Limiting Global: How CO2?

[Obamot]

Funny how ecofascists are afraid of competition, which in their great cognitive bias they project into others. "The dictatorship will be green or it will not be" !

What is your point? Looks like you're shooting at everything that moves?
What would you do to “limit warming” Exnihiloest?

He would eliminate these green Khmer bastards, then all these little socialos sluts, and he would put France back at work with big blows of science in the dche.

An uncle said to me:
"- In France, half of the people are there for em ... the other ..."

After that ... good luck to him for “refout France at work!"

[Exnihiloest]

Already answered for the recent period:

I do not understand why natural noise would have stopped for the recent period when it existed before, physically it makes no sense.

Well, it's clear: because.
Moreover Paul72 provided the references which prove that this is true: " nails, nada, cock skin !! No need to go around in circles on it !!"

I had doubts but now I realized the obvious. I am really impressed by the strength of the argument.

[Exnihiloest]

Funny how ecofascists are afraid of competition, which in their great cognitive bias they project into others. "The dictatorship will be green or it will not be" !

What is your point? Looks like you're shooting at everything that moves?
What would you do to “limit warming” Exnihiloest?

Transition to “all nuclear”? Or is it “there is no warming, go around there is nothing to do”?

The “all nuclear” is of course the ideal in terms of energy, especially with the upcoming fusion, predictable, and the fission in the meantime, still possible.

I only shoot at the fundamentalists of greening, the new religion. And I have already answered your question elsewhere, several times.
There is absolutely nothing to do against the climate, it is even desirable to do nothing, for two reasons:
- there is no climatic emergency, the apocalyptic predictions are not forecasts, they are incompatible with what allows the rudimentary level at which is still climatology as science,
- no human action can have a significant effect on the temperature (of the order of a gain of 0,2 ° in 20 years if we applied the Paris agreements to the letter) but given their colossal cost, will do much more damage to peoples by sinking the economy, especially in developing countries.

Finally, CO2 makes the planet green again, and the past has shown that periods of global warming have coincided with periods of prosperity for humans. So warming is undoubtedly desirable but the opinion of people, in ecology, we do not care, everything is dogma, it would therefore be necessary to thwart the climate, in fact a pretext wielded by the supporters of anti-development because it is sure that a fight against the climate would drastically hamper development.

The idea that:
- warming is bad
- warming is inevitable if we do nothing
- we could act against global warming
is a set of prejudices.
The problem is less with having prejudices than with assuming that others have the same when discussing a topic, which is the case with a few participants with blinders here. Then ensue the lawsuits and calumnies: "if he does not want to fight against global warming, it is because he is a bastard who wants the death of our children "and not" it is because he does not believe in it because he has good reasons to believe that nothing that is planned will happen "or" is that he thinks it will do more damage than doing nothing".

[Obamot]

7D2314FE-C73A-477F-8C2B-215BD8B974B5.gif (1.67 Mio) Consulté 1893 fois

[Obamot]

Already answered ... Even if we find the work of the IPCC doubtful, the most basic precaution is to do what is necessary for the climate ... Already only in cities pollution kills, that the raid of raw materials continues and that the temperatures do not stop increasing .... I see nothing else to add, even if ... we managed to reduce emissions to zero, I agree that canceling the 3% of Co2 that we emit would not do much ... But it must be done for that and for other reasons!

[izentrop]

Limit warming? We do not feel an advance on this side.
By cons fight against its effects, some are preparing ...

[Paul72]

Already answered for the recent period:

I do not understand why natural noise would have stopped for the recent period when it existed before, physically it makes no sense.

Well, it's clear: because.
Moreover Paul72 provided the references which prove that this is true: " nails, nada, cock skin !! No need to go around in circles on it !!"

I had doubts but now I realized the obvious. I am really impressed by the strength of the argument.

I have nothing to argue: many scientists do it much better than I do. But in the face of Holocaust denial there is no valid argument.

[GuyGadebois]

I have nothing to argue: many scientists do it much better than I do. But in the face of Holocaust denial there is no valid argument.

Yes but according to OUR specialist geniuses Tryphion and AVC, scientists, researchers and other gender specialists are not worth a nail until they are of their informed opinion.

[ABC2019]

I have nothing to argue: many scientists do it much better than I do. But in the face of Holocaust denial there is no valid argument.

bah if when it is really scientific, there are valid arguments, precisely. This is even why we recognize that it is truly scientific.

So why would natural noise suddenly stop then, "scientifically"?

[ABC2019]

I have nothing to argue: many scientists do it much better than I do. But in the face of Holocaust denial there is no valid argument.

Yes but according to OUR specialist geniuses Tryphion and AVC, scientists, researchers and other gender specialists are not worth a nail until they are of their informed opinion.

oh no, that's what you think of health researchers. In climatology, I am not saying they are bad, I am saying that the scientific results say much less than what they are made to say, and are transformed into catastrophic speeches by the media. The researchers are content to be a little complacent and let it be said, because it suits them to fund their research.