dude, get lost.

Why exactly is it beneficial? You say that it “seems” beneficial. Perhaps it is not. — praxis

Place Richard Dawkins and some Muslim on an island, come back in a week to see who's head was cut off.

Quite obsessed with that issue, aren’t you. As I said before, I’m not interested in your transphobia. — Xtrix

So now biology is called transphopbia? Talk about science denial. :D

Bro, if you want to be in a doomsday cult, that's up to you. It's not like I am interested in digging up 30 year or Mann or Gore videos to prove something.

Climate change is a fact, not a “theory” (a term you don’t understand).

There’s a mountain of evidence that supports the idea that the rate of change is outside natural variability. The spike in global average temperature is the result of the industrial Revolution — burning fossil fuels, increasing deforestation through agricultural practices, etc.

There’s a thing called the Internet where you can LEARN about this stuff.

Or continue on being a buffoon. Works either way for me. — Xtrix

Seems you been learning too much stuff that's not very accurate. Some even manage to learn that men can turn into women by wishing so, on the internet. :D

Since 1992, the global sea level has risen on average 2.9 millimeters a year. That’s a total of 78.3 millimeters, according to NOAA.

Penn State University meteorologist Michael Mann argued that we underestimated the rate of ice sheet collapse, which has "implications for future sea-level rise."

There was a video of this Mann guy talking in front of congress(?), promising Washington DC going underwater in the near future. Somehow it got dialed down to less than 8cm. :D

And predictions have been spot on. Despite those who repeat denial propaganda want to claim.

https://amp.onlineathens.com/amp/2014160007 — Xtrix

Ask and astrologer if his predictions are accurate and I have no doubt he will show you a few that actually came true. If you want a scientific approach, look for those that failed.

One surefire way of convincing us that there's truth in these climate change claims is to make a prediction and see if it comes true. Einstein did it with his theory of relativity - remember the solar eclipse of 1919. — Agent Smith

Yeap. And so far all the "we have 3 years left!" predictions pretty much have failed.

Quantum mechanics…climate change…electromagnetism…all on par with horoscopes and unicorns. — Xtrix

The thing you don't want to grasp here is the ability to verify a theory in an experiment.

If instead of fucking up the planet they had prayed, this would be the case indeed! :grin:
Anyone denying the unbalanced, irreversible, definitive, relentless imprint on nature caused by man is in denial. — Haglund

Aren't men also part of the same nature?

Yes. If man wouldn't have fucked up the atmosphere, there would have been less deaths. Because of the fires and floods it created wouldn't have happened then. — Haglund

sounds as unreasonable as "if people would have prayed more to God, there would have been less deaths." :D

You mean to say all this climate emergency hullabaloo is much ado about nothing? — Agent Smith

Yes.
Journalists are getting clicks on scary titles. Politicians get votes from scared people. Green energy shills are getting government payouts. Celebrities get to fly around in private jets, telling people how they should live. Even Austin the weirdo, who lives in his mom's basement, can walk around with a placard and feel like he is saving the earth.

And the number of deaths would be lower without temperature increase by man. — Haglund

So in the graph we already see a sharp decline in death, yet without a 1 degree temp increase the decline would be even sharper? :grin: so, unfalsifiable.

climate change, if a scientific hypothesis, can't be, for that very fact, the only game in town. Are there other hypotheses that are...well...inelegant, too complex, etc.? — Agent Smith

How's about "climate is always changing and a 1 degree increase is positive, yet so minuscule that there's really nothing to talk about".

It's not a theory. There are just more fires and floods everywhere. For a fact. And you would expect management to have improved. — Haglund

And how do you know it is caused by a 1 degree temp. increase? If we measure it in the number of death, the picture is not so bleak.

Chaotic effects. Forrest fires and floods happen quite regularly lately. — Haglund

War! Pestilence! Famine! Death! and also locusts everywhere! I mean it is a doomsday cult prophecy, not a credible scientific theory. What if forest fires are caused by its mismanagement?

