Climate change: anthropogenic to the core

[JosephK]

I didn't say that we should stop consuming everything, but we should generously reduce our consumption

But my point is that we don't have a choice in what it is that they are producing and selling to us. Before the 1990s, everyone was perfectly happy without plastic bottles, and taking glass back to the shops for the recycling refund. Almost no one that I knew before 1997 in cities like Chicago owned a car or even had driver's licences. My point is it isn't up to us, it's up to the piece of shit businessmen who continually find cheaper and worse ways of getting people hooked on things.

[Teutone]

I am aware of the climate changes throughout all of the earth's history, and that's the point, we are in an icehouse period and we should head towards a glacial period, the opposite of what is taking place right now!

Thats something you want to believe, the so called scientific consensus on the issue is a joke and all predictions were wrong so far.

[pulstar]

[brennus dux gallorum]

that's exactly what i am talking about

[pulstar]

that's exactly what i am talking about

Well conservation of energy applies only to isolated systems.

[Sarmatian]

And more dessertification, you forgot the most important.

No these levels of CO2 don't cause more green especially when there's not enough water

In early Middle Ages averages were so high people were growing grapes in Greenland and Newfoundland hence the reason vikings called it Vinland. That's much hotter than it is now. Yes there were always areas with lack of fresh water and yet there was plenty of perfectly habitable space.

I am aware of the climate changes throughout all of the earth's history, and that's the point, we are in an icehouse period and we should head towards a glacial period, the opposite of what is taking place right now!

Should we? Who said that exactly?

Every single prediction regarding climate has been made based on models. So far there was no complete model ever created since climate is such complicated system. Thus every single prediction is mere speculation.

For example situation around dessertification. For decades scientific consensus was that large herbivores present a major contributing factor since their herds eat and damage green layer resulting in soil exposure. But one Dutch scientist discovered that large herds in fact have totally opposite effect. In his experiments involving some 400-500 animals he turned empty dunes into savannas full of grass and bushes in only 2 years. Not only these animals spread seeds of plants they eat but they also provide perfect natural fertilizer when they shit forming fertile moisture absorbing layer for plants to feed on. Think about it: just one guy had proven decades of scientific beliefs and assumptions to be wrong. And that's regarding things happening right in front of people. Now you asking people to believe all the assumptions in regards to processes happening up there in the sky. In your place I'd expect a lot of skepticism. Your arguments are not convincing at all.

[Trouble]

Thats something you want to believe, the so called scientific consensus on the issue is a joke and all predictions were wrong so far.

Yeah, 97% of climate scientists agreeing it's real is no consensus/s

You have literal shit for brains. But then again we already knew that.

[frankhammer]

Better to err on the side of caution.

[Sarmatian]

Yeah, 97% of climate scientists agreeing it's real is no consensus/s

You have literal shit for brains. But then again we already knew that.

You have to do your research on that 97% number. Where it came from and such. There are documentaries by real climate scientists exposing fraud around it.

[brennus dux gallorum]

You have to do your research on that 97% number. Where it came from and such. There are documentaries by real climate scientists exposing fraud around it.

The only sure is that there are no economic interests or major economic interests supporting that climate change doesn't exist