Utopia Talk - Politics - england will be destroyed by climate

Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Thu Apr 18 21:00:53 2024

Utopia Talk / Politics / england will be destroyed by climate

Sam Adams
Member Fri Dec 27 19:14:18
http://cei.org/sites/default/files/29.png

Lol sorry you are going to freeze to death in just a few days seb.

Pillz
Member Fri Dec 27 23:57:06
F

Dukhat
Member Sat Dec 28 00:23:19
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Competitive_Enterprise_Institute

Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) is a libertarian think tank based in Washington DC.
It was founded by lobbyist Fred Smith, and has been funded by a laundry list of bogeymen, such as Koch Industries, the Scaife Foundations, Exxon, Philip Morris, etc. Like any of the Beltway think tanks that spews vulgar libertarianism, they take quite a consistent line against any government regulation of their financial backers.

"CEI is a major proponent of global warming denial, second-hand smoke denial, and denial of any science establishing that industrial activity can cause environmental damage. One of their adjuncts is the noted denialist shyster, Steve Milloy."

"Cooler Heads Coalition
The "Competitive Enterprise Institute" put together something called the "Cooler Heads Coalition," which is basically a committee that takes the output of the bullshit factory that comprises various denialist think tanks and funnels it into a single propaganda outlet (their website) and hypes denialist petitions. Cooler heads try to obscure their connections to vested interests which stand to lose if fossil fuel use is regulated.[1] They're linked to CFACT, the Heartland Institute and the Marshal Institute. [2]

Their website appears superficially like a genuine consumer organization and it can be hard for online enquirers to sort out who is behind what they browse.[3]

Cooler Heads Coalition hosted lectures by "Climate Misinformer, Richard Lindzen" more than once. [4] Lindzen stands accused of ignoring vital parts of Scientific data that go against the Cooler Heads Coalition agenda. [5] Lindzen was also involved with the The Great Global Warming Swindle which tries unreasonably to deny Global warming.

"Bureaucrash
They run an astroturf organization called Bureaucrash, which organizes libertarian "activists." Its communications director Lee Doren has a YouTube channel "HowTheWorldWorks," peddling laissez-faire talking points on the economy and environmental denialism.

"Africa Fighting Malaria
CEI also has connections to the astroturf group Africa Fighting Malaria, which exists mainly to shill for DDT, spread anti-environmentalism, and pay out large sums of money to its "fellows."

Samantha is too stupid to check sources but we already knew that.

Paramount
Member Sat Dec 28 03:36:12
“A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate by 2020.”

Lol, no wonder why US defence chiefs suppressed that ‘secret report’. Probably because it is a bs fake report. It doesn’t even say who authored the report.

Sam Adams
Member Sat Dec 28 05:30:31
Lol cuckhat tries to defend a proven lie.

Is there anything you do that isnt retarded, little child?

Rugian
Member Sat Dec 28 06:46:21
Is Dukhat seriously trying to claim that the OP image is not credible?

http://www...2004/feb/22/usnews.theobserver

Also, lol @ using Rational Wiki while decrying others for the use of biased sources. You have the mentality of a 19-year old poli sci major, Dukhat.

Daemon
Member Sat Dec 28 09:10:11
With the power of GOOGLE I present:

http://www...ate-change-came-chesapeake-bay

IN OCTOBER 2003, A LITTLE-KNOWN THINK TANK in the Department of Defense quietly released a report warning that climate change could happen suddenly—so suddenly it could pose a major threat to our country's national security.

The title of the Pentagon report was a mouthful: An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and its Implications for United States National Security. Those implications included rising seas, flooded coastal cities, at least one drowned country, droughts, food shortages, failed states, and fortress states. The report was never designed as a scientific prediction. It was a speculative effort by defense strategists to dramatize all the security threats the country would face if the climate suddenly shifted.
[...]

http://grist.org/article/pentagoners/
[...]
While The Observer sensationalized the story with its erroneous claim that the report was “secret” and “suppressed by U.S. defense chiefs” when in fact it had already been publicly discussed, the document is worthy of even the British press’ flair for melodrama.
[...]
It wasn’t like, ‘Oh, wow, that totally debunks the president’s stand on global warming,’ because it was merely a thought exercise. We don’t have a crystal ball. We don’t really know.”

When pressed to explain the point of a “thought exercise” that can have no policy implications, Hetlage said, “People should feel comforted that we are thinking about contingencies.”
[...]

Paramount
Member Sat Dec 28 10:13:44
http://www...ate-change-came-chesapeake-bay

^ No one is going to read all that wall of text.

