No need for the EPA

[brenthutch 444]

So it was warmer 1300 years ago.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

brenthutch

***That is like saying that you will only believe that gun sales are up if the murder rate goes up as well.

Yeah....exactly like that.

Yes it is like that......just as stupid.

How would, a prediction about the possible effects of climate change coming true, prove that climate change is man made?

[brenthutch 444]

When it falls outside the range of natural variability.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

brenthutch

When it falls outside the range of natural variability.

What is the range of natural variability of all those events?

At what point would being outside that range prove that climate change is man made?

How do you even draw that correlation?

[brenthutch 444]

Maybe this will help.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xRNZOlh10rw

From Good Morning America, keep in mind that it is now 2017

[normiss 801]

A youtube video from an entertainment show....was there a point to this?

[SkyDekker 1,465]

brenthutch

Maybe this will help.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xRNZOlh10rw

From Good Morning America, keep in mind that it is now 2017

Ahh, you base your opinion of global warming on entertainment shows.

It does indeed help, thank you.

[brenthutch 444]

I was mindful of my audience. BTW those were bonafide climate scientists making those predictions.

[billvon 2,998]

>When it falls outside the range of natural variability.

Less than two months ago you were a type III denier - claiming that CO2 and its consequent warming was a good thing, and would green the world, stop hunger, cure acne etc. and what sort of idiot would be against that?

Now you're back to a type II denier - "it's natural."

Make up your mind.

[brenthutch 444]

yoink

***Now that the EPA will no longer be chasing its tail over CO2, it can get back to science based environmental protection.

What data would it take to convince you that climate change as a result of man-made CO2 was real?

I answered your question, now answer mine.
What data would it take to convince you that climate change is natural? How many failed predictions of death and destruction before you question AGW dogma?

[jakee 1,499]

brenthutch

When it falls outside the range of natural variability.

Brent... that's just dumb.

If I leave my car outside with the windows up and electrics off the natural variability of temperatures inside could range from -10C to +50C. Yet when I get in the car in the morning and the temp is 5C, I turn the heater on and it quickly becomes 20C it is most definitely the heater which is making the temperature change, even though the end result is nowhere near the high temperature the car could reach on its own given the right conditions.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,499]

brenthutch

I answered your question, now answer mine.
What data would it take to convince you that climate change is natural? How many failed predictions of death and destruction before you question AGW dogma?

You're conflating two different issues.

1) Is AGW happening?

2) What are the consequences of AGW?

If someone did provide an incorrect answer to Q2, it doesn't follow that the answer to Q1 must therefore be 'no'.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[brenthutch 444]

[url]

jakee

***I answered your question, now answer mine.
What data would it take to convince you that climate change is natural? How many failed predictions of death and destruction before you question AGW dogma?

h
You're conflating two different issues.

1) Is AGW happening?

2) What are the consequences of AGW?

If someone did provide an incorrect answer to Q2, it doesn't follow that the answer to Q1 must therefore be 'no'.

It makes all of the difference in the world when it comes to policy.
If AGW is real and it is happening but there is no real downside and its effects are largely beneficial; has completely different policy implications than, AGW is real it's happening and we are all going to die.

[jakee 1,499]

brenthutch

It makes all of the difference in the world when it comes to policy.

Now you're conflating a third thing.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[brenthutch 444]

jakee

***It makes all of the difference in the world when it comes to policy.

Now you're conflating a third thing.

Why do you think I give a rats ass about AGW if was merely an esoteric academic exercise. It is ALL about policy.

[jakee 1,499]

brenthutch

******It makes all of the difference in the world when it comes to policy.

Now you're conflating a third thing.

Why do you think I give a rats ass about AGW if was merely an esoteric academic exercise. It is ALL about policy.

Actually no, whether or not AGW is actually happening is not a question of policy, it's a question of reality.

Your problem is that if there are three questions;
1) Is AGW happening?
2) What are the consequences
3) What policies should be enacted because of it/do I like those policies?

You try and make the answer to questions 2 and particularly 3 affect the answer to question 1.

It doesn't work like that.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[brenthutch 444]

jakee

*********It makes all of the difference in the world when it comes to policy.

Now you're conflating a third thing.

Why do you think I give a rats ass about AGW if was merely an esoteric academic exercise. It is ALL about policy.

Actually no, whether or not AGW is actually happening is not a question of policy, it's a question of reality.

