Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   When you try to deny climate change but then the hurricane hits   ( nytimes.com) divider line
    More: Florida, Flood, climate change, Global warming, Tropical cyclone, Storm surge, John McCain, Paris climate accord, Weather  
•       •       •

7416 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Oct 2018 at 6:32 AM (11 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



326 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2018-10-11 08:14:14 AM  

Madman drummers bummers: winedrinkingman: I have religious family members from that region who have already said they think Panama City was hit by a hurricane because of all the proud people and sinfulness in the area, and that God was trying to make them repent and change there ways.  That's right.  It wasn't climate change, it was because the Florida Panhandle wasn't religious enough.

I... can't smart this because there's secondhand derp in it, and I can't funny it because it's not funny.

Can we lobby Fark for a Facepalm button?


If we're lobbying, I want a dumbest button as well.
 
2018-10-11 08:14:56 AM  

sardonicobserver: Climate is and has always been changing in one way or another.  Earth has had ice ages and warm ages, and the Sun palpably goes through 11-year cycles that vary from time to time.  There was the medieval warm period followed by the little ice age, which ended in the 1850-1900 time frame.  There has been a warming trend since about 1900.  Data for recent decades has been diddled; see below.

What's controversial is whether mankind controls climate.  The Kyoto protocols, in which the developed countries would use carbon credits as a basis to transfer their wealth to undeveloped countries, would have brought down Western civilization while temporarily enriching the third world countries, which has become known as the motivation of those who organized and wrote the protocols - but a reduced carbon emissions would not accrue due to the carbon credits and the financial transactions.  The Paris Accords would require the US to reduce its carbon emissions 10% over current levels while the rest of the world, including China, had limits more like 1%, and the US is already doing far more than anyone else to reduce carbon emissions, so that the only way to reduce emissions another 10% would be to drastically downsize US industry. Signatories on the Kyoto protocols and the Paris accord are those that would benefit financially or competitively, including some that would not likely comply, like China.

The science concerning recent decades is muddled due to corruption in the climate community that includes doctoring the raw data.  For a short course on what's up with that, go to YouTube and do a search on "hide the decline" and do a web search on "emailgate". If there is anything that we can do, fraud and corruption in the climate community has muddled the picture pretty thoroughly for the time being, preventing a solid basis for decisions with profound economic impact.

We have a long range roadmap to transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy.  The only renewable sources that remotely have the capacity to support the current world population are nuclear fission and fusion power.  There seems to be small factions in the governments of all the developed countries that are providing enough information to keep the funding and progress going, and the future is fusion power with nuclear, hydroelectric, solar of several types, and wind power as players, and we are headed there but that's not where the clickbait is, and it doesn't have a partisan ring to it.


78.media.tumblr.comView Full Size
 
2018-10-11 08:16:49 AM  
I think there are two parts to this problem in the US.

One, nobody wants to do anything about the climate change issue unless they can make money off of it. But even if they really didn't go for the money first, is there really anything we can do about it?

Two, the climate is always changing. Is it changing faster because of man? Who knows? The people in the US are too busy trying to turn a profit off of it.

There is no doubt in my mind that the earth is warming. I just have no idea what's causing it or if it's even something we should try to change. The earth goes through warm and cold cycles. Maybe it's like geology in that 10K years is the blink of an eye. So then we're stuck with stupid politicians trying to blame the democrats or republicans for everything. Well, that's part of the problem, it shouldn't be a democrat problem or a republican problem, it should be "What's best for the world". And of course that'll never happen because everyone is trying to make a buck off of the climate change issue.

So then we're stuck with many people like myself just giving up on the whole thing. I've installed LEDs, burn almost no petroleum products (electric cars rock but gas mowers are still better than electric ones), increased the amount of insulation in my house to conserve energy, recycle as much as possible, reduced my waste stream to where I have one bag of trash every two months and all of the other tree hugger stuff. But I'm mostly doing it for myself with the pleasant thought in the back of my head that it's good for the planet too.
 
2018-10-11 08:16:55 AM  
I thought we'd progressed past the sort of superstitions of thinking every bad storm was a sign of the end of the world.
 