They need to come up with much shorter and hitting lines that people will actually read and understand, such as: "Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years".

Seb
Member Sat Dec 28 11:15:34
The OP refers to a true story about a real pentagon report that referenced some rather speculative scenario reports.

Sam Adams
Member Sat Dec 28 13:33:48
Lol. Or maybe if you were honest with yourself you would admit your nonsensical hype was simply wrong.

jergul
large member Sat Dec 28 20:11:05
The US military has contigency studies on everything. Including abrupt climate change.

Dukhat
Member Sat Dec 28 20:46:56
Samantha doubling down on stupid. Cuckservatives rally together to protect the stupid because it fits their preconceived notions.

Idiots.

Seb
Member Sun Dec 29 03:48:05
To my knowledge, none of the big climate models predict Siberia for the UK, Sam, but you wanted to join the air force, so "logically" this is your own selfpwnage.

Sam Adams
Member Thu Jan 02 12:20:18
"To my knowledge, none of the big climate models predict Siberia for the UK"

Correct. There is no possibility of this at all in a warmin world. Yet the crazed left wing guardian still ran with it, and plebs like cuckhat, unable to think on their own, slurp it up.

Habebe
Member Thu Jan 02 12:27:40
What ever happened to the hole in the ozone layer?

TJ
Member Thu Jan 02 12:48:20
http://www...-on-record-since-its-discovery

jergul
large member Thu Jan 02 12:59:51
Habebe
The world got together and solved it. But not me.

Trawlers had exceptions to changing coolants. The part where freezers are supposed to be closed systems is very theoretical in the Barents Sea.

We lost millions upon millions of refrigerator/AC unit contents of freon.

Happy days. I can somewhat relate to how that SS guy must have felt before he was deported for trial.

Habebe
Member Thu Jan 02 13:01:31
Perhaps, it seems that climate change has helped the ozone according to the NASA link....at least in part.

jergul
large member Thu Jan 02 13:02:26
Sammy
Gulf Stream slowdown/shutdown is a scenario.

jergul
large member Thu Jan 02 13:08:32
Habebe
Rebuild it perhaps. But to rebuild, you have to first stop destroying it. Its pure chemistry and how CFCs interact with O3.

CFCs are incidentally powerful climate warming gases (by molecule - far more powerful than CO2).

In before gaslighting sammy: No, coolants do not heat the climate. They are however good at trapping energy that would otherwise have been sent back into space.

Habebe
Member Thu Jan 02 13:13:09
The funny thing is that while " rebuilding the ozone" we are increasing greenhouse gasses since ozone is a greenhouse gas.

Forwyn
Member Thu Jan 02 13:16:56
Cuckhat, who whines about sources, unironically shares "rational wiki". lulz

jergul
large member Thu Jan 02 14:09:53
Habebe
The O3 target is 0.3 ppm. Air density in the stratosphere goes from say 15% of surface density then trends towards 0% (though there is a volume increase of course as the stratosphere is bigger).

"The total mass of ozone in the atmosphere is about 3 billion metric tons. That may seem like a lot, but it is only 0.00006 percent of the atmosphere"

Nasa

CO2 emissions in 2018 (a single year): 37.1 billion metric tons.

The internet

Sam Adams
Member Thu Jan 02 14:56:57
"Gulf Stream slowdown/shutdown is a scenario."

Rofl. Perhaps in movies. Not in the real world.

Dukhat
Member Thu Jan 02 16:02:27
Literally everything the cuckservatives say is factually wrong.

You fucking imbeciles.

jergul
large member Thu Jan 02 16:05:01
Wow, so you are an expert not only of weather, but now of water?

They should make you a minor Norse Godlet.

There are concerns about what the fuck will happen as salinity changes due to melt off. 1000 year full cycle for deep water does not really matter if a tipping point is far earlier than 100% exchange.

seb
Member Thu Jan 02 17:33:52
Sam Adams:

1. So why direct the post at me again?
2. The story is a good one and worth printing. If the pentagon is publishing reports about how to respond to radical climate change like the UK becoming Siberian (which is true) why is the US govt at the same time silencing it's climate scientists (as it was)?

In fact, had this been covered by the science correspondent a new angle emerges: why is the US govt under Bush preventing the actual climate scientists talking about their findings, while allowing the pentagon to produce reports that are so clearly unfounded in science and misunderstanding of climate change modes, and is it then the case had the US govt for purely ideological reasons contributing to waste and Undermining defence planning by making dissemination of climate science findings to defence planners harder?

seb
Member Thu Jan 02 17:36:32
Jergul:

The net effect of that still isn't Siberian.