Your problem is that if there are three questions;
1) Is AGW happening?
2) What are the consequences
3) What policies should be enacted because of it/do I like those policies?

You try and make the answer to questions 2 and particularly 3 affect the answer to question 1.

It doesn't work like that.


There is ZERO proof that any of the observed/adjusted warming is a result of man made CO2.
There is ZERO evidence that the slight warming is anything other than beneficial.
And conceding points one and two there are no proposed solutions othat would have anything other than a negative economic impact, while doing nothing to prevent bad weather.
But that does not prevent a bunch of quixotic leftists from trying. After all "we have to do SOMETHING!!!"

[yoink 321]

brenthutch

There is ZERO proof that any of the observed/adjusted warming is a result of man made CO2.
There is ZERO evidence that the slight warming is anything other than beneficial.

You can state stuff as fact all you like, but it simply isn't true.

There's plenty of data to support both of those positions. You may not choose to believe it, but stating that there is ZERO(Caps must make it true?) proof is simply WRONG. And that's a fact.

[billvon 2,998]

>There is ZERO proof that any of the observed/adjusted warming is a result of man made CO2.

There is hard scientific proof that CO2 levels are increasing.
There is hard scientific proof that increasing CO2 levels traps more heat in the atmosphere.
There is hard scientific proof that the earth is warming at a rate proportional to that increase in trapped heat.

Sorry.

>There is ZERO evidence that the slight warming is anything other than beneficial.

"In May 2015, India was struck by a severe heat wave. As of 3 June 2015, it has caused the deaths of at least 2,500 people in multiple regions." - Wikipedia

Sorry. I know you've got to be bumming on Earth Day.

[brenthutch 444]

FACT, climate related deaths are a tiny fraction of what they were one hundred years ago.
Just to be clear, are you suggesting that a onetime event, in one part of the globe, two years ago is your evidence?!?! Where was the deadly heatwave last year or this year? Why don't you cite the deadly heatwave in Europe in 2003 which killed ten times as many people? Oh that is because CO2 levels were much lower then and that "inconvenient truth" would blow your little theory right out of the water.
BTW the correlation between CO2 levels and temperatures occurs only after "corrections" are made. The raw, unadjusted numbers show no such agreement.

I celebrated Earth Day, by smoking a pork shoulder for ten hours, loading up the SUV and going to a giant tailgate party with 70,000 of my closest friends, then I put a big fire in the fireplace. Don't worry though, the wood I burned is considered renewable energy.

[jakee 1,499]

brenthutch

FACT, climate related deaths are a tiny fraction of what they were one hundred years ago.

I would be very surprised if there weren't many more climate related deaths now, if only because there are vastly more people living in places where climate can cause problems.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[brenthutch 444]

jakee

***FACT, climate related deaths are a tiny fraction of what they were one hundred years ago.

I would be very surprised if there weren't many more climate related deaths now, if only because there are vastly more people living in places where climate can cause problems.

One might think that however modernity, powered but fossil fuels, has largely insulation Man from the ravages of Mother Nature. That said, the worst floods, droughts, hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires, heatwaves, cold spells, and disease outbreaks and the deaths associated with them occurred long ago. They are not happening now.

Oh BTW cold kills about twenty times more people than heat. So forgive me if I don't get my panties bunched by a three one hundredths of a degree rise in temperature.

[jakee 1,499]

Quote

One might think that however modernity, powered but fossil fuels, has largely insulation Man from the ravages of Mother Nature.

One who lives in the USA and forgets that lots of other people don't live in the USA might think that. But One would be shortsighted.

Quote

That said, the worst floods, droughts, hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires, heatwaves, cold spells, and disease outbreaks and the deaths associated with them occurred long ago. They are not happening now.

Ummm... Say what now?

Quote

Oh BTW cold kills about twenty times more people than heat.

In the USA or in the world?

And what about all the other stuff that climate affects?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[brenthutch 444]

What "other stuff" would you be referring to? I already addressed hurricanes, floods, droughts, disease, tornadoes, wildfires, heatwaves and cold spells. Nothing that is happening today is outside of historical norms.

[jakee 1,499]

brenthutch

What "other stuff" would you be referring to? I already addressed hurricanes, floods, droughts, disease, tornadoes, wildfires, heatwaves and cold spells. Nothing that is happening today is outside of historical norms.

Sure. If by 'addressed' you mean 'made wild and unsubstantiated claim'.

Plus, you just said all those things are not happening now. Historically, that sounds pretty abnormal to me.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?