Anthropogenic Negative Climate Change (ANCC)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sid Belzberg
    replied
    Originally posted by Bob Gillanders View Post

    Well, thank you for the invitation, but I will pass. I invite Pargat to take my spot.

    It was maybe 10-15 years ago, I spent a very unhealthy amount of time researching the topic of climate change (or global warming as it was known then). There was a vast amount of youtube videos and websites on the topic, arguing both sides. I approached it with an open mind, listening closely to both sides. Trying to understand as best I could the science and all the data presented. I am no scientist, so it took some time. But eventually I concluded global warming was real in spite of all the noise presented by those denying it.

    When I was a small boy, I remember snow arriving in December and remaining until it melted in April. There would occasionally be a warm spell where most of the snow melted, but quickly replaced with new snow within a week. But for the most part, during the months of January to March the ground had continuously covered with snow. Nowadays, it is unusual if we get more than a week or two of snow all winter.

    For me the debate is over. Climate change is real. Deniers want to drag out the debate to avoid doing anything about it.

    We need to move on and debate what to do.
    "Throughout History, the majority is always wrong, & therefore critical & original thought is the gateway that separates one from the majority."

    Screen Shot 2022-08-10 at 9.26.52 AM.png

    Leave a comment:


  • Dilip Panjwani
    replied
    Originally posted by Bob Gillanders View Post

    Well, thank you for the invitation, but I will pass. I invite Pargat to take my spot.

    It was maybe 10-15 years ago, I spent a very unhealthy amount of time researching the topic of climate change (or global warming as it was known then). There was a vast amount of youtube videos and websites on the topic, arguing both sides. I approached it with an open mind, listening closely to both sides. Trying to understand as best I could the science and all the data presented. I am no scientist, so it took some time. But eventually I concluded global warming was real in spite of all the noise presented by those denying it.

    When I was a small boy, I remember snow arriving in December and remaining until it melted in April. There would occasionally be a warm spell where most of the snow melted, but quickly replaced with new snow within a week. But for the most part, during the months of January to March the ground had continuously covered with snow. Nowadays, it is unusual if we get more than a week or two of snow all winter.

    For me the debate is over. Climate change is real. Deniers want to drag out the debate so as to avoid doing anything about it.

    We need to move on and debate what to do.
    You are missing the point, Bob G.
    Everybody knows that Climate keeps on changing. The question up for debate is: How much of a threat it is, and should we, can we and if so, what should we be doing about it?

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Gillanders
    replied
    Originally posted by Dilip Panjwani View Post

    Bob A and Bob G,
    We have an excellent opportunity for a sincere and science-based debate here on chesstalk between you guys and Sid. Want to take up the challenge? Pargat could set up the rules of the debate, as that would help.
    D
    Well, thank you for the invitation, but I will pass. I invite Pargat to take my spot.

    It was maybe 10-15 years ago, I spent a very unhealthy amount of time researching the topic of climate change (or global warming as it was known then). There was a vast amount of youtube videos and websites on the topic, arguing both sides. I approached it with an open mind, listening closely to both sides. Trying to understand as best I could the science and all the data presented. I am no scientist, so it took some time. But eventually I concluded global warming was real in spite of all the noise presented by those denying it.

    When I was a small boy, I remember snow arriving in December and remaining until it melted in April. There would occasionally be a warm spell where most of the snow melted, but quickly replaced with new snow within a week. But for the most part, during the months of January to March the ground had continuously covered with snow. Nowadays, it is unusual if we get more than a week or two of snow all winter.

    For me the debate is over. Climate change is real. Deniers want to drag out the debate so as to avoid doing anything about it.

    We need to move on and debate what to do.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dilip Panjwani
    replied
    Originally posted by Sid Belzberg View Post
    Bob, 25 facts why you are dead wrong and, in fact these half-baked ideas iare endangering life on this planet with "pal-reviewed" Pseudoscience

    https://co2coalition.org/facts/


    Fact #1
    CO2140-million-year trend of dangerously decreasing CO2.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #2
    CO2 vs Temperature CO2The warming effect of each molecule of CO2 declines as its concentration increases

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #3
    Food Security CO2First and foremost, CO2 is plant food.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #4
    CO2In the last four glacial advances, the CO2 level was dangerously low.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #5
    CO2CO2 emissions began accelerating in the mid-20th century