Maybe a climate similar to what Siberia might then look like, which notably wouldn't include permafrost.

jergul
large member Thu Jan 02 18:26:30
Siberian is sort of a figure of speech. Why would permafrost be notable? And why would you think that might not occur? Additional local cooling is to be expected from glacial formation in the highlands for example. Even Edinburough cuts through the lower part of the Hudson Bay.

But my point is mostly we don't know what will happen if the gulf stream is disrupted.

It will get very hot some places for sure. The system does exchange heat after all.

jergul
large member Thu Jan 02 18:27:25
Edinburg's latitude*.

Sam Adams
Member Thu Jan 02 19:10:32

"1. So why direct the post at me again? "

Because it is your country and more importantly you have a bad habit of listening to crazed left wing hype sources.

"They should make you a minor Norse Godlet. "

They should. Fortunately, they pay me like one so thats good enough for me.

Sam Adams
Member Thu Jan 02 19:14:58
"But my point is mostly we don't know what will happen if the gulf stream is disrupted. "

double wrong. We know what would happen and it cannot happen. The gulf stream cannot be significantly disrupted so long as the continents are in the place they are and our orbit, spin rate, and solar input remain approximately the same.

Sam Adams
Member Thu Jan 02 19:19:39
You see jergul, salinity means nothing to the gulf stream. Even without the gulf stream england would not be siberian.

jergul
large member Thu Jan 02 23:08:13
Gaslighting again sammy. Try to find a new debating technique, mkay?

I don't fucking care what you mean by "significantly disrupted".

I said "disrupted".

Changing salinity changes how ocean water levels interact. It is important to how ocean currents flow.

We don't know what will happen and what impact that will have.

Sam Adams
Member Thu Jan 02 23:26:21
"It is important to how ocean currents flow."

It is utterly meaningless to how surface currents flow.

"We don't know what will happen and what impact that will have."

You dont know. I do. Thats why they pay me what they pay me.

Habebe
Member Thu Jan 02 23:57:18
A convenient truth_ Steven Levity

http://www.......1.........0i71.9sEOjlLytsM

The top link

jergul
large member Fri Jan 03 00:04:18
Sammy
lulz@water density not having an impact on how water flows between ocean levels.

Also, what have I said about gas-lighting? Stop reframing the argument to something other than the one made. It makes you look stupid.

I am sure you think you are quite the expert. One step up from a talking head. Have you considered your own radio-show?

jergul
large member Fri Jan 03 00:05:19
I recommend twice monthly at a 2 am timeslot.

Sam Adams
Member Fri Jan 03 00:29:21
I see jergul has learned one of the fashionable liberal buzzwords that means nothing.

Dukhat
Member Fri Jan 03 00:35:27
Samantha already owned but people keep interacting like what he said wasn't completely debunked. Utopia politics is a shithole. Basically a virtual nursing home for people who are mentally if not physically infirm.

seb
Member Fri Jan 03 09:25:29
Jergul:

The implication is the report would mean military effects. To be explicit, yes, if there was no gulf stream, based on latitude, the UK *now* would be much colder. However, for the gulf stream to have been sufficiently disrupted, the temperature of these latitudes would be much warmer than now. Net, the UK largely remains temperate, maybe a bit colder.

I suspect the pentagon report writers may have added 1 and 1 and got 5.

Sam Adams
Member Fri Jan 03 09:50:46
"I suspect the pentagon report writers may have added 1 and 1 and got 5."

Unlikely. Far more likely is that the guardian reporters got confused.

jergul
large member Fri Jan 03 10:14:32
Seb
I tend to agree. I was merely disputing the claim that there was absolutely no scenario.

Sammy
Military analysts (particularly from think tanks) get things horribly wrong all the time.

Jergul: says *stuff*
Sammy: Jergul is crazy. Look everyone crazy. You all agree, crazy.

Gaslighting is a thing. You do it all the time. Mostly aimed at Seb, but often at me.

Its lazy and makes you seem stupid.

Sam Adams
Member Fri Jan 03 11:16:59
Your new liberal buzzword doesnt make you look any less confused jergul

jergul
large member Fri Jan 03 11:22:30
Its not a new term. I've known of the play for decades.

Read books Sammy. Know stuff.

seb
Member Fri Jan 03 11:42:14
Sam:

What could the pentagon have written that the Guardian reporters could misconstrue as saying that the UK would be Siberian?