2018-10-11 08:18:22 AM  

bigfatbuddhist: Instead of Youtube, try a peer-reviewed article.


Instead using unnamed peers to agree with a predetermined conclusion, try using the scientific method.  Predictive models can't predict all the variables that are unpredictable.  Are those peer reviewers also going to review all the carbon tax returns?
 
2018-10-11 08:18:22 AM  
The deadly changes couldn't come fast enough to Florida.

/True Floridian
//Good riddance
 
2018-10-11 08:20:05 AM  

Interceptor1: I think there are two parts to this problem in the US.

One, nobody wants to do anything about the climate change issue unless they can make money off of it. But even if they really didn't go for the money first, is there really anything we can do about it?

Two, the climate is always changing. Is it changing faster because of man? Who knows? The people in the US are too busy trying to turn a profit off of it.

There is no doubt in my mind that the earth is warming. I just have no idea what's causing it or if it's even something we should try to change. The earth goes through warm and cold cycles. Maybe it's like geology in that 10K years is the blink of an eye. So then we're stuck with stupid politicians trying to blame the democrats or republicans for everything. Well, that's part of the problem, it shouldn't be a democrat problem or a republican problem, it should be "What's best for the world". And of course that'll never happen because everyone is trying to make a buck off of the climate change issue.

So then we're stuck with many people like myself just giving up on the whole thing. I've installed LEDs, burn almost no petroleum products (electric cars rock but gas mowers are still better than electric ones), increased the amount of insulation in my house to conserve energy, recycle as much as possible, reduced my waste stream to where I have one bag of trash every two months and all of the other tree hugger stuff. But I'm mostly doing it for myself with the pleasant thought in the back of my head that it's good for the planet too.


We can answer all the bolded things. So ummm...... sure.
 
2018-10-11 08:20:26 AM  

flynn80: bigfatbuddhist: Instead of Youtube, try a peer-reviewed article.

Instead using unnamed peers to agree with a predetermined conclusion, try using the scientific method.  Predictive models can't predict all the variables that are unpredictable.  Are those peer reviewers also going to review all the carbon tax returns?


Sometimes, when you've got nothing to say, it's better not to say it, son.
 
2018-10-11 08:21:23 AM  

flynn80: bigfatbuddhist: Instead of Youtube, try a peer-reviewed article.

Instead using unnamed peers to agree with a predetermined conclusion, try using the scientific method.  Predictive models can't predict all the variables that are unpredictable.  Are those peer reviewers also going to review all the carbon tax returns?


This post is almost impressive in its ignorance.

I mean.....wow.
 
2018-10-11 08:22:42 AM  
Well, I guess they ran out of bullsh*t talking points already
 
2018-10-11 08:23:06 AM  

Munden: [img.fark.net image 400x402]


Oh, so we're supposed to believe it's getting warmer just because the temperature goes up? That's pointless fearmongering and you should be ashamed.

Now if you'll excuse me, the contractor just showed up to begin installing my MS-13 panic room.
 
2018-10-11 08:25:37 AM  
Blame the sun.
 
2018-10-11 08:26:14 AM  

Lady J: How dumb do you have to be to be STILL denying climate change.


Almost as dumb as believing that without the burning of fossil fuels the climate would not have changed at all.

Almost.
 
2018-10-11 08:26:46 AM  

Deep Contact: Blame the sun.


But Mama, that's where the fun is.
 
2018-10-11 08:26:48 AM  
sardonicobserver:

a whole bunch of words

yep. I gets my science from youtube. That's how I found out the earth was flat
 
2018-10-11 08:27:14 AM  
I think a baseline for if I should listen to you on climate change is if you know what month the Earth is closest to the sun.
 
2018-10-11 08:31:50 AM  
The derp level is rising

img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-10-11 08:31:51 AM  

Zeb Hesselgresser: Lady J: How dumb do you have to be to be STILL denying climate change.

Almost as dumb as believing that without the burning of fossil fuels the climate would not have changed at all.

Almost.


You got evidence that it would have changed this much sans trillions of tons of CO2?
 