    Learn More
    Fact #6
    CO2Our current geologic period (Quaternary) has the lowest average CO2 levels in the last 600 million years

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #6
    Food SecurityCO2 increase is enhancing corn production… a lot

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #7
    CO2Current CO2 levels are near record lows. We are CO2 impoverished.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #8
    CO2More CO2 means more plant growth.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #9
    Food Security CO2More CO2 helps to feed more people worldwide.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #10
    Temperature CO2 vs TemperatureModern warming began more than 300 years ago…

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #11
    TemperatureMelting glaciers confirm modern warming predated increases of CO2

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #12
    TemperatureRising sea levels confirm modern warming predated increases of CO2

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #13
    TemperatureTemperatures changed dramatically during the past 10,000 years. It wasn’t us.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #14
    TemperatureInterglacials usually last 10,000 – 15,000 years. Ours is 11,000 years old.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #15
    TemperatureThe last interglacial was 8°C (14°F) warmer than today. The polar bears survived. Greenland didn’t melt.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #16
    TemperatureThe current warming trend is neither unusual nor unprecedented (Part 1).

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #17
    TemperatureThe current warming trend is neither unusual nor unprecedented (Part 2).

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #18
    TemperatureEarth’s orbit and tilt drive glacial-interglacial changes.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #19
    TemperatureWe are living in one of the coldest periods in all of Earth’s history.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #20
    TemperatureFor most of Earth’s history, it was about 10°C (18°F) warmer than today.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #21
    TemperatureIPCC models have overstated warming up to three times too much.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #22
    TemperatureFor human advancement, warmer is better than colder.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #24
    TemperatureAn “ideal” temperature is not that of 150 years ago

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #25
    Food SecurityMore CO2 means moister soil.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Bob A and Bob G,
    We have an excellent opportunity for a sincere and science-based debate here on chesstalk between you guys and Sid. Want to take up the challenge? Pargat could set up the rules of the debate, as that would help.
    D

    Leave a comment:


  • Sid Belzberg
    replied
    Bob, 25 facts why you are dead wrong and, in fact these half-baked ideas iare endangering life on this planet with "pal-reviewed" Pseudoscience

    https://co2coalition.org/facts/


    Fact #1
    CO2140-million-year trend of dangerously decreasing CO2.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #2
    CO2 vs Temperature CO2The warming effect of each molecule of CO2 declines as its concentration increases

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #3
    Food Security CO2First and foremost, CO2 is plant food.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #4
    CO2In the last four glacial advances, the CO2 level was dangerously low.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #5
    CO2CO2 emissions began accelerating in the mid-20th century


    Learn More
    Fact #6
    CO2Our current geologic period (Quaternary) has the lowest average CO2 levels in the last 600 million years

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #6
    Food SecurityCO2 increase is enhancing corn production… a lot

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #7
    CO2Current CO2 levels are near record lows. We are CO2 impoverished.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #8
    CO2More CO2 means more plant growth.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #9
    Food Security CO2More CO2 helps to feed more people worldwide.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #10
    Temperature CO2 vs TemperatureModern warming began more than 300 years ago…

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #11
    TemperatureMelting glaciers confirm modern warming predated increases of CO2

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #12
    TemperatureRising sea levels confirm modern warming predated increases of CO2

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #13
    TemperatureTemperatures changed dramatically during the past 10,000 years. It wasn’t us.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #14
    TemperatureInterglacials usually last 10,000 – 15,000 years. Ours is 11,000 years old.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #15
    TemperatureThe last interglacial was 8°C (14°F) warmer than today. The polar bears survived. Greenland didn’t melt.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #16
    TemperatureThe current warming trend is neither unusual nor unprecedented (Part 1).

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #17
    TemperatureThe current warming trend is neither unusual nor unprecedented (Part 2).

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #18
    TemperatureEarth’s orbit and tilt drive glacial-interglacial changes.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #19
    TemperatureWe are living in one of the coldest periods in all of Earth’s history.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #20
    TemperatureFor most of Earth’s history, it was about 10°C (18°F) warmer than today.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #21
    TemperatureIPCC models have overstated warming up to three times too much.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #22
    TemperatureFor human advancement, warmer is better than colder.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #24
    TemperatureAn “ideal” temperature is not that of 150 years ago

    Download this Resource
    Learn More
    Fact #25
    Food SecurityMore CO2 means moister soil.