Far more likely Bush's daft policy, which you supported at the time, of banning US climate researchers from talking or publishing their work meant the pentagon got the wrong end of the stick.

seb
Member Fri Jan 03 12:02:20
Here is the report. The pentagon paid 100k for this.

seb
Member Fri Jan 03 12:03:01
http://www...g=AOvVaw0SOjAPJT2I-S8-vmhJRjIh

CrownRoyal
Member Fri Jan 03 12:12:37
^this, and similar documents, might be a good enough justification for a president to declare national security emergency, and use pentagon budget however he or she sees fit. Without explicit congressional appropriation, I mean, like donald tried for his wall. On a side note

Sam Adams
Member Fri Jan 03 12:29:18
"Here is the report. The pentagon paid 100k for this.
seb
Member Fri Jan 03 12:03:01
http://www...g=AOvVaw0SOjAPJT2I-S8-vmhJRjI"

Lol. That report is indeed retarded. But the pentagon didnt write it and ignored it. If the guardian wasnt retarded, they would have ignored it too.

seb
Member Fri Jan 03 12:33:49
Pentagon commissioned it from consultants - same shit.

seb
Member Fri Jan 03 12:36:34
The Guardian story remains perfectly good: on the one hand the US govt was trying to deny climate change was occurring/man made and preventing is scientists releasing their finding. And on the other hand, it was commissioning reports on the defence implications of the worst (im)possible case scenarios (what was it spending on central case scenarios?).

So clearly the suppression of conventional climate science was in bad faith.

Sam Adams
Member Fri Jan 03 13:03:58
"The Guardian story remains perfectly good: "

Lol. Except for you know, being exactly wrong. Here we are it. Its 2020. Their claims didnt happen. But thats perfect according to seb?

seb
Member Fri Jan 03 15:26:48
Sam:

Your claims you mean?

After all, if you are saying the Guardian reporting on the claims made by the report, which they attribute to the report, become their claims because they the report, then clearly they become your claims too when you repeat the Guardian.

Or maybe that's just really, really dumb Sam. Grow up a bit. You've been doing this for over 20 years, are you really do intellectually stunted this still amuses you?

seb
Member Fri Jan 03 15:30:13
Tl;Dr - the article claims nothing more than that the report exists, its contents, the circumstances of is commissioning and the hypocrisy of the American govts denial of climate change. All of which are true.

The fact the report is shit is irrelevant. It existed, it's a fair representation of the circumstance and commissioning and its contents, and the accusation of hypocrisy spot on.

jergul
large member Fri Jan 03 15:37:47
In sum. The Guardian reported.

Sam Adams
Member Fri Jan 03 15:49:26
Wrongly, as they usually do. The claim they copied was obviously wrong, and on top of they they ignored the low probability attached to it.

Look seb, theres no way to weasle out of this. Your guys exaggerated claims have been proven to be wrong yet again, as they always are.

Dukhat
Member Fri Jan 03 18:27:50
Samantha was already owned long ago in this thread.

Shit source using distorted representation of a report that nobody even read.

And yet because he keeps doubling down on stupid, he thinks he is more right.

Fucking idiotic.

Sam Adams
Member Fri Jan 03 19:41:45
Cuckhat and jergul and seb. Thats a fucking legendary lineup of brains.

Keep it up cuckhat and im sure you will be remembered for great things.

Rofl.

Dukhat
Member Fri Jan 03 21:15:38
Just because you get the last word doesn't make you any more of an idiot for using a shit source by some Republican lobbyist.

Sam Adams
Member Sat Jan 04 11:19:44
http://gla...-climate-change-uncertainties/

Cuckhat strikes again.

Seb
Member Sun Jan 05 08:27:05
Sam, you copied the claim in the title thread.

Seb
Member Sun Jan 05 08:30:38
By contrast what the guardian says is "Now pentagon tells Bush: climate will destroy us".

They didn't endorse the claims the report did.

You however, in the thread title, did. You obviously didn't mean it sarcastically, because you now claim that typing the central thrust of the report obviously means endorsement.

Can't believe you fell for this shit Sam. Idiot.

Sam Adams
Member Sun Jan 05 11:29:12
Oh so when a crazed leftist source makes an obviously wrong global warming claim for the 50th time, your new defense is to claim it was sarcasm?

How childishly retarded.

Lol seriously?

Seb
Member Sun Jan 05 15:50:54
Sam:

They didn't make a claim, period. They reported a claim someone else made.