2018-10-11 08:32:11 AM  

Zeb Hesselgresser: Lady J: How dumb do you have to be to be STILL denying climate change.

Almost as dumb as believing that without the burning of fossil fuels the climate would not have changed at all.

Almost.


Good thing no one's saying that.
 
2018-10-11 08:33:00 AM  

Sean VasDeferens: Gubbo: Lucky LaRue: Weather is not the same thing as climate.  Trying to equate a hurricane with climate change makes the alarmist look even more  uneducated and ignorant than they actually are.

While it is true that hurricanes are not caused by climate change, there is a lot of building evidence that the increase in frequency, the increase in strength, and the massive increase in how quickly hurricanes are intensifying are all linked to global warming.

But sure, go with your technically correct and completely devoid of context post.

We just went 12 years without a hurricane making landfall in the U.S.


The United States is not the entire world, son.

Also, that's not true. Like, at all.
 
2018-10-11 08:34:08 AM  

Gubbo: Sean VasDeferens: Gubbo: Lucky LaRue: Weather is not the same thing as climate.  Trying to equate a hurricane with climate change makes the alarmist look even more  uneducated and ignorant than they actually are.

While it is true that hurricanes are not caused by climate change, there is a lot of building evidence that the increase in frequency, the increase in strength, and the massive increase in how quickly hurricanes are intensifying are all linked to global warming.

But sure, go with your technically correct and completely devoid of context post.

We just went 12 years without a hurricane making landfall in the U.S.

I often forget how the USA is the only country in the world.


It's also not true. Link

Although, that is the NOAA's list, so the science is all corrupt or something.
 
2018-10-11 08:42:12 AM  

Sean VasDeferens: UNC_Samurai: We just went 12 years without a hurricane making landfall in the U.S.

Ike, Irene, and Matthew would like to have a word with this pig-farking ignorance.

Get woke  https://www.washingtonpost.com/n​ews/energy-environment/wp/2017/09/07/t​he-science-behind-the-u-s-s-strange-hu​rricane-drought-and-its-sudden-end/?no​redirect=on&utm_term=.c76f81dbcc9d


I don't care if some putz wrote a story about it. I was in Ike in 2008 and my dad sure as shiat remembers Sandy in 12. Not to mention Gustav, Irene or Isaac.

Yes, there were no storms that made landfall in the US in 09 or 10. But to keep harping this insane talking point means you're either just blatantly lying or incredibly stupid, and either way you should stop.
 
2018-10-11 08:42:24 AM  

Natalie Portmanteau: Gubbo: Sean VasDeferens: Gubbo: Lucky LaRue: Weather is not the same thing as climate.  Trying to equate a hurricane with climate change makes the alarmist look even more  uneducated and ignorant than they actually are.

While it is true that hurricanes are not caused by climate change, there is a lot of building evidence that the increase in frequency, the increase in strength, and the massive increase in how quickly hurricanes are intensifying are all linked to global warming.

But sure, go with your technically correct and completely devoid of context post.

We just went 12 years without a hurricane making landfall in the U.S.

I often forget how the USA is the only country in the world.

It's also not true. Link

Although, that is the NOAA's list, so the science is all corrupt or something.


Oh I know it's not true. I just like making fun of that lie that America is the whole world.
 
2018-10-11 08:44:57 AM  

GoldSpider: Sean VasDeferens: UNC_Samurai: We just went 12 years without a hurricane making landfall in the U.S.

Ike, Irene, and Matthew would like to have a word with this pig-farking ignorance.

Get woke  https://www.washingtonpost.com/n​ews/energy-environment/wp/2017/09/07/t​he-science-behind-the-u-s-s-strange-hu​rricane-drought-and-its-sudden-end/?no​redirect=on&utm_term=.c76f81dbcc9d

"...the mainland United States had avoided a Category 3 or higher landfall since 2005."

Omitting that qualifier is what makes you a liar.

/hey it rhymes!


And that's still not true. Ike was a Cat 4 in 2008 and Sandy was a Cat 3 four years later in 2012.
 
