-
ICMag with help from Phlizon, Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest for Christmas! You can check it here. Prizes are: full spectrum led light, seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
Have you looked at the North Pole lately?
- Thread starter igrowone
- Start date
Man is an illogical creature, still far more swayed by emotion than by calm reason. Man has wonderful powers of self-deception, and of the uncritical suppression of unwelcome facts; he is still capable of believing what he wants to believe, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Indeed, there are none so blind as will not see, or so deaf as will not hear.
Porky82
Well-known member
Pretty much explains the stupidity on display in this thread and multiple others.
Show me some evidence to the contary then, none of the could, might, maybe or my new favorite "extremly likely" rubbish, how about some cold hard facts
“The IPCC is mandated to find a consensus on the causes of climate change. I understand the political usefulness of having a consensus view in that it makes things easier for politicians. However, science doesn’t work by consensus. In fact, science thrives best when scientists are allowed to disagree with each other and to investigate the various reasons for disagreement. I fear that by effectively only considering the datasets and studies that support their chosen narrative, the IPCC have seriously hampered scientific progress into genuinely understanding the causes of recent and future climate change. I am particularly disturbed by their inability to satisfactorily explain the rural temperature trends.”
Its probably stupidity that makes you believers blindly believing what you are told without a second thought that you might be being played for a fool
DYOR
you say this as though you are confident you aren't myopic yourself, but is the irony lost on you that you simply take it as a given that the other is completely willfully uninformed?
they say if you want to know what someone thinks, you ask them what they think everyone else thinks; i wonder if a similar theme is at play here is all i'm saying.
Let me guess, you have been vaccinated for covid multible times, support the LBGTQI +++ and child mutilation, hate Trump with a passion because he's Hitler in disguise and think everyones going to die from "man made" climate change.
No doubt a life long democrat voter or would be if you were older enough to vote
Eltitoguay
Well-known member
And what was the problem with the more than 11,000 deaths in Libya, Greece, Bulgaria and Turkey last year?
Tormenta Daniel - Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre
Storm Daniel - Wikipedia
And of the 230 deaths in Spain this year? Did they wear too little or too much clothing?
And what clothes should I wear when the stream that borders my village (which is dry 360 days a year), went in 15 minutes from being a dry land to carrying more water than the Rhine River (it happened in Valencia, Spain, a month ago)? And when that inland tsunami uproots my house, like in the east of my Autonomous Community last month?
(Images after the flood):
And with what clothing will we face the increasingly greater and more widespread loss of crops and the lack of drinking water? And the conflicts that arise as a result?
Eltitoguay
Well-known member
I repeat that the idea of a "calm" increase in average temperatures is childish. This increase in energy in the atmosphere makes all meteorological phenomena more powerful, longer lasting, more repeated and more geographically widespread, each time. I mean, you won't be able to grow pure haze or avocados outdoors in Alaska, even if they have summers at 40°C and winters at 20°C... because sudden hailstorms, hurricanes, floods, droughts, etc, They will take care of it more and more frequently and intensely.
As for human adaptability to change, we cannot talk about it as if we were in the Paleolithic, and even with the entire planet practically "virgin" for our size :
Now there are more than 8 billion (8 200 000 000) of us hungry to devour resources, and competing for those resources (including simply more territory to expand), organized in nations armed to the teeth, (who were already fighting for those resources, without any climate change), and with the capacity to destroy the biosphere several times...
As for human adaptability to change, we cannot talk about it as if we were in the Paleolithic, and even with the entire planet practically "virgin" for our size :
Now there are more than 8 billion (8 200 000 000) of us hungry to devour resources, and competing for those resources (including simply more territory to expand), organized in nations armed to the teeth, (who were already fighting for those resources, without any climate change), and with the capacity to destroy the biosphere several times...
Last edited:
don't worry, @Eltitoguay
these critical thinkers have been told by their billionaire handlers that everything will be ok for them ... and that the libs will be crying
these critical thinkers have been told by their billionaire handlers that everything will be ok for them ... and that the libs will be crying
Hiddenjems
Well-known member
Life on earth is tenacious. It’s survived average temperatures 40* higher than now and being a solid ball of ice for a hundred million years.
To think we are powerful enough to destroy the place is narcissism at its peak.
Hiddenjems
Well-known member
Any climate experts want to show me the part where these equations prove they’re right?
whose purporting to be climate experts here?
the deniers tend to be the ones putting up their 'math/science' arguments
the supporters are putting up data and observations of the current state of the climate
deniers are becoming 'climate scientists' of a sort, you become what you hate
you have zero to go off of contending we don't do our research or that we don't think. looks a lot like projection from here.
