If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Video on Negative Climate Change (The Global Warming Problem)
The Naturalist Position - the powers that be are deliberately focusing on the wrong issues, and making false claims, in order to further their covert agenda of getting greater global control.
Post # 944 above presents evidence that Water Vapour is not the problem re global warming. Post # 945 intends to refute this position. What do CT'ers think?
Are there other points made in this particular video that "Anthropogenicists" would claim to be false?
~ Bob A (T-S/P)
P.S. Sid - In your post # 945, you say that your link refutes the Anthropogenicist's position that water vapour is irrelevant to the issue of the "cause" of global warming. But your link seems to go to a different point:
"The forcings due to changing concentrations of Earth’s five most important, naturally occur-ring greenhouse gases, H2O, CO2, O3, N2O and CH4as well as CF4and SF6 were evaluated."
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Friday, 11th November, 2022, 12:54 AM.
Video on Negative Climate Change (The Global Warming Problem)
The Naturalist Position - the powers that be are deliberately focusing on the wrong issues, and making false claims, in order to further their covert agenda of getting greater global control.
Post # 944 above presents evidence that Water Vapour is not the problem re global warming. Post # 945 intends to refute this position. What do CT'ers think?
Are there other points made in this particular video that "Anthropogenicists" would claim to be false?
~ Bob A (T-S/P)
P.S. Sid - In your post # 945, you say that your link refutes the Anthropogenicist's position that water vapour is irrelevant to the issue of the "cause" of global warming. But your link seems to go to a different point:
"The forcings due to changing concentrations of Earth’s five most important, naturally occur-ring greenhouse gases, H2O, CO2, O3, N2O and CH4as well as CF4and SF6 were evaluated."
Sigh
"The Impact of CO2, H2O and Other “Greenhouse Gases” on Equilibrium Earth Temperatures"
"This result strongly suggests that increasing levels of CO2 will not lead to significant changes in earth temperature and that increases in CH4 and N2O will have very little discernable impact." https://www.sciencepublishinggroup.c...os.20210502.12
NASA changes its positions on water vapor depending on which way the political orders change.
"Water Vapor Confirmed as Major Player in Climate Change"
Disclaimer: This material is being kept online for historical purposes.....this page may contain.....outdated information. Visit NASA.gov for current information.
Newest NASA Paper (22/2/8):
How Atmospheric Water Vapor Amplifies Earth's Greenhouse Effect
"Some people mistakenly believe water vapor is the main driver of Earth’s current warming. But increased water vapor doesn’t cause global warming. Instead, it’s a consequence of it. Increased water vapor in the atmosphere amplifies the warming caused by other greenhouse gases."
"Water vapor is literally individual molecules of H2O that are part of the collection of gases in the atmosphere. Varies greatly from place to place, and from time to time. It averages only about 0.4% of the atmosphere, but varies from as much as 4% in the humid tropics to near 0% in cold polar regions."
Disclaimer: This material is being kept online for historical purposes.....this page may contain.....outdated information. Visit NASA.gov for current information.
Newest NASA Paper (22/2/8):
How Atmospheric Water Vapor Amplifies Earth's Greenhouse Effect
"Some people mistakenly believe water vapor is the main driver of Earth’s current warming. But increased water vapor doesn’t cause global warming. Instead, it’s a consequence of it. Increased water vapor in the atmosphere amplifies the warming caused by other greenhouse gases."
"Water vapor is literally individual molecules of H2O that are part of the collection of gases in the atmosphere. Varies greatly from place to place, and from time to time. It averages only about 0.4% of the atmosphere, but varies from as much as 4% in the humid tropics to near 0% in cold polar regions."
Yes, of course, they put the disclaimer there exactly because highly politicized NASA does "waffle". the science and data did not change. If anything, recent research shows water vapor clouds have a cooling effect as they saturate the radiation from CO2 and put a cap on how much additional radiation Co2 causes.when more and more CO2 is emitted.
"They are generally covered with cumulus and thunderstorm clouds. These act as a 100% absorber of upwelling radiation … so any additional CO2 will make little difference. In addition, temperatures in these areas are up near the maximum, so they won’t warm much from increased greenhouse or solar radiation.
"Islands aren't sinking. Temperatures aren't rising. Greatest hoax of modern times pushed by crooked, socialist United Nations. Australia's dishonest anti-Australia ABC trots out the debunked climate scam. COP27 narcissists guzzle, eat, fly 1st class."
Carbon Dioxide isn’t Warming the Earth. How do we know? It’s simple really …
You have been told that carbon dioxide (“CO2”) is warming the Earth. It’s a lie.
"Within a few minutes, host of The New American Ben Armstrong debunks the entire climate change story touted by Al Gore, Greta Thunberg, United Nations, World Economic Forum, corporate media, governments, professors, school teachers and anyone else who follows Agenda 2030’s climate change narrative.
What climate alarmists have done is reverse cause and effect. They are saying the effect of something is the cause, said Armstrong. However, rather than being the cause, CO2 in the atmosphere is the effect of warmer temperatures – first, there are warmer temperatures and then higher CO2 levels in the atmosphere follow.
