Climate Change Consequences

Actually you get a smaller less efficient economy more government rules and regulations starvation in the third world and wars everywhere.

 

Don't forget attacks by locusts.
I don't even want to know where you came up with that, but it is pure fantasy.
Even the US department of Defense acknowledges Global Warming - and sees it as a threat.
You know better. Sure.
All those scientists just scheming to mess with you.
Wow.

 

Why would any of that be true?

China has taken over the leadership in manufacturing renewable technology.

Those are jobs WE could have but refused to invest in. THAT hurt our economy.

And OIL is the basis for most of the wars we've had to deal with for over 100 years

 

Nonsense. The Permian extinction was a massive event that occurred in three stages and produced huge changes in a fairly short period of time and ended with the death of 95% of all species on earth. The last 100 years have seen an average temp increase of around 1 degree and an increase in CO2 that fifty years ago we couldn't even have measured. Note 1 degree on a planet where the diurnal temperature range can be as much as 75 F. degrees borders on the meaningless.

 

Had I wish to include locusts I would have. Though believe it or not with fewer acres devoted to farming because of stupid environmental rules putting marginal lands out of business that becomes a very real possibility. The fact that people who work for the government are in favor of things that produce a larger government should not be a surprise to anyone. Especially when that government provides hefty financial and other rewards to those who empower it.

 

So, you're alleging the scientists are all on government payroll?
ALL AROUND THE WORLD???
And the hoax is to generate more government jobs???
Okay.....

 

If it isn't warming everywhere then how can it be "global" warming?

I've already pointed out that if not every place is warming then we should be seeing *more* extreme weather events because of increasing temp differentials. But we are seeing fewer extreme weather events.

Simple logic and thermodynamics says we aren't warming in just a few spots.

A simple assertion you seem to be unable to refute. All you offer are argumentative fallacies.

Tell me again who is being embarrased?

 

First all is baloney as you and I both know because not all scientist work for the government though most all of the alarmists do. Not necessarily our government but somebody's government.

 

Again, either every place is warming or the temp differential is increasing.

The first is disproven by my own data. The second is disproven by the fact that extreme weather events are decreasing instead of increasing.

The fact is that there has been no global warming for almost twenty years according to the satellite data. It is only the highly manipulated land/sea data that is being used to show warming.

And I know that a growing number of scientists are becoming critics of the global warming hypothesis. There are valid reasons for that criticism!

 

Sorry, I won't reply to you any more.
There has to be some reality to continue a discussion, and I do not see any.
You are too far away to reason with.

 

13% growth over 35 years is a LOT of growth when you consider it is worldwide. Deforestation only occurs in a few areas.

I agree there are a lot of things we could do. And that the fact we aren't *is* suspicious. Like always, follosw the money.

 

Alternative energy is *NOT* cheaper. If it was it wouldn't require huge subsidies.
Alternative energy simply cannot provide base loads consisently. So we have to maintain fossil fuel generation. Germany is finding that out. It's why they are now adding coal plants.

 

Are you kidding? There are HUGE research grants out there to prove global warming. And so far they have proven nothing!

The Koch's don't give out near the number of research grants the government does!

 

Oh really?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian–Triassic_extinction_event

 

Any new technology requires an investment.

And yes...once a technology becomes "mature" it's costs decrease tremendously and operation is VERY cheap

 

Really?

Germany's renewable energy sector is among the most innovative and successful worldwide.[citation needed] Net-generation from renewable energy sources in the German electricity sector has increased from 6.3% in 2000 to about 34% in 2016.[1]

On Sunday 15 May 2016 at 14:00 hours, renewables supplied nearly all of domestic electricity demand.[2]

While peak-generation from combined wind and solar reached a previous all-time high of 74% in April 2014,[3] wind power saw its best day ever on December 12, 2014, generating 562 GWh.[4] Germany has been called "the world's first major renewable energy economy".[5][6]

More than 23,000 wind turbines and 1.4 million solar PV systems are distributed all over the country's area of 357,000 square kilometers.[7][8] As of 2011, Germany's federal government is working on a new plan for increasing renewable energy commercialization,[9] with a particular focus on offshore wind farms.[10] A major challenge is the development of sufficient network capacities for transmitting the power generated in the North Sea to the large industrial consumers in southern parts of the country.[11]

According to official figures, some 370,000 people were employed in the renewable energy sector in 2010, especially in small and medium-sized companies. This is an increase of around 8% compared to 2009 (around 339,500 jobs), and well over twice the number of jobs in 2004 (160,500). About two-thirds of these jobs are attributed to the Renewable Energy Sources Act.[12][13]

 

Thanks for the confirmation.

 

Try reading about your event.

It had to do with three events. A meteor strike, massive volcanic activity and s LOT longer period than you represented.

NONE applies here

 

Look at the chat running alongside it changes were huge compared to what we are worrying about and the changes happen. Each event did cumulative damage, 1st was the siberian traps which put paid to most land animals probably didn't take much more than a hundred years before most land animals were gone, Temperatures went far higher than anything measured since the planet came to be. Though, if memory serves, it lasted much longer than that. The meteor strike seems to have boosted temps even higher and that triggered the third event which unleashed a lot of methane from anhydrous sources under the sea taking care of a whole lot of marine fauna and flora and raising temperatures higher still.

 

Please tell us if you 'know' that from actual measurements (if so please share) or are you just taking some political faction's word for it?

 

You mean like the "investment" in Solyndra by Obama?
You keep skipping over the fact that alternative energy is incapable of providing for base load much of the time. No amount of investment is going to fix that!

 

Pleae share any data from physical measurements that support that conclusion, but if the number just comes from some political faction be advised that you've been voted out.

 

go here: https://insideclimatenews.org/news/...greenest-city-building-coal-fired-power-plant

"Wind and solar energy are inherently intermittent, and engineers haven't yet developed cost-efficient technologies to store electricity generated by renewables. "
" the percentage of electricity produced from renewable sources has grown faster than anyone expected—from 6.8 percent in 2000 to more than 20 percent in 2012. The federal goal calls for renewables' share of electricity generation to rise to at least 35 percent by 2020." - (upside: where is the other 65% of energy going to come from?)

go here: http://www.theenergycollective.com/...s-nuclear-phase-out-leading-more-coal-burning
"Between 2011 and 2015 Germany will open 10.7 GW of new coal fired power stations. This is more new coal coal capacity than was constructed in the entire two decades after the fall of the Berlin Wall. The expected annual electricity production of these power stations will far exceed that of existing solar panels and will be approximately the same as that of Germany’s existing solar panels and wind turbines combined. Solar panels and wind turbines however have expected life spans of no more than 25 years. Coal power plants typically last 50 years or longer. At best you could call the recent developments in Germany’s electricity sector contradictory."

go here: www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/08/31/germany-insane-or-just-plain-stupid/#4b89975e4c4e
"But don’t worry. Germany is building about 25 clean coal-fired power plants to offset the loss of nuclear and address Germany’s admittedly “unaffordably expensive and unreliable” renewable portfolio (Der Spiegel)."

I can provide lots of additional links if you need more convincing.

 

Yes really. Even w/ subsidies and all that "inovation" they still can't even manage a fourth of their power from wind/solar/biomass:

Talk is easy. Money is hard.

 

They do. And your guess is wrong.

There are limits to the amount of CO2 that new trees can absorb.