You did make the claim. By your own standards. Childishly retarded is a good description of this standard.

Sam Adams
Member Sun Jan 05 22:02:20
You are actually retarded

show deleted posts

Sam Adams Member	Fri Dec 27 19:14:18 http://cei.org/sites/default/files/29.png Lol sorry you are going to freeze to death in just a few days seb.
Pillz Member	Fri Dec 27 23:57:06 F
Dukhat Member	Sat Dec 28 00:23:19 https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Competitive_Enterprise_Institute Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) is a libertarian think tank based in Washington DC. It was founded by lobbyist Fred Smith, and has been funded by a laundry list of bogeymen, such as Koch Industries, the Scaife Foundations, Exxon, Philip Morris, etc. Like any of the Beltway think tanks that spews vulgar libertarianism, they take quite a consistent line against any government regulation of their financial backers. "CEI is a major proponent of global warming denial, second-hand smoke denial, and denial of any science establishing that industrial activity can cause environmental damage. One of their adjuncts is the noted denialist shyster, Steve Milloy." "Cooler Heads Coalition The "Competitive Enterprise Institute" put together something called the "Cooler Heads Coalition," which is basically a committee that takes the output of the bullshit factory that comprises various denialist think tanks and funnels it into a single propaganda outlet (their website) and hypes denialist petitions. Cooler heads try to obscure their connections to vested interests which stand to lose if fossil fuel use is regulated.[1] They're linked to CFACT, the Heartland Institute and the Marshal Institute. [2] Their website appears superficially like a genuine consumer organization and it can be hard for online enquirers to sort out who is behind what they browse.[3] Cooler Heads Coalition hosted lectures by "Climate Misinformer, Richard Lindzen" more than once. [4] Lindzen stands accused of ignoring vital parts of Scientific data that go against the Cooler Heads Coalition agenda. [5] Lindzen was also involved with the The Great Global Warming Swindle which tries unreasonably to deny Global warming. "Bureaucrash They run an astroturf organization called Bureaucrash, which organizes libertarian "activists." Its communications director Lee Doren has a YouTube channel "HowTheWorldWorks," peddling laissez-faire talking points on the economy and environmental denialism. "Africa Fighting Malaria CEI also has connections to the astroturf group Africa Fighting Malaria, which exists mainly to shill for DDT, spread anti-environmentalism, and pay out large sums of money to its "fellows." Samantha is too stupid to check sources but we already knew that.
Paramount Member	Sat Dec 28 03:36:12 “A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate by 2020.” Lol, no wonder why US defence chiefs suppressed that ‘secret report’. Probably because it is a bs fake report. It doesn’t even say who authored the report.
Sam Adams Member	Sat Dec 28 05:30:31 Lol cuckhat tries to defend a proven lie. Is there anything you do that isnt retarded, little child?
Rugian Member	Sat Dec 28 06:46:21 Is Dukhat seriously trying to claim that the OP image is not credible? http://www...2004/feb/22/usnews.theobserver Also, lol @ using Rational Wiki while decrying others for the use of biased sources. You have the mentality of a 19-year old poli sci major, Dukhat.
Daemon Member	Sat Dec 28 09:10:11 With the power of GOOGLE I present: http://www...ate-change-came-chesapeake-bay IN OCTOBER 2003, A LITTLE-KNOWN THINK TANK in the Department of Defense quietly released a report warning that climate change could happen suddenly—so suddenly it could pose a major threat to our country's national security. The title of the Pentagon report was a mouthful: An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and its Implications for United States National Security. Those implications included rising seas, flooded coastal cities, at least one drowned country, droughts, food shortages, failed states, and fortress states. The report was never designed as a scientific prediction. It was a speculative effort by defense strategists to dramatize all the security threats the country would face if the climate suddenly shifted. [...] http://grist.org/article/pentagoners/ [...] While The Observer sensationalized the story with its erroneous claim that the report was “secret” and “suppressed by U.S. defense chiefs” when in fact it had already been publicly discussed, the document is worthy of even the British press’ flair for melodrama. [...] It wasn’t like, ‘Oh, wow, that totally debunks the president’s stand on global warming,’ because it was merely a thought exercise. We don’t have a crystal ball. We don’t really know.” When pressed to explain the point of a “thought exercise” that can have no policy implications, Hetlage said, “People should feel comforted that we are thinking about contingencies.” [...]