How can I prove this? Armstrong asked. The oceans. The Oceans are the number one contributor to CO2 in the atmosphere. Watch Armstrong’s full explanation in the video below. It’s so simple even a child will understand."
Bob, I read the article, and I do not see anywhere how it supports your position that Climate Change is not a hoax.
1) Please show us anywhere that shows that CO2 does not ALWAYS follow temperature change, not the opposite.
2)That the largest contributor to the atmosphere of CO2 is by far the Oceans.man made CO2 is tiny percentage of this
3) That Oceans deliver CO2 to the atmosphere AFTER they are heated up by the sun.
4)The sun is what drives climate change,
If you don't believe statement 3, pour yourself two glasses of water, put one in the fridge and the other on your window ledge on a warm sunny day. The water on
the ledge will, in due course, become bubbly, and the water in the fridge will not.
All four statements are undisputed facts. All you have are theories, Sorry if that puts a pin in your bubble pun intended!
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Monday, 14th November, 2022, 04:09 PM.
It is an article that I feel supports the position of the Naturalists, to some extent.
I posted it because I am trying to get to the bottom of all this..........and that means posting information supporting the Naturalists, if I come upon it, just like I do articles supporting the Anthropogenicists.
And for transparency purposes, it is obvious that I do have a starting position. But it is challenged by a substantial enough minority that I will listen to what they are putting forward as evidence of their position.
Should I become convinced I am wrong, I hope I will do the right thing.........and go kill myself!
~Bob A (T-S/P)
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Monday, 14th November, 2022, 12:12 PM.
I have friends of all stripes........drives some of my left-wing friends to distraction.........
I have learned that there are good people on all sides of issues, but they can legitimately disagree about what is fact, and can certainly have conflicting opinions.
My friends who find me very high maintenance, and I, have learned that we can amicably "agree to disagree", and go have coffee together!
Issues do not determine who are, and are not, "good" people (And who are "friends" - there is a saying: "With friends like this.......who needs enemies?).........this determination is dependent on other factors.
"Global warming nutters have forecast that ‘life on earth is dying, billions will die, and the collapse of civilization has already begun. They have also compared global warming to the Holocaust but ‘on a far greater scale. There is not one shred of evidence for any of this. Look at the facts: In the 1920s, half a million people were killed by weather disasters. In the last decade, the total was 18,000. In 1900, nearly 5% of the world’s land area caught fire. Now the figure is close to 3%. The Great Barrier Reef and polar bears are booming.
The IPPC’s estimate is that sea levels could rise by two feet by the year 2100. How much of a crisis do you think this is, given that one-third of the Netherlands has always been below sea level –some of it over 60 feet below sea level?
The global warming loonies don’t seem to be aware that we’ve always had weather and there have always been loonies warning that the end of the world is nigh. In 1817, the President of the Royal Society in London warned that there had been a considerable change of climate that would lead to massive changes. In 1947, a Swedish geophysicist warned that the climate was warming up. In the 1970s, the BBC, that perennial source of misinformation, warned of an oncoming ice age – as big a threat to life as a nuclear war. In 2007 we were warned that we had five years to save the planet. In 2011, the International Energy Agency said we had five years left. In 2017, the United Nations said we had three years left. In 2013, a Cambridge professor said all the Arctic ice would be gone by 2015. In 2009, Gordon Brown, then UK PM, took time off from buggering up the economy to tell us we had 50 days left. Back in 2004, the Observer newspaper told us that we’d be living in a Siberian climate by 2020. Eleven years ago, Prince Charles said we had eight years left to save the planet.
If there have been any strange weather phenomena in recent years they have been man-made – but deliberately not accidentally. I don’t believe that any rational scientist who has looked at the evidence believes in the myth of global warming.
Every time it rains the cultists blame global warming. But the wettest day in Britain this summer was less than a third as wet as the wettest day in 1929 and just a quarter as wet as Dorset in 1955. We’re told that hurricanes are more common now. But that’s a lie. They try to push up the figures by counting breezes as storms but the evidence is clear: there are no more hurricanes today than there used to be. The media just make more of a fuss because it helps the agenda. There are no more forest fires either. Climate change campaigners claim that forest fires are a result of global warming. But experts in both Australia and America have concluded that climate change has had little or no impact on the development of forest fires – which are, in any case, less frequent than they used to be. The average annual acreage of American forest burned is now around 6.6 million. Back in 1928, the average annual acreage of American forest lost to fires was 41.7 million. I am pretty confident that 41.7 is a bigger figure than 6.6.
Between 1931 (the peak) and 2020, there has been a 99.7% decline in the death toll from natural disasters around the globe."
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Thursday, 17th November, 2022, 02:42 AM.
"....it seems the time has come for a commitment to advancing one compelling solution – nuclear energy – to resolve the near-existential threat posed by climate change to our collective well-being."
Tweet
Comment