Anthropogenic Negative Climate Change (ANCC)

[Bob Gillanders]

COP 28 has shown that the urgency, and dire consequences of negative climate change, are not yet appreciated.

Not to mention the vested interests that will be damaged by quicker action, who are determinedly, at best, trying to slow the process down. They seek to wring as many final dollars out of their enterprises, before the gong strikes, as they can (No care about the damage to millions that will be caused.

Bob A (Anthropogenicist)

Thanks Bob A, well said.

I hope to live long enough to see the tide turn.

[Dilip Panjwani]

Thanks Bob A, well said.

I hope to live long enough to see the tide turn.

The tide is bound to turn, Bob G, with the 'activist' community getting bored of climate anxiety and getting hold of some other fad to cling to...

[Bob Armstrong]

It is one thing for the "Naturalists to say that this is part of a longer process in time, of eons, that man is not the main driver, and that it has been worse before. One might agree that, at least, this raises some rational argument.

But many "naturalists" do admit that at the moment, there are more people on the planet than last time, and that, indeed, the environment is slowly (Slower than the "anthropogenicists say) getting more hostile to the human species. So the second time around is going to cause a lot of people dislocation, as it did in earlier phases (Do I get the Naturalists right here?).

But it is entirely something else (Irrational argument) for "climate change deniers" to claim, in the face of world evidence of collateral damage to persons, that "nothing is going on"!

They may claim that what is going on has happened before (That is, it is not "unusual" in that sense). But to deny it is "unusual" for the people of the current time, right now, when we have never faced such hostile environmental changes for multi-centuries, is merely "wishful thinking". I expect that these people will be scrambling to adapt like everyone else who is a realist as the clock ticks closer to midnight..

What will be their explanation for their struggling to adapt, at that time?

Bob A

[Bob Gillanders]

What will be their explanation for their struggling to adapt, at that time?

No doubt they will blame it on others.

I am disappointed there is not more protestors at COP28, but it seems protesting has been banned. Mystery solved.
Anyway, it is pretty pointless arguing with Sid and Dilip about it. I am going to try again to avoid posting here. I have better things to do.

I certainly won't miss Dilip's insipid trolling. At least Sid posted with some passion.

Well, back to work Bob G. Lots of tournaments to process. CFC keeps growing.
I think I will try listening to some Taylor Swift while I work.

[Fred Harvey]

No doubt they will blame it on others.

I am disappointed there is not more protestors at COP28, but it seems protesting has been banned. Mystery solved.
Anyway, it is pretty pointless arguing with Sid and Dilip about it. I am going to try again to avoid posting here. I have better things to do.

I certainly won't miss Dilip's insipid trolling. At least Sid posted with some passion.

Well, back to work Bob G. Lots of tournaments to process. CFC keeps growing.
I think I will try listening to some Taylor Swift while I work.

Keep remembering.....in the land of the lunatics, you're probably king!

[Dilip Panjwani]

It is one thing for the "Naturalists to say that this is part of a longer process in time, of eons, that man is not the main driver, and that it has been worse before. One might agree that, at least, this raises some rational argument.

But many "naturalists" do admit that at the moment, there are more people on the planet than last time, and that, indeed, the environment is slowly (Slower than the "anthropogenicists say) getting more hostile to the human species. So the second time around is going to cause a lot of people dislocation, as it did in earlier phases (Do I get the Naturalists right here?).

But it is entirely something else (Irrational argument) for "climate change deniers" to claim, in the face of world evidence of collateral damage to persons, that "nothing is going on"!

They may claim that what is going on has happened before (That is, it is not "unusual" in that sense). But to deny it is "unusual" for the people of the current time, right now, when we have never faced such hostile environmental changes for multi-centuries, is merely "wishful thinking". I expect that these people will be scrambling to adapt like everyone else who is a realist as the clock ticks closer to midnight..

What will be their explanation for their struggling to adapt, at that time?

Bob A

Bob A,
Why do you keep on forgetting that the number of persons adversely affected by climate has fallen over the last few decades... and it is not because of efforts of the climate anxious activists, but because of common sense actions by people who just do their regular job instead of always protesting and making a mountain out of a molehill.

[Peter McKillop]

Bob A,
Why do you keep on forgetting that the number of persons adversely affected by climate has fallen over the last few decades... and it is not because of efforts of the climate anxious activists, but because of common sense actions by people who just do their regular job instead of always protesting and making a mountain out of a molehill.