2018-10-11 08:46:01 AM  

Guybird: Sean VasDeferens: UNC_Samurai: We just went 12 years without a hurricane making landfall in the U.S.

Ike, Irene, and Matthew would like to have a word with this pig-farking ignorance.

Get woke  https://www.washingtonpost.com/n​ews/energy-environment/wp/2017/09/07/t​he-science-behind-the-u-s-s-strange-hu​rricane-drought-and-its-sudden-end/?no​redirect=on&utm_term=.c76f81dbcc9d

Since 2005, though, we've experienced no major U.S. landfalls until Harvey this year.

Hurricane Hermine: Sept. 2016, this Category 1 storm was the first hurricane to hit Florida since Hurricane Wilma in 2005.
• Hurricane Arthur: July 2014, this storm whipped North Carolina's Outer Banks with winds of 100 mph, making it a Category 2.
• Hurricane Sandy: Oct. 2012, Superstorm Sandy, the largest Atlantic system on record, slammed into New Jersey. It was the deadliest hurricane to hit the northeastern U.S. in 40 years and the second-costliest in the nation's history.
Hurricane Isaac: Aug. 2012, this deadly Category 1 storm hit the coast of Louisiana and Mississippi right around the seventh anniversary of Hurricane Katrina.
• Hurricane Irene: Sept. 2011, Irene hit North Carolina as a Category 1 storm. The storm caused major flooding in the northeast, and Irene's effects were felt along the entire Eastern seaboard.
• Hurricane Ike: Sept. 2008, the last hurricane to strike Texas was Hurricane Ike, a powerful Category 2 storm that caused billions in damage and became the third most costly storm in the U.S., after Hurricanes Sandy and Katrina.
• Hurricane Gustav: Sept. 2008, tens of thousands evacuated before this Category 2 storm hit the Louisiana coast, New Orlean's first major storm since Katrina.
Hurricane Dolly: July 2008, Dolly made landfall in Texas as a Category 2 storm and gradually weakened to a tropical storm as it progressed.
•Hurricane Humberto:Sept. 2007, although initially weak this record-breaking storm intensified rapidly before making landfall in Texas as a Category 1 storm.


Ike was a cat 4 when it hit land. It was a cat 2 when it hit Houston.
 
2018-10-11 08:47:50 AM  

Smoking GNU: Lady J: How dumb do you have to be to be STILL denying climate change.

You missed the boobies, i take it?


She probably has it blocked. I didnt know it was in here until people started responding to it.
 
2018-10-11 08:49:22 AM  
 
2018-10-11 08:49:46 AM  

guestguy: Zeb Hesselgresser: Lady J: How dumb do you have to be to be STILL denying climate change.

Almost as dumb as believing that without the burning of fossil fuels the climate would not have changed at all.

Almost.

Good thing no one's saying that.


So absent human influences, is the climate warming or cooling?  Are we mitigating a cooling trend or accelerating a warming trend?
 
2018-10-11 08:50:59 AM  

Lucky LaRue: Weather is not the same thing as climate. Trying to equate a hurricane with climate change makes the alarmist look even more uneducated and ignorant than they actually are.


FTA: "It's true that we can't definitively link the damage from any one hurricane (or drought or forest fire) to rising carbon emissions. But think of it as playing with loaded dice: A double six might have occurred anyway, but much less often."
Seems like a pretty solid analogy to me.
 
2018-10-11 08:52:06 AM  

Natalie Portmanteau: GoldSpider: Sean VasDeferens: UNC_Samurai: We just went 12 years without a hurricane making landfall in the U.S.

Ike, Irene, and Matthew would like to have a word with this pig-farking ignorance.

Get woke  https://www.washingtonpost.com/n​ews/energy-environment/wp/2017/09/07/t​he-science-behind-the-u-s-s-strange-hu​rricane-drought-and-its-sudden-end/?no​redirect=on&utm_term=.c76f81dbcc9d

"...the mainland United States had avoided a Category 3 or higher landfall since 2005."

Omitting that qualifier is what makes you a liar.

/hey it rhymes!

And that's still not true. Ike was a Cat 4 in 2008 and Sandy was a Cat 3 four years later in 2012.


Ike was Category 2 when it first hit the continental US.  Sandy was barely a hurricane under the Saffir-Simpson scale when it finally made landfall.
 
2018-10-11 08:55:19 AM  

Natalie Portmanteau: Smoking GNU: Lady J: How dumb do you have to be to be STILL denying climate change.

You missed the boobies, i take it?

She probably has it blocked. I didnt know it was in here until people started responding to it.


I left a few of the older ones off the ignore to just get the general gist of the flow of derp through the site.
 
2018-10-11 08:55:39 AM  

Zeb Hesselgresser: guestguy: Zeb Hesselgresser: Lady J: How dumb do you have to be to be STILL denying climate change.

Almost as dumb as believing that without the burning of fossil fuels the climate would not have changed at all.

Almost.

Good thing no one's saying that.

So absent human influences, is the climate warming or cooling?  Are we mitigating a cooling trend or accelerating a warming trend?


Gee, do you think nobody has studied this yet?
 
2018-10-11 08:56:00 AM  

Lady J: How dumb do you have to be to be STILL denying climate change.

img.fark.netView Full Size

This dumb?
 
2018-10-11 09:03:51 AM  

sardonicobserver: Climate is and has always been changing in one way or another.  Earth has had ice ages and warm ages, and the Sun palpably goes through 11-year cycles that vary from time to time.  There was the medieval warm period followed by the little ice age, which ended in the 1850-1900 time frame.  There has been a warming trend since about 1900.  Data for recent decades has been diddled; see below.

What's controversial is whether mankind controls climate.  The Kyoto protocols, in which the developed countries would use carbon credits as a basis to transfer their wealth to undeveloped countries, would have brought down Western civilization while temporarily enriching the third world countries, which has become known as the motivation of those who organized and wrote the protocols - but a reduced carbon emissions would not accrue due to the carbon credits and the financial transactions.  The Paris Accords would require the US to reduce its carbon emissions 10% over current levels while the rest of the world, including China, had limits more like 1%, and the US is already doing far more than anyone else to reduce carbon emissions, so that the only way to reduce emissions another 10% would be to drastically downsize US industry.  Signatories on the Kyoto protocols and the Paris accord are those that would benefit financially or competitively, including some that would not likely comply, like China.

The science concerning recent decades is muddled due to corruption in the climate community that includes doctoring the raw data.  For a short course on what's up with that, go to YouTube and do a search on "hide the decline" and do a web search on "emailgate".  If there is anything that we can do, fraud and corruption in the climate community has muddled the picture pretty thoroughly for the time being, preventing a solid basis for decisions with profound economic impact.

We have a long range roadmap to transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy.  The only renewable sources ...


Drew! Why don't we have a stupid button?
 
2018-10-11 09:09:20 AM  

Dork Gently: Natalie Portmanteau: GoldSpider: Sean VasDeferens: UNC_Samurai: We just went 12 years without a hurricane making landfall in the U.S.

Ike, Irene, and Matthew would like to have a word with this pig-farking ignorance.

Get woke  https://www.washingtonpost.com/n​ews/energy-environment/wp/2017/09/07/t​he-science-behind-the-u-s-s-strange-hu​rricane-drought-and-its-sudden-end/?no​redirect=on&utm_term=.c76f81dbcc9d

"...the mainland United States had avoided a Category 3 or higher landfall since 2005."

Omitting that qualifier is what makes you a liar.

/hey it rhymes!

And that's still not true. Ike was a Cat 4 in 2008 and Sandy was a Cat 3 four years later in 2012.

Ike was Category 2 when it first hit the continental US.  Sandy was barely a hurricane under the Saffir-Simpson scale when it finally made landfall.


First landfall was in the Caribbean as a 4. Ike hit texas as a 2 and still did a tremendous amount of damage. Sandy shut down the east coast for almost a week.

This metric of "lol doesn't count" is ridiculous. Ike killed 195 people, sandy killed 285. Katrina killed 1833 as a cat 3 (granted, the levees made it worse), but cat 5 Andrew killed 65. Maybe the Saffir-Simpson scale could use some tweaking.
 
2018-10-11 09:10:12 AM  

Smoking GNU: Natalie Portmanteau: Smoking GNU: Lady J: How dumb do you have to be to be STILL denying climate change.

You missed the boobies, i take it?

She probably has it blocked. I didnt know it was in here until people started responding to it.

I left a few of the older ones off the ignore to just get the general gist of the flow of derp through the site.


That one in particular just irritates me. I have very few people blocked, but they're one of them.
 
2018-10-11 09:10:45 AM  

Gubbo: gar1013: If you believe that climate change is caused by human activities; and

If you believe that the activities of the average American are what's really contributing to climate change; then

Shouldn't we have tighter immigration control?

Since people that don't live in the US don't contribute as much to climate change, we should try to keep as many of those people as humanly possible from coming here and increasing climate change.

Environmental groups used to have positions on immigration like this until it became politically incorrect for them to do so.

While there is a huge amount of competition in this thread. I'm nominating this for stupid post of the day.


Dear god

That shiat needs to come with a warning label. I'm glad I don't need to brain too hard today, that sucked about 20 IQ points right outta my head, and that on top of the slow leak from all the previous shiatposts...

Christ, I think I'll stay home & watch Feyneman lectures on youtube. Try to put a mental bandage on.
 
2018-10-11 09:16:14 AM  
I wonder what it was like before climate changeTM when there were never any hurricanes...
 
2018-10-11 09:20:30 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: durbnpoisn: No one is denying climate change anymore.  We can now officially drop that whole thing.

What people are denying is that humans are responsible.  The main reason they are denying this is that regulations affect corporate profits.  And these denials are at a national level of multiple HUGE countries.

The biggest problem with all of this is that the US is only one contributor.  And we are doing some things to help.  But that says nothing about the greatest contributors to the problem in other countries.  And it makes matters far worse that when American companies are stifled too much by regulation, they move their pollution to another country that is more pollution friendly.

If you don't know that this is the problem than you haven't been paying attention.

So did you just miss the whole Paris agreement thing or


I did not.  And you must have missed the point of my post.
It's too little too late.  Plus, the US has backed out of it.
 
2018-10-11 09:21:05 AM  
I'd bookmark this thread as a beautiful example of derpish rwnj talking points & the incredible need to dress up idiocy in pseudoscientific terms, but the herpaderp is strong enough to require a prescription.
 
2018-10-11 09:23:59 AM  

sillydragon: gay speedboat armada


not sure what band i'm going to give tribute to, but that will be the name of a tribute/cover band.
 
2018-10-11 09:25:05 AM  
Again....oh my god, a hurricane hit during hurricane season the world is over. Ya know, there is a reason they call it hurricane season.
 
2018-10-11 09:26:25 AM  
I believe in man made global warming. But many espousing the climate change message have a certain religious zealotry to them.

For one, they like to prophesy. I think the message gets muddled with the ongoing series of predictions of imminent demise that never materialize.

I won't list them here but a simple Google search will show you how many global warming predictions have been false. I think another one came out this week stating that we only have 10 years left.

Also, are humans just not another group of animals on this planet? Would you morally judge ants for building an ant colony? Maybe global warming is just another evolution of this planet.  Maybe this version of humanity's time is over. Maybe things should change. Most people in here don't seem happy and are in a current state of rage about some crap or another. What makes humans so unique that we have some morally justification to "save the planet"? Did god tell you this?

And many zealots for climate change would like to see the "deniers" put to death. Just read the comments in here. According to them, if you don't believe their message then you should die.

I think the problem selling climate change has been the rhetoric and that every solution that's been put on the table seems to involve a government forced transfer of wealth.

In the end I think capitalism (which I personally believe to be humanities most natural state) that got us into this mess may find us a way out of it. An example would be the recycling industry. You can turn a profit while making the planet greener.  And automated electric cars and working from home could help too.


But I could be wrong. On the other side of things, I'd like all meat products to be taxed heavily so that having a steak dinner is something the average family only maybe does once every couple months. And fast-food restaurant should never sell beef. You could easily replace the stuff in there food with vegie meat and no one would tell the difference with as much crap they put on it.

So next time you ready to get in someone face, predict an event 10 years in the future, tell someone they should die if they don't believe, congrats you've found god.
 
2018-10-11 09:32:24 AM  

sardonicobserver: Climate is and has always been changing in one way or another.  Earth has had ice ages and warm ages, and the Sun palpably goes through 11-year cycles that vary from time to time.  There was the medieval warm period followed by the little ice age, which ended in the 1850-1900 time frame.  There has been a warming trend since about 1900.  Data for recent decades has been diddled; see below.

What's controversial is whether mankind controls climate.  The Kyoto protocols, in which the developed countries would use carbon credits as a basis to transfer their wealth to undeveloped countries, would have brought down Western civilization while temporarily enriching the third world countries, which has become known as the motivation of those who organized and wrote the protocols - but a reduced carbon emissions would not accrue due to the carbon credits and the financial transactions.  The Paris Accords would require the US to reduce its carbon emissions 10% over current levels while the rest of the world, including China, had limits more like 1%, and the US is already doing far more than anyone else to reduce carbon emissions, so that the only way to reduce emissions another 10% would be to drastically downsize US industry.  Signatories on the Kyoto protocols and the Paris accord are those that would benefit financially or competitively, including some that would not likely comply, like China.

The science concerning recent decades is muddled due to corruption in the climate community that includes doctoring the raw data.  For a short course on what's up with that, go to YouTube and do a search on "hide the decline" and do a web search on "emailgate".  If there is anything that we can do, fraud and corruption in the climate community has muddled the picture pretty thoroughly for the time being, preventing a solid basis for decisions with profound economic impact.

We have a long range roadmap to transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy.  The only renewable sources ...


Thank god someone here can think for themselves instead of making this a partisan issue. Lots of shouting people down here and not much intelligent discourse until I read your post. I have read both sides of this issue recently and there is no hard science (proof) that shows an increase in hurricane activity or strength attributed to global climate change. There are suggestions and computer models and educated guesses galore but nobody actually knows how much impact humans have on the global climate. You cannot deny climate change because climate has and always will change it will never stay the same. In the eternal words of Douglas Adams "Don't Panic".
 
2018-10-11 09:33:48 AM  

sardonicobserver: Climate is and has always been changing in one way or another.  Earth has had ice ages and warm ages, and the Sun palpably goes through 11-year cycles that vary from time to time.  There was the medieval warm period followed by the little ice age, which ended in the 1850-1900 time frame.  There has been a warming trend since about 1900.  Data for recent decades has been diddled; see below.

What's controversial is whether mankind controls climate.  The Kyoto protocols, in which the developed countries would use carbon credits as a basis to transfer their wealth to undeveloped countries, would have brought down Western civilization while temporarily enriching the third world countries, which has become known as the motivation of those who organized and wrote the protocols - but a reduced carbon emissions would not accrue due to the carbon credits and the financial transactions.  The Paris Accords would require the US to reduce its carbon emissions 10% over current levels while the rest of the world, including China, had limits more like 1%, and the US is already doing far more than anyone else to reduce carbon emissions, so that the only way to reduce emissions another 10% would be to drastically downsize US industry.  Signatories on the Kyoto protocols and the Paris accord are those that would benefit financially or competitively, including some that would not likely comply, like China.

The science concerning recent decades is muddled due to corruption in the climate community that includes doctoring the raw data.  For a short course on what's up with that, go to YouTube and do a search on "hide the decline" and do a web search on "emailgate".  If there is anything that we can do, fraud and corruption in the climate community has muddled the picture pretty thoroughly for the time being, preventing a solid basis for decisions with profound economic impact.

We have a long range roadmap to transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy.  The only renewable sources ...


Which Koch brother are you?
 
2018-10-11 09:39:52 AM  
cdn.cnn.comView Full Size
Won't someone think of the "real" Florida?!
 
2018-10-11 09:44:20 AM  

ArinTheLost: sardonicobserver: Climate is and has always been changing in one way or another.  Earth has had ice ages and warm ages, and the Sun palpably goes through 11-year cycles that vary from time to time.  There was the medieval warm period followed by the little ice age, which ended in the 1850-1900 time frame.  There has been a warming trend since about 1900.  Data for recent decades has been diddled; see below.

What's controversial is whether mankind controls climate.  The Kyoto protocols, in which the developed countries would use carbon credits as a basis to transfer their wealth to undeveloped countries, would have brought down Western civilization while temporarily enriching the third world countries, which has become known as the motivation of those who organized and wrote the protocols - but a reduced carbon emissions would not accrue due to the carbon credits and the financial transactions.  The Paris Accords would require the US to reduce its carbon emissions 10% over current levels while the rest of the world, including China, had limits more like 1%, and the US is already doing far more than anyone else to reduce carbon emissions, so that the only way to reduce emissions another 10% would be to drastically downsize US industry.  Signatories on the Kyoto protocols and the Paris accord are those that would benefit financially or competitively, including some that would not likely comply, like China.

The science concerning recent decades is muddled due to corruption in the climate community that includes doctoring the raw data.  For a short course on what's up with that, go to YouTube and do a search on "hide the decline" and do a web search on "emailgate".  If there is anything that we can do, fraud and corruption in the climate community has muddled the picture pretty thoroughly for the time being, preventing a solid basis for decisions with profound economic impact.

We have a long range roadmap to transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy.  The only ...


Manmade catastrophic climate change is indisputable. It's a fact. We know what's causing climate change; it's human carbon emissions. It threatens to destroy the entire global ecosystem. You can sit here and play faux intellectual with your "both sides are bad" and "nobody really knows" bullshiat but at the end of the day, you're just showing off your ignorance.
Honestly, reading comments like yours is infuriating because there is so much evidence that back up climate science that the only reason to have any doubt is laziness or willful ignorance.
 
2018-10-11 09:47:40 AM  

Smoking GNU: winedrinkingman: I have religious family members from that region who have already said they think Panama City was hit by a hurricane because of all the proud people and sinfulness in the area, and that God was trying to make them repent and change there ways.  That's right.  It wasn't climate change, it was because the Florida Panhandle wasn't religious enough.

Isn't that always their reasoning?


Turn it around on them.

Tell them it is the fault of the hypocrites who claim to be christian but don't follow his teachings about pacifism, non violence, the fact you should gladly pay taxes (render unto Caesar thing), etc., etc., etc.

God is punishing you hypocrites for being a Christian In Name Only.

Basically tell them if y'all weren't CINOs, this would not have happened.

Oh, and if y'all actually set a good example by how you talk and act, some of the non believers might just be inclined to convert.

Too bad you guys aren't spiritually and morally upright enough to do that, huh?

Or adult enough to realize and accept  that bad shiat can  happen to you randomly regardless of what you have faith in.
 
2018-10-11 09:48:38 AM  
sardonicobserver:
The science concerning recent decades is muddled due to corruption in the climate community that includes doctoring the raw data.  For a short course on what's up with that, go to YouTube and do a search on "hide the decline" and do a web search on "emailgate".

So, you believe the data on climate change has been deceptively doctored as part of a conspiracy to do...things... And as proof, you provide data that has long been proven to have not only been deceptively doctored, but also selectively taken out of context? 

Well... Our days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle.
 
2018-10-11 09:52:19 AM  
Let's save the earth and recycle!
Sounds great until you realize that the recycling companies are mostly in
China which just shut down importing such stuff as a direct result of D2S's tarrifs.
Just hears a story on the radio how some cities are just shuttering their recycling programs - there's nowhere to send the stuff to.
Now you're nodding and asking why there aren't businesses here in the USA doing this? China doesn't give a flying fark about the environment, that's why.
If we tried this here with our regulations we would have to pay the companies to take our stuff.

guestguy: No one saw this coming...NO ONE, I say!


Now we know D2S' Fark handle.
 
Displayed 50 of 326 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report