There is no fluctuation we induce. We induce a permanent increase (in short time) without fluctuating back. That's not natural. Not normal. — Haglund

ok, but the question still is whether it is a small pleasantry or a global catastrophe. I don't see any tangible evidence to suggest a catastrophe.

The temperature change induced by man is short term and lasting. There is no return to normal. — Haglund

What is normal? I mean the idea that if temperature fluctuates tens of degrees withing a few years is not a problem, if the same happens over thousands of years it's ok, too. Yet if a 10 times smaller fluctuation happens within decades - global catastrophe! It does not sound very logical to me, nor is it testable in an experiment. Moreover, those "experts" are known to be wrong / grossly exaggerating many times before, so seems like quackery.

's the short time in which it happens that matters. — Haglund

Notice how you are moving the goalposts. Ok, temperature changes some 10 degrees every day/night cycle. It changes 50 degrees during the year. Having a 20 degree difference between average temperatures withing two sequential years is not unusual. Yet having a 1 degree increase in 30 years is the end of the world? Does that sound reasonable?

And in comparison with human impact on nature, even this looks pale and bleak. — Haglund

See goalpost moved again. What exactly is this impact? Sahara is greening because of the release of trapped co2 by human. In cities situation is certainly way better than it was 150 years ago, when everything was covered with soot.

I think you just hate people as such and are trying to make up reasons for why we are bad.

Shame you never had the balls to tell your dad to fuck off. You might have turned out a man with balls instead of a bully asshole crapping on kids. — Sir2u

Actually my parents raised me in a very hands-off way, so you are projecting here. ;)

Yeah…great job. So I guess that settles it! You’ve singlehandedly refuted all of climate science! Somehow they missed your extraordinary insight! Good work! — Xtrix

You are looking at them like some God-send enlightened gurus, I see them just as another breed of quacks, similar to astrologers, homeopath, faith healers, taro card readers etc.

I don't need to read every book on horoscopes to know it is quackery.

For anyone serious about learning about sea level rise:
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level — Xtrix

Aha, so it went from 1.4mm to 3.6mm , therefor in one case Marseille would be under water in 25k years, but in the other in just 10k years. Yeap, that a real emergency! :D

Let's also do Marseille, France. 1mm per year, elevation 36m. Fully gone in just 36.000 years! OMG!

Now let's do San Francisco:



On average 1.75mm per year. I don't see any sharp increases, but ok, let's double that for the sake of the argument. So 3.5mm per year, elevation of SF is 16m , so at this rate it will still take like 4.5K years.

Sea level has risen, and extreme weather events happen every year — Xtrix

I just checked randomly the levels at KeyWest, FL. Here is the graph, I can not see any sharp increase in it, can you?
The current rate it about 2.5mm per year. The highest point of KeyWest is 5.5m , so if my math is right, it will take just 2200 years for them to go under water.



Can you provide me with a counter example?

Actually, it has. Sea level has risen, and extreme weather events happen every year — breaking records. Not to mention average global temperatures are the hottest year after year. But I know that means nothing for those who don’t want to believe it. — Xtrix

How much has it risen? Is some city underwater? What extreme events has it caused? I can say the same way, if you want to see climate change, you will find it everywhere and than use it as a confirmation.

That’s because you don’t have a clue about the Earth’s climate.
Nevermind. It sounds unreasonable to you, so I guess that settles it. What are all those stupid scientists who’ve dedicated their entire lives to understanding the earth talking about? Idiots! — Xtrix

So you blindly trust some group of people, who claim to know something you can't verify? Why not trust priests or imams or UFO hunters?

Or you can talk to a climatologist, and they’ll explain it to you. — Xtrix

In a same way you can talk to a liberal gender studies major and xzer will kindly explain you that there are 128 genders, yet it still does not make it reasonable or trustworthy.

Problem is that people always try to twist the reality to fit their narrative and than try to give it credibility by calling it science. Even in such obvious un-scientific concepts a men turning into women by wishing for it to be so.

It all boils down to the fact that the idea of a minuscule ~1 degree warming causing some global catastrophe does not sound reasonable.

We have been promised sea levels raising, extreme weather events, etc. for decades, yet none of that has materialized. Is any nation underwater, as promised from the UN tribune 20 years ago?

If nothing happens in 5 years, 10 or 20 , when will you finally say "ok, guess it was a bit exaggerated"?

You might read about the scientific method ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method ), about Popper’s falsifiability criteria, etc.

Capitalism has certainly fucked some things up, like putting sugars and seed oils into food. But blaming all your troubles on it and assuming communism would do better might not be a reasonable way to go.

It is science. Your own ramblings notwithstanding. Feel free to take your Republican talking points elsewhere.

“Optimal CO2 level.” :lol: — Xtrix

If it is science, can you verify or falsify it? can you explain how the scientific method was applied to come to this conclusion?

do you have a problem with republicans?

Would I agree with the random musings of an Internet troll with no understanding whatever of climatology? That’s an easy “no.” — Xtrix

You are welcome to believe whatever religion / cult / ideology you want, just be honest with yourself and don't call it science. ;)

Would you agree that not knowing what is the optimal temperature or what is the optimal co2 level all other speculations are futile. You just took as a dogma that "bad weather is always your fault and the solution to it is adopting global communism by Monday". Again, it's delusional activism, not science. ;)

Just let the little fuckers wear what ever they want even if it is a pink shirt. — Sir2u

Somehow reading this my imagination draws a picture of 7 year old you being yelled at by your father not to wear a pink shirt. :grin: I think it is time for you to forgive him and move on with your life.

Have fun. In my opinion - both extremes - force the kids to do things they hate or offer no guidance whatsoever - are equally unproductive.
Parents are wiser, they accumulated some knowledge about how life works, and they should give it to their children in an appropriate way.

So, as someone already asked, if you have seen so much of this indoctrination why are you not gay?
Oh, I suppose it is because you are too smart to fall for the lies. — Sir2u

I was not indoctrinated into this lunacy, but seeing lefties react to the Florida bill as a vampire to sunlight, it is better to be cautious of their attempts. ;)

So that gives you the right to tell your boys that the have to act like men and cannot wear pink shirts or dance ballet! — Sir2u

Yes.

Where do you think the parents got the ideas from? Most parents are not really happy bout their kids being "different".
Could it be that the kids come up with the ideas?
Could it be that these concepts about gender have always been there and no one has ever talked about them, sort of like hiding in a closet type of thing? — Sir2u

I'd say it seems that some teachers, social media, even Disney are more than happy to indoctrinate children into this ideology.

But that still does not make it right for you to push your ideas down your kid's throats. Let them figure out what they want to be and how they want to live their lives. Just because you were force to each a lot of shit does not mean it is OK for you to do the same to them. — Sir2u

I actually was raised in a very hands-off way, which I believe was a mistake.
I am not saying that parents would force their unfulfilled dreams onto their kids, especially if the kids hate it. Yet in the same time kids don't have the mental capacity to figure everything out on their own, so their parents experience might come handy.

I'd rather feel sorry for kids, whos parents are thinking up new ideas about gender fludity and such. :)

Thinking about it, it seems I am a lesbian. Well, i mean i like women.

How's about France, Space having higher? Germany just a bit lower. Poland through the roof...
As for Africa, old and frail people probably already died of other diseases.

I think your fear of traditional gender roles is based in your understanding that you fall way short of them, so you reject them, portraying your own wimpiness as progress, not degeneration which it really is.

don't confuse fear with disguast ;)

Nietzsche is generally considered the precursor of postmodern philosophy, the basis of which are: Antichrist (rejection of all attachment to God) and a call for a re-evaluation of all values, a negation of conventional metaphysics, an insistence on perspectivism, a rejection of Enlightenment rationality and the advocation of will to power.

Perhaps you’re more postmodern than you think, or not. :lol: — praxis

You might want to re-read Nietzsche. ;) Postmodernists go like "let's screw over the whole society, so that some hypothetical transvestite doesn't feel excluded", Nietzsche more like "screw the slaves, focus on developing the master morality".