]

Ooooo....A small island with the population of South Carolina is reeeeeealy going to put a dent in worldwide CO2 emissions.

It's put a dent in your categorical assertion which has been shown to be wrong, which you can't acknowledge, demonstrated by the way you keep repeating it. But that is the way of deniers.

Which assertion would that be, Skeezix?

My apologies, I withdraw that, I thought I was replying to Snookers, again.

But yes, a small island with the population of Colorado often leads the way in world public policy ideas. Like women's emancipation; stopping nuclear testing in the Pacific; even international time...

On 2 November 1868, New Zealand discarded its numerous local times in favour of a standard time nationwide. In a decision which was a triumph for convenience and economic rationality over tradition and local identity, the colony became the first country to regulate its time in relation to Greenwich mean time (GMT).

This was the first step towards an international order of time.
https://nzhistory.govt.nz​

And now the refusal to issue fossil fuel survey permits...

 

[cnm]

When you warmer cultists have an idea that doesn't involve scores of trillions in taxes and upending the world's economies, you be sure to chime in....Until such a time, you have no ideas.

What? You mean reducing CO2 emissions from fossil fuels is an unacceptable idea to deniers? Well I swan...

Looks like they'll never be convinced.

 

[Oddball]

My apologies, I withdraw that, I thought I was replying to Snookers, again.

But yes, a small island with the population of Colorado often leads the way in world public policy ideas. Like women's emancipation; stopping nuclear testing in the Pacific; even international time...

On 2 November 1868, New Zealand discarded its numerous local times in favour of a standard time nationwide. In a decision which was a triumph for convenience and economic rationality over tradition and local identity, the colony became the first country to regulate its time in relation to Greenwich mean time (GMT).

This was the first step towards an international order of time.
https://nzhistory.govt.nz​

Apples and aircraft carriers.

 

[Oddball]

When you warmer cultists have an idea that doesn't involve scores of trillions in taxes and upending the world's economies, you be sure to chime in....Until such a time, you have no ideas.

What? You mean reducing CO2 emissions from fossil fuels is an unacceptable idea to deniers? Well I swan...

The underlying problem is that reducing CO2 from hydrocarbon fuels will never ever satisfy the cult of the warmers....Y'all are closet eugenicists, and you're probably too mired in your anti-CO2 cult to recognize it.

 

[Crick]

As you've heard before, it would be immensely cheaper to prevent the problem than to deal with its consequences. And the longer you wait, the worse that comparison grows.

As I've discovered, you're too much of a dullard to understand the most basic of economic laws and models....That you can further try to pass yourself off as some sort of savant of science is laughable.

Do you believe some law of economics says it's best to ignore growing problems with the potential for catastrophic consequences?

My knowledge of science is obviously better than yours, but I am no savant and have never passed myself off as one. The lesson that this particular forum makes clear is that there is a very strong correlation between accepting the conclusions of the IPCC (ie, of mainstream science on this issue) and a science education something beyond what one can obtain by the 8th grade.

 

[SSDD]

At what rate is temperature change "catastrophic"? Has temperature changed catastrophically before? Prior to Man, or Man's industrialization?

I keep asking what the ideal temperature is for life on planet earth...they can't even give a temperature...much less what rate of change is catastrophic...and of course temperatures have changed catastrophically before...cold is a killer and whenever an ice age happens, extinctions, in great numbers follow.

 

[SSDD]

The temperature change you see from the far left to the middle is a typical, natural warming post glacial warming cycle. This diagram is Marocotte and Shakun's work on the Holocene with Hadley and then a model running the A1B scenario tacked on at the right. Thus, that vertical stripe you see at the far right shows the rate at which temperature has been increasing since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.


Pure bullshit...taking a very short instrumental record onto a very long, questionable proxy record...that is the shabbiest sort of pseudoscience...but it is good enough to fool you....isn't it skidmark?

 

[SSDD]

We will never convince the deniers. Giant world wide conspiracy theories are fun and exciting to think about. Slowly changing climates, where the action happens over years or even decades, just can't compete with that for entertainment value.
Then there is the feeling of belonging these socially handicapped tRumpkins get from high-fiving each other every time they think they've scored some sort of point. For instance the 2 dozen or so threads that were started about the polar vortex disruptions last week.

And finally there's the way these things are presented to them, as if they are some kinda privileged information that only a chosen few get to know. It makes them feel (falsely) superior to everyone else, even if only for a few minutes, and that can be a powerful thing if you suffer from low self esteem like the vast majority of these nut-bars do.

Do you know what an interglacial cycle is, Einstein?

Absolutely nothing to do with this thread.

Are you saying that glacial cycles have nothing to do with climate?

 

[Crepitus]

We will never convince the deniers. Giant world wide conspiracy theories are fun and exciting to think about. Slowly changing climates, where the action happens over years or even decades, just can't compete with that for entertainment value.
Then there is the feeling of belonging these socially handicapped tRumpkins get from high-fiving each other every time they think they've scored some sort of point. For instance the 2 dozen or so threads that were started about the polar vortex disruptions last week.

And finally there's the way these things are presented to them, as if they are some kinda privileged information that only a chosen few get to know. It makes them feel (falsely) superior to everyone else, even if only for a few minutes, and that can be a powerful thing if you suffer from low self esteem like the vast majority of these nut-bars do.

Do you know what an interglacial cycle is, Einstein?

Absolutely nothing to do with this thread.

Are you saying that glacial cycles have nothing to do with climate?

You're off topic.

 

[ding]

We will never convince the deniers. Giant world wide conspiracy theories are fun and exciting to think about. Slowly changing climates, where the action happens over years or even decades, just can't compete with that for entertainment value.
Then there is the feeling of belonging these socially handicapped tRumpkins get from high-fiving each other every time they think they've scored some sort of point. For instance the 2 dozen or so threads that were started about the polar vortex disruptions last week.

And finally there's the way these things are presented to them, as if they are some kinda privileged information that only a chosen few get to know. It makes them feel (falsely) superior to everyone else, even if only for a few minutes, and that can be a powerful thing if you suffer from low self esteem like the vast majority of these nut-bars do.

Do you know what an interglacial cycle is, Einstein?

Absolutely nothing to do with this thread.

Are you saying that glacial cycles have nothing to do with climate?

You're off topic.

Natural causes of warming are not off topic in a thread about climate deniers.

In fact, you are literally proving that YOU are a climate denier by denying known naturally caused climate change events.

 

[Crepitus]

We will never convince the deniers. Giant world wide conspiracy theories are fun and exciting to think about. Slowly changing climates, where the action happens over years or even decades, just can't compete with that for entertainment value.
Then there is the feeling of belonging these socially handicapped tRumpkins get from high-fiving each other every time they think they've scored some sort of point. For instance the 2 dozen or so threads that were started about the polar vortex disruptions last week.

And finally there's the way these things are presented to them, as if they are some kinda privileged information that only a chosen few get to know. It makes them feel (falsely) superior to everyone else, even if only for a few minutes, and that can be a powerful thing if you suffer from low self esteem like the vast majority of these nut-bars do.

Do you know what an interglacial cycle is, Einstein?

Absolutely nothing to do with this thread.

Are you saying that glacial cycles have nothing to do with climate?

You're off topic.

Natural causes of warming are not off topic in a thread about climate deniers.

In fact, you are literally proving that YOU are a climate denier by denying known naturally caused climate change events.

That's some twisted reasoning there. The topic is you, the denier. Not the climate. That is no longer up for debate.

 

[ding]

Do you know what an interglacial cycle is, Einstein?

Absolutely nothing to do with this thread.

Are you saying that glacial cycles have nothing to do with climate?

You're off topic.

Natural causes of warming are not off topic in a thread about climate deniers.

In fact, you are literally proving that YOU are a climate denier by denying known naturally caused climate change events.

That's some twisted reasoning there. The topic is you, the denier. Not the climate. That is no longer up for debate.

Science is always up for debate. Science is never settled. YOU sound like a science denier.

And yes, the debate is about climate and you have just proven yourself a denier of natural causes of climate change. How on earth did earth’s climate ever change before man got here.

 

[Crick]

Lots of ways. But those aren't what's about to fuck the world.

 

[Pilot1]

Nobody can tell me how they can tell the difference between Natural Climate Change, and Man Made Climate Change. So how am I a denier, if they deny that they CAN'T TELL THE DIFFERENCE?

 

[Crick]

Almost every molecule of atmospheric CO2 above that present at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution can be shown to have originated from the combustion of fossil fuel. Thus all warming that has resulted from that increase is man made. Simple enough?

 

[Crepitus]

Absolutely nothing to do with this thread.

Are you saying that glacial cycles have nothing to do with climate?

You're off topic.

Natural causes of warming are not off topic in a thread about climate deniers.

In fact, you are literally proving that YOU are a climate denier by denying known naturally caused climate change events.

That's some twisted reasoning there. The topic is you, the denier. Not the climate. That is no longer up for debate.

Science is always up for debate. Science is never settled. YOU sound like a science denier.

And yes, the debate is about climate and you have just proven yourself a denier of natural causes of climate change. How on earth did earth’s climate ever change before man got here.

Nope.

Discuss the topic, climate deniers and their gullibility, or go to one of the 15 or so thread started during the cold snap last week.

 

[ding]

Are you saying that glacial cycles have nothing to do with climate?

You're off topic.

Natural causes of warming are not off topic in a thread about climate deniers.

In fact, you are literally proving that YOU are a climate denier by denying known naturally caused climate change events.

That's some twisted reasoning there. The topic is you, the denier. Not the climate. That is no longer up for debate.

Science is always up for debate. Science is never settled. YOU sound like a science denier.

And yes, the debate is about climate and you have just proven yourself a denier of natural causes of climate change. How on earth did earth’s climate ever change before man got here.

Nope.

Discuss the topic, climate deniers and their gullibility, or go to one of the 15 or so thread started during the cold snap last week.

The only climate denier I see here is you. You deny natural causes for climate change.

 

[Pilot1]

Almost every molecule of atmospheric CO2 above that present at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution can be shown to have originated from the combustion of fossil fuel. Thus all warming that has resulted from that increase is man made. Simple enough?

We know the climate changes naturally, and drastically all the time. What makes you think that isn't happening now? How can you tell the difference between natural climate change and what if any is caused my man?

 

[Crepitus]

You're off topic.

Natural causes of warming are not off topic in a thread about climate deniers.

In fact, you are literally proving that YOU are a climate denier by denying known naturally caused climate change events.

That's some twisted reasoning there. The topic is you, the denier. Not the climate. That is no longer up for debate.

Science is always up for debate. Science is never settled. YOU sound like a science denier.

And yes, the debate is about climate and you have just proven yourself a denier of natural causes of climate change. How on earth did earth’s climate ever change before man got here.

Nope.

Discuss the topic, climate deniers and their gullibility, or go to one of the 15 or so thread started during the cold snap last week.

The only climate denier I see here is you. You deny natural causes for climate change.

Lol, please quote me denying the canned natural causes of climate change as well.

You can't, because I haven't.

You are the denier. You are a tool of the oil and coal industry, a patsy for every polluter who doesn't want to stop because it will affect his bottom line, and the murderer of your own children and grandchildren.

You and your kind are worse than useless, you are an actual drag on society, working to prevent actions necessary to save our planet.

 

[ding]

Natural causes of warming are not off topic in a thread about climate deniers.

In fact, you are literally proving that YOU are a climate denier by denying known naturally caused climate change events.

That's some twisted reasoning there. The topic is you, the denier. Not the climate. That is no longer up for debate.

Science is always up for debate. Science is never settled. YOU sound like a science denier.

And yes, the debate is about climate and you have just proven yourself a denier of natural causes of climate change. How on earth did earth’s climate ever change before man got here.

Nope.

Discuss the topic, climate deniers and their gullibility, or go to one of the 15 or so thread started during the cold snap last week.

The only climate denier I see here is you. You deny natural causes for climate change.

Lol, please quote me denying the canned natural causes of climate change as well.

You can't, because I haven't.

You are the denier. You are a tool of the oil and coal industry, a patsy for every polluter who doesn't want to stop because it will affect his bottom line, and the murderer of your own children and grandchildren.

You and your kind are worse than useless, you are an actual drag on society, working to prevent actions necessary to save our planet.

Let’s test that. How much of the warming over the last 200 years is attributable to natural causes?