After reading some of Syd Ballzborg's recent posts, I've concluded that deliberately misspelling the name of the person you're talking to is the latest mindless ChessTalk fad, so, greetings Dollop Pandawanda!!

Dollop, the part of your post that I 'bolded' is interesting. Do you have a link to an article, or the name of a book, that influenced your thinking on this point?

The rest of your post, in a very general way, makes sense too. One example, if people are so concerned about shutting down carbon emissions then why aren't competing, reliable energy sources being aggressively developed? Where are the nuclear power plants?

[Sid Belzberg]

After reading some of Syd Ballzborg's recent posts, I've concluded that deliberately misspelling the name of the person you're talking to is the latest mindless ChessTalk fad, so, greetings Dollop Pandawanda!!

Dollop, the part of your post that I 'bolded' is interesting. Do you have a link to an article, or the name of a book, that influenced your thinking on this point?

The rest of your post, in a very general way, makes sense too. One example, if people are so concerned about shutting down carbon emissions then why aren't competing, reliable energy sources being aggressively developed? Where are the nuclear power plants?

Peter, here is the paper I already posted that shows that increases in cold-related deaths went down by .51% while heat-related deaths went up by .21% for a net decrease in climate deaths between 2000-2019, as cold-related deaths account for 95% of climate-related deaths.
Why in hell is there so much worry about global warming when almost all of the climate deaths are from cold???? Obviously, because the climate anxious are being scammed just like the same naive group of fools was scammed during COVID.

The Climate Scam was invented by the WEF/UN/WHO to launder Tax Dollars to their Agenda, which embraces policies that obliterate the Environment. They blame Humans for their catastrophic results while using MSM to repeat their ‘Climate Crisis’ like a broken Goebbels Record Player.







Here is the paper

https://lens.monash.edu/@medicine-he...uman-mortality

[Dilip Panjwani]

After reading some of Syd Ballzborg's recent posts, I've concluded that deliberately misspelling the name of the person you're talking to is the latest mindless ChessTalk fad, so, greetings Dollop Pandawanda!!

Dollop, the part of your post that I 'bolded' is interesting. Do you have a link to an article, or the name of a book, that influenced your thinking on this point?

The rest of your post, in a very general way, makes sense too. One example, if people are so concerned about shutting down carbon emissions then why aren't competing, reliable energy sources being aggressively developed? Where are the nuclear power plants?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/climate...ng-11635973538

https://nypost.com/2022/04/30/deaths-in-climate-disasters-declined-99-from-a-century-ago/

[Sid Belzberg]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/climate...ng-11635973538

https://nypost.com/2022/04/30/deaths-in-climate-disasters-declined-99-from-a-century-ago/

Hi Dillip,
Here is the correct link for NY post article. The forum software posted the same link twice for you.
https://nypost.com/2022/04/30/deaths...a-century-ago/

[Dilip Panjwani]

Hi Dillip,
Here is the correct link for NY post article. The forum software posted the same link twice for you.
https://nypost.com/2022/04/30/deaths...a-century-ago/

Thanks, Sid.

[Dilip Panjwani]

Sid, your new independent group, Clintel is making some rather bold statements. Certainly in sync with the fossil fuel industry and the new COP28 President.
The trouble, as I see it, you are just wrong. We are indeed in a climate emergency. Not that the wolrd will end in 7 years or anything silly like that, but that the more we delay concrete action, the more difficult it will be to solve the problem. Admitting there is a problem and having a realistic plan to take corrective action is the solution.

While you may argue the alarmists were being too alarmist, the penduluum has now swung even further in the opposite direction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qz_X...=TopMovieClip

We'll see if 2024 is again another record breaking year.

Beijing shivers through coldest December on record (bbc.com)

{the heater seems to have been turned off temporarily, to allay some of your anxiety :-) ... Have a Truly Merry Christmas, Bob G! }

[Bob Armstrong]

Dilip doesn't know the difference between "weather" and "Climate".

Bob A

[Dilip Panjwani]

Dilip doesn't know the difference between "weather" and "Climate".

Bob A

I do, Bob. Your climate anxiety peaks when some place records the highest ever temperature; so let it be alleviated when some other place records the lowest ever temperature...
and do not imitate your co-marxist by using personal attacks, okay?

[Bob Armstrong]

My statement in my last post was not a personal attack.

It was a true objective fact statement, confirmed by the response.

Bob A