Paramount Member	Sat Dec 28 10:13:44 http://www...ate-change-came-chesapeake-bay ^ No one is going to read all that wall of text. They need to come up with much shorter and hitting lines that people will actually read and understand, such as: "Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years".
Seb Member	Sat Dec 28 11:15:34 The OP refers to a true story about a real pentagon report that referenced some rather speculative scenario reports.
Sam Adams Member	Sat Dec 28 13:33:48 Lol. Or maybe if you were honest with yourself you would admit your nonsensical hype was simply wrong.
jergul large member	Sat Dec 28 20:11:05 The US military has contigency studies on everything. Including abrupt climate change.
Dukhat Member	Sat Dec 28 20:46:56 Samantha doubling down on stupid. Cuckservatives rally together to protect the stupid because it fits their preconceived notions. Idiots.
Seb Member	Sun Dec 29 03:48:05 To my knowledge, none of the big climate models predict Siberia for the UK, Sam, but you wanted to join the air force, so "logically" this is your own selfpwnage.
Sam Adams Member	Thu Jan 02 12:20:18 "To my knowledge, none of the big climate models predict Siberia for the UK" Correct. There is no possibility of this at all in a warmin world. Yet the crazed left wing guardian still ran with it, and plebs like cuckhat, unable to think on their own, slurp it up.
Habebe Member	Thu Jan 02 12:27:40 What ever happened to the hole in the ozone layer?
TJ Member	Thu Jan 02 12:48:20 http://www...-on-record-since-its-discovery
jergul large member	Thu Jan 02 12:59:51 Habebe The world got together and solved it. But not me. Trawlers had exceptions to changing coolants. The part where freezers are supposed to be closed systems is very theoretical in the Barents Sea. We lost millions upon millions of refrigerator/AC unit contents of freon. Happy days. I can somewhat relate to how that SS guy must have felt before he was deported for trial.
Habebe Member	Thu Jan 02 13:01:31 Perhaps, it seems that climate change has helped the ozone according to the NASA link....at least in part.
jergul large member	Thu Jan 02 13:02:26 Sammy Gulf Stream slowdown/shutdown is a scenario.
jergul large member	Thu Jan 02 13:08:32 Habebe Rebuild it perhaps. But to rebuild, you have to first stop destroying it. Its pure chemistry and how CFCs interact with O3. CFCs are incidentally powerful climate warming gases (by molecule - far more powerful than CO2). In before gaslighting sammy: No, coolants do not heat the climate. They are however good at trapping energy that would otherwise have been sent back into space.
Habebe Member	Thu Jan 02 13:13:09 The funny thing is that while " rebuilding the ozone" we are increasing greenhouse gasses since ozone is a greenhouse gas.
Forwyn Member	Thu Jan 02 13:16:56 Cuckhat, who whines about sources, unironically shares "rational wiki". lulz
jergul large member	Thu Jan 02 14:09:53 Habebe The O3 target is 0.3 ppm. Air density in the stratosphere goes from say 15% of surface density then trends towards 0% (though there is a volume increase of course as the stratosphere is bigger). "The total mass of ozone in the atmosphere is about 3 billion metric tons. That may seem like a lot, but it is only 0.00006 percent of the atmosphere" Nasa CO2 emissions in 2018 (a single year): 37.1 billion metric tons. The internet
Sam Adams Member	Thu Jan 02 14:56:57 "Gulf Stream slowdown/shutdown is a scenario." Rofl. Perhaps in movies. Not in the real world.
Dukhat Member	Thu Jan 02 16:02:27 Literally everything the cuckservatives say is factually wrong. You fucking imbeciles.
jergul large member	Thu Jan 02 16:05:01 Wow, so you are an expert not only of weather, but now of water? They should make you a minor Norse Godlet. There are concerns about what the fuck will happen as salinity changes due to melt off. 1000 year full cycle for deep water does not really matter if a tipping point is far earlier than 100% exchange.
seb Member	Thu Jan 02 17:33:52 Sam Adams: 1. So why direct the post at me again? 2. The story is a good one and worth printing. If the pentagon is publishing reports about how to respond to radical climate change like the UK becoming Siberian (which is true) why is the US govt at the same time silencing it's climate scientists (as it was)? In fact, had this been covered by the science correspondent a new angle emerges: why is the US govt under Bush preventing the actual climate scientists talking about their findings, while allowing the pentagon to produce reports that are so clearly unfounded in science and misunderstanding of climate change modes, and is it then the case had the US govt for purely ideological reasons contributing to waste and Undermining defence planning by making dissemination of climate science findings to defence planners harder?
