Yeah, it makes attempting to discuss anything unbearable.
Houston..
- Thread starter Beantown
- Start date
Yeah, it makes attempting to discuss anything unbearable.
You continue the straw man. No one is claiming this hurricane was caused by global warming.
Sooooo much this.
I feel like I've brought this up before, but the amount of ****ty trolls/ alts is a serious detriment to this board.
It becomes impossible to discuss a topic when you don't know whether the person you are replying to is serious or just TR0lL1NG 4 Th3 L0lZ. And when you open a public forum it's tough to differentiate between the morons and the trolls!
Case in point. Here we have someone far smarter than me whose opinion on **** I would like to hear, yet he's arguing with a troll.
Red
Well-Known Member
Well, you wrote: "we can either blame it on this "mythical man made climate change" or you can start building for the next storm. whoch can be in 5 years in another place."
As others have pointed out, nobody is saying this storm, or any particular storm, was directly caused by climate change. But, increasing CO2 emissions are warming the oceans, including to deeper levels, which is bound to provide more energy to those storms. Scott Pruitt is on the public record as saying man made CO2 emissions are not an important factor in global warming. Yet we are seeing a greater increase in that warming in our northern polar regions, and in our oceans. Because of the increase in man produced CO2 emissions that Pruitt says are not a factor. And you have called man made climate change "mythical". So how am I misreading your words? For most people, mythical is somewhat in opposition to factual. How am I misreading you?
In addition to "mythical", you refer to the consensus that CO2 emissions are contributing to a warming climate as "hogwash". You're entitled to your opinion, but if I say you deny the reality of a significant human contribution to a warming climate, I believe, based on your oft cited opinions on the subject, in this thread and elsewhere, that I am not misrepresenting your opinion.
Red
Well-Known Member
Well, much of the warming is occurring in the oceans, where there are no trees. And deforestation of the Amazon rain forest, for example, is proceeding at an alarming pace.
It is true, that mitigation may hinge on developing technology that can extract CO2 from the atmosphere. Trees do help, but as noted with natural regulators like the Amazon rain forest, humans are not helping the situation.
https://www.fastcompany.com/4042187...out-of-the-air-to-save-us-from-climate-change
Red
Well-Known Member
It probably needs to be pointed out that when speaking of climate change through the Earth's history, we are talking about climate change within a geological scale of time. Geologic time involves millions of years, generally speaking. The Pleistocene Period of the Cenozoic Era began roughly 1 million years ago. It is the period during which the Earth experienced 4 major periods of glaciation, with warm period intervals during which continental glaciers retreated. Some geologists see us as living in a warm interval within an ongoing Pleistocene Period. Others denote a Anthropocene Period, when the climate began to experience influence via the industrial activity of the human species.
At any rate, there is clearly a difference in the scale of time, and the rate of climate change, when dealing with a geologic time scale on the one hand, and a human time scale on the other hand. We should expect to see changes coincident with widespread industrialization, and I believe we in fact do. I have no problem, unlike Scott Pruitt, in understanding that...
Red
Well-Known Member
In Houston, the problem was not heat absorbed by asphalt. The problem was making flooding worse by covering a flood plain with asphalt. Trees help, but, in the long run, it's about reducing CO2 emissions, which is what the Paris Climate Accord was about. And adhering to it is only voluntary, making Trump's withdrawal all the dumber. And it remains to be seen to what degree the development of man made CO2 extraction technology will mitigate warming caused by CO2 emissions. I don't think anybody expects the modest goals of the Paris Accord to be met, anyway. As far as I am concerned the denial movement that attacks climate science is in part driven by fossil energy companies motivated by profit over the long term needs of humanity, and the general anti-intellectualism of popular culture, which distrusts authority in virtually all fields of human knowledge. As I've mentioned elsewhere, if not on this forum, I would not entrust brain surgery to a man off the street, but we're trending in that direction. And that's only partly comic sans....
Keep spruiking. Your a heat sink denier?
Git rid of heat sinks an git rid of global warming. You know how much heat asphalt absorbs, retains an then radiates? It is not natural to paint the planet black with a substance that holds heat in.
Hell mining concrete an exposin rocks to sunlight even absorbs tons of energy. Go out on a hot summer day barefoot an walk on grass, in the weeds. Than go walk on cement or asphalt.
The joy is in putting together the rebuttal - doing the research, writing and editing the position, clarifying your thoughts to yourself. That's likely the motivator instead of changing the minds of the trolls.