    Download this Resource
    Learn More

    Leave a comment:


  • Sid Belzberg
    replied
    http://www.sciencebits.com/IceCoreTruth/
    "The main evidence proving that CO2 does not control the climate, but at most can play a second fiddle by just amplifying the variations already present, is that of lags. In all cases where there is a good enough resolution, one finds that the CO2 lags behind the temperature by typically several hundred to a thousand years. Namely, the basic climate driver which controls the temperature cannot be that of CO2. That driver, whatever it is, affects the climate equilibrium, and the temperature changes accordingly. Once the oceans adjust (on time scale of decades to centuries), the CO2 equilibrium changes as well. The changed CO2 can further affect the temperature, but the CO2 / temperature correlation cannot be used to say almost anything about the strength of this link. Note that I write "almost anything", because it turns out that the CO2 temperature correlation can be used to say at least one thing about the temperature sensitivity to CO2 variations, as can be seen in the box below."




    Leave a comment:


  • Sid Belzberg
    replied
    Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
    Both Happer and Lindzen have long held out against the current demonisation of atmospheric CO2, pointing out that the current 415 parts per million (ppm) is near a record low and not dangerously high. They note that 600 million years of CO2 and temperature data “contradict the theory that high levels of CO2 will cause catastrophic global warming”. Omitting unfavourable data is an egregious violation of scientific method. Facts omitted by those who argue there is a climate emergency include that CO2 levels were over 1,000 ppm for hundreds of millions of years and have been as high as over 7,000 ppm; CO2 has been declining for 180 million years from about 2,800 ppm to today’s low; and today’s low is not far above the minimum level when plants die of CO2 starvation, leading to all other life forms perishing for lack of food.

    Finally, the authors note that the logarithmic influence of CO2 means its contribution to global warming is “heavily saturated”. The scientists calculate that a doubling of current CO2 levels would only reduce the heat escaping to space by about 1.1%. This suggests warming of around 1°C or less. The saturation hypothesis explains, they say, the disconnect between CO2 and temperature observed over 600 million years.

    Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
    https://dailysceptic.org/2022/07/11/...utright-lying/

    Leave a comment:


  • Sid Belzberg
    replied
    Screen Shot 2022-08-10 at 6.58.20 AM.png

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Armstrong
    replied
    Ozone Hole.jpg

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Armstrong
    replied
    Pyrrhic Victory.jpg

    Leave a comment:


  • Pargat Perrer
    replied
    Originally posted by Pargat Perrer View Post

    What I'd like to see is a formal debate between the best scientists who say rising CO2 isn't a problem and the best scientists who say it is. The whole world should tune into that debate and make up their minds, and the majority can decide which way we go: limiting CO2 or not limiting it.

    Maybe you could organize such a debate, Sid?


    Originally posted by Bob Gillanders View Post

    That debate is over. The deniers love to pretend climate change is still an open question so they can delay any action forever. But sure, have a debate if you must, but realize the video Sid posted "climate change is a hoax" is at least 10 years old. If you haven't seen it before, you might get the impression that the scientific community is split on climate change, it isn't. It a very well produced piece of propaganda, but thats all it is. We have 50 years of data to prove climate change, progressing just as the science predicted. Sure, along the way, models gave different predictions, results differed from forecasts, but that is the nature of predictive models. You update them as new data is available, predictions change over time as we learn more and assumptions are updated. The general trend of the predictions, more greenhouse gases equates to higher global temperatures have been demonstrated conclusively. If a further debate will settle the matter amongst the public, then go ahead.
    Bob, I don't think you can just tell everyone the debate is over and expect them to give up their lifestyle, maybe even their careers, based on that. They need to be SHOWN, and I think such a debate is the best way to show them, if indeed the scientists who are on the side of climate change being caused by CO2 and methane are correct AND CAN PROVE IT IN A DEBATE.

    If they can't prove it in the debate, or if such a debate is not held, then just hoping the world will change is not a plan. Hope is not a strategy.

    People will follow the path of least resistance. It is, and always has been, human nature.




    Originally posted by Bob Gillanders View Post

    Climate change is here. Extreme weather events are here. How bad will it get before we take action? That is the debate we should be having.
    That would be part of what the pro-anthropogenic climate change scientists WOULD demonstrate (I would expect) at the debate I am proposing.