seb Member	Thu Jan 02 17:36:32 Jergul: The net effect of that still isn't Siberian. Maybe a climate similar to what Siberia might then look like, which notably wouldn't include permafrost.
jergul large member	Thu Jan 02 18:26:30 Siberian is sort of a figure of speech. Why would permafrost be notable? And why would you think that might not occur? Additional local cooling is to be expected from glacial formation in the highlands for example. Even Edinburough cuts through the lower part of the Hudson Bay. But my point is mostly we don't know what will happen if the gulf stream is disrupted. It will get very hot some places for sure. The system does exchange heat after all.
jergul large member	Thu Jan 02 18:27:25 *Edinburg's latitude.**
Sam Adams Member	Thu Jan 02 19:10:32 "1. So why direct the post at me again? " Because it is your country and more importantly you have a bad habit of listening to crazed left wing hype sources. "They should make you a minor Norse Godlet. " They should. Fortunately, they pay me like one so thats good enough for me.
Sam Adams Member	Thu Jan 02 19:14:58 "But my point is mostly we don't know what will happen if the gulf stream is disrupted. " double wrong. We know what would happen and it cannot happen. The gulf stream cannot be significantly disrupted so long as the continents are in the place they are and our orbit, spin rate, and solar input remain approximately the same.
Sam Adams Member	Thu Jan 02 19:19:39 You see jergul, salinity means nothing to the gulf stream. Even without the gulf stream england would not be siberian.
jergul large member	Thu Jan 02 23:08:13 Gaslighting again sammy. Try to find a new debating technique, mkay? I don't fucking care what you mean by "significantly disrupted". I said "disrupted". Changing salinity changes how ocean water levels interact. It is important to how ocean currents flow. We don't know what will happen and what impact that will have.
Sam Adams Member	Thu Jan 02 23:26:21 "It is important to how ocean currents flow." It is utterly meaningless to how surface currents flow. "We don't know what will happen and what impact that will have." You dont know. I do. Thats why they pay me what they pay me.
Habebe Member	Thu Jan 02 23:57:18 A convenient truth_ Steven Levity http://www.......1.........0i71.9sEOjlLytsM The top link
jergul large member	Fri Jan 03 00:04:18 Sammy lulz@water density not having an impact on how water flows between ocean levels. Also, what have I said about gas-lighting? Stop reframing the argument to something other than the one made. It makes you look stupid. I am sure you think you are quite the expert. One step up from a talking head. Have you considered your own radio-show?
jergul large member	Fri Jan 03 00:05:19 I recommend twice monthly at a 2 am timeslot.
Sam Adams Member	Fri Jan 03 00:29:21 I see jergul has learned one of the fashionable liberal buzzwords that means nothing.
Dukhat Member	Fri Jan 03 00:35:27 Samantha already owned but people keep interacting like what he said wasn't completely debunked. Utopia politics is a shithole. Basically a virtual nursing home for people who are mentally if not physically infirm.
seb Member	Fri Jan 03 09:25:29 Jergul: The implication is the report would mean military effects. To be explicit, yes, if there was no gulf stream, based on latitude, the UK now would be much colder. However, for the gulf stream to have been sufficiently disrupted, the temperature of these latitudes would be much warmer than now. Net, the UK largely remains temperate, maybe a bit colder. I suspect the pentagon report writers may have added 1 and 1 and got 5.
Sam Adams Member	Fri Jan 03 09:50:46 "I suspect the pentagon report writers may have added 1 and 1 and got 5." Unlikely. Far more likely is that the guardian reporters got confused.
jergul large member	Fri Jan 03 10:14:32 Seb I tend to agree. I was merely disputing the claim that there was absolutely no scenario. Sammy Military analysts (particularly from think tanks) get things horribly wrong all the time. Jergul: says stuff Sammy: Jergul is crazy. Look everyone crazy. You all agree, crazy. Gaslighting is a thing. You do it all the time. Mostly aimed at Seb, but often at me. Its lazy and makes you seem stupid.
Sam Adams Member	Fri Jan 03 11:16:59 Your new liberal buzzword doesnt make you look any less confused jergul
jergul large member	Fri Jan 03 11:22:30 Its not a new term. I've known of the play for decades. Read books Sammy. Know stuff.