    You say Sid's video is 10 years old, I'm not arguing it but people are still watching it and saying, "WTF, I am being hoodwinked by the media." So to counteract that, someone MUST DO THE EDUCATING.

    To me, the best education would be this debate I propose with the pro-ACC scientists winning hands down with actual proof of just what you said, HOW BAD ITS GOING TO GET.

    In that 10-year old vide, they show that Earth has undergone previous warming cycles with temps even higher, much higher, than we are seeing now. The fact that the video is 10 years old doesn't negate this piece of information. If the Earth in fact did get much warmer in the medieval time period, and humans are still here now, then what is the fuss all about? Could we be overreacting?

    Can we in fact "weather" this period of climate change? (Sorry for the pun).

    To anyone who wants to change world behavior in such an extreme way, you simply MUST make it real and you must do that for everyone, not just the paltry few who have lost homes to wildfires or hurricanes or floods. That isn't enough people.

    A good analogy is what the anti-tobacco industry did. They showed the lungs of lifelong smokers, and that was graphic proof. Still, many smokers just carried on, ready to die coughing. So you see what your up against?

    You will not change humanity, they will simply not listen to warnings. SOME will but not enough by a long shot, and that's the best you can manage. I know Bob you are more optimistic than that, good for you, not going to say you should change, but be ready for some big disappointments.




    Leave a comment:


  • Sid Belzberg
    replied
    Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
    Hi Sid:

    I don't believe the vaccine (4 doses) had anything to do with my heart.

    The Valve implant can cause the natural Aortic valve to expand. The conduit to the heart runs contiguous to the natural valve. If the valve (expanded) presses on the conduit, the regular beating of the heart can be altered, thus requiring a pacemaker.........my heart did not stop for 10 seconds due to spikes on vaccines.

    This is the cardiologist explanation at what is considered the 4th best cardiac unit in the world.

    ~ Bob A (T-S/P)
    Good, I hope it was not your cardiologist’s idea to
    take all four shots.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Armstrong
    replied
    Hi Sid:

    I don't believe the vaccine (4 doses) had anything to do with my heart.

    The Valve implant can cause the natural Aortic valve to expand. The conduit to the heart runs contiguous to the natural valve. If the valve (expanded) presses on the conduit, the regular beating of the heart can be altered, thus requiring a pacemaker.........my heart did not stop for 10 seconds due to spikes on vaccines.

    This is the cardiologist explanation at what is considered the 4th best cardiac unit in the world.

    ~ Bob A (T-S/P)

    Leave a comment:


  • Sid Belzberg
    replied
    Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
    Bob H & Sid:

    Since the two of you will be organizing this global "Non-Porous Atmospheric Canopy" debate, I'd suggest that you include methane gas, since it is substantially more important than even CO2, as I understand the problem.


    Thanks........waiting breathlessly.........

    ~ Bob A (T-S/P)
    Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
    Thanks........waiting breathlessly.........
    Methane issue was already addressed in the documentary I posted. You are unwittingly carrying out a genocidal agenda of the WEF and I no longer have time for you or Bob G. You are scientifically too ignorant and brainwashed to recognize reality. Had you taken the time to read my posts on jabs and myocarditis going back over a year you might have avoided the heart issue you experienced.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sid Belzberg
    replied
    Originally posted by Bob Gillanders View Post

    Bob H ? Certainly you don't mean me!

    I consider the debate is over. The science is settled.

    In fact the whole world came together and passed the Paris agreement in 2016.
    Then along came idiot Trump and tore it up.






    "The science is settled" Why because some WEF corrupted scientists, bureaucrats and politicians say so? Science is NEVER settled! Show me science where sunspot activity no longer correlates with temp on the earth. I will save you the suspense you won't!

    Exaclty this type of bullshit that killed 10,000,000 people in the last 2.5 years from being denied proven treatment and coerced into taking death shots. You do not know the first thing about science. Why do you think Sri Lanka's climate change fear pron fanatic govt was over thrown? They did not appreciate the food supply disruptions resulting in their starvation over the climate change scam.
    The same fate awaits the Netherlands with the farmer's revolution. https://www.rebelnews.com/tags/farmer_rebellion

    How long do you think people with put up with this anywhere???? Listen to this conversation and learn. You are on the wrong side of history!
    https://thevigilantfox.substack.com/...ed-myocarditis


    Leave a comment:

Working...
X