seb Member	Fri Jan 03 11:42:14 Sam: What could the pentagon have written that the Guardian reporters could misconstrue as saying that the UK would be Siberian? Far more likely Bush's daft policy, which you supported at the time, of banning US climate researchers from talking or publishing their work meant the pentagon got the wrong end of the stick.
seb Member	Fri Jan 03 12:02:20 Here is the report. The pentagon paid 100k for this.
seb Member	Fri Jan 03 12:03:01 http://www...g=AOvVaw0SOjAPJT2I-S8-vmhJRjIh
CrownRoyal Member	Fri Jan 03 12:12:37 ^this, and similar documents, might be a good enough justification for a president to declare national security emergency, and use pentagon budget however he or she sees fit. Without explicit congressional appropriation, I mean, like donald tried for his wall. On a side note
Sam Adams Member	Fri Jan 03 12:29:18 "Here is the report. The pentagon paid 100k for this. seb Member Fri Jan 03 12:03:01 http://www...g=AOvVaw0SOjAPJT2I-S8-vmhJRjI" Lol. That report is indeed retarded. But the pentagon didnt write it and ignored it. If the guardian wasnt retarded, they would have ignored it too.
seb Member	Fri Jan 03 12:33:49 Pentagon commissioned it from consultants - same shit.
seb Member	Fri Jan 03 12:36:34 The Guardian story remains perfectly good: on the one hand the US govt was trying to deny climate change was occurring/man made and preventing is scientists releasing their finding. And on the other hand, it was commissioning reports on the defence implications of the worst (im)possible case scenarios (what was it spending on central case scenarios?). So clearly the suppression of conventional climate science was in bad faith.
Sam Adams Member	Fri Jan 03 13:03:58 "The Guardian story remains perfectly good: " Lol. Except for you know, being exactly wrong. Here we are it. Its 2020. Their claims didnt happen. But thats perfect according to seb?
seb Member	Fri Jan 03 15:26:48 Sam: Your claims you mean? After all, if you are saying the Guardian reporting on the claims made by the report, which they attribute to the report, become their claims because they the report, then clearly they become your claims too when you repeat the Guardian. Or maybe that's just really, really dumb Sam. Grow up a bit. You've been doing this for over 20 years, are you really do intellectually stunted this still amuses you?
seb Member	Fri Jan 03 15:30:13 Tl;Dr - the article claims nothing more than that the report exists, its contents, the circumstances of is commissioning and the hypocrisy of the American govts denial of climate change. All of which are true. The fact the report is shit is irrelevant. It existed, it's a fair representation of the circumstance and commissioning and its contents, and the accusation of hypocrisy spot on.
jergul large member	Fri Jan 03 15:37:47 In sum. The Guardian reported.
Sam Adams Member	Fri Jan 03 15:49:26 Wrongly, as they usually do. The claim they copied was obviously wrong, and on top of they they ignored the low probability attached to it. Look seb, theres no way to weasle out of this. Your guys exaggerated claims have been proven to be wrong yet again, as they always are.
Dukhat Member	Fri Jan 03 18:27:50 Samantha was already owned long ago in this thread. Shit source using distorted representation of a report that nobody even read. And yet because he keeps doubling down on stupid, he thinks he is more right. Fucking idiotic.
Sam Adams Member	Fri Jan 03 19:41:45 Cuckhat and jergul and seb. Thats a fucking legendary lineup of brains. Keep it up cuckhat and im sure you will be remembered for great things. Rofl.
Dukhat Member	Fri Jan 03 21:15:38 Just because you get the last word doesn't make you any more of an idiot for using a shit source by some Republican lobbyist.
Sam Adams Member	Sat Jan 04 11:19:44 http://gla...-climate-change-uncertainties/ Cuckhat strikes again.
Seb Member	Sun Jan 05 08:27:05 Sam, you copied the claim in the title thread.
Seb Member	Sun Jan 05 08:30:38 By contrast what the guardian says is "Now pentagon tells Bush: climate will destroy us". They didn't endorse the claims the report did. You however, in the thread title, did. You obviously didn't mean it sarcastically, because you now claim that typing the central thrust of the report obviously means endorsement. Can't believe you fell for this shit Sam. Idiot.
Sam Adams Member	Sun Jan 05 11:29:12 Oh so when a crazed leftist source makes an obviously wrong global warming claim for the 50th time, your new defense is to claim it was sarcasm? How childishly retarded. Lol seriously?
Seb Member	Sun Jan 05 15:50:54 Sam: They didn't make a claim, period. They reported a claim someone else made. You did make the claim. By your own standards. Childishly retarded is a good description of this standard.
Sam Adams Member	Sun Jan 05 22:02:20 You are actually retarded
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: