Alleged Climate Change

[Rightguide]

EPAs Own Data Shows Only 19% of All Climate Stations Reported Warming Since 1948​

GREGORY WRIGHTSTONE FROM CO2 COALITION 12:10 PM on December 02, 2023
As reported by EPA, only 19% of all weather stations report an increase in the number of hot days since 1948!

Below is an important chart that somehow slipped by EPA’s “consensus” censorship squad. It is a map of all 1,066 weather stations across the United States. The change in the number of hot days for that station are ID’d as increasing (red), stayed the same (blank) or decreasing (blue).

A total of 863 stations, or 81%, reported either a decrease or no change in the number of hot days! Any guesses on how long this map will remain up on their site?

More here: https://hotair.com/headlines/2023/1...-stations-reported-warming-since-1948-n596149

But Greta says...

 

[cermin]

its an extortion racket

 

[ll74]

Lol....spin is fun.

 

[Starfire6369]

I'll throw my 2 cents in here but may bow out if ppl just throw talking points instead of actual research.

Is the climate changing? Yes
Is it man made? No, Most climate models ignore solar forcing and earths weakening magnetic field, effects of earths electromagnetic fields among other things
Do we need to care for our environment and reduce our impact? Definitely!

Instead of dismissing Wrightstone as a climate denier, actually look at his research instead of parrotting the party line.

 

[ll74]

Most climate models ignore solar forcing and earths weakening magnetic field, effects of earths electromagnetic fields among other things

That is incorrect. Models do account for all factors including solar cycles.

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/couldnt-sun-be-cause-global-warming

So if your assessment is based on flawed assumptions, then your conclusions are also flawed.

 

[Rightguide]

I'll throw my 2 cents in here but may bow out if ppl just throw talking points instead of actual research.

Is the climate changing? Yes
Is it man made? No, Most climate models ignore solar forcing and earths weakening magnetic field, effects of earths electromagnetic fields among other things
Do we need to care for our environment and reduce our impact? Definitely!

Instead of dismissing Wrightstone as a climate denier, actually look at his research instead of parrotting the party line.

May I just add as well, has the climate been changing since creation? Yes. Is it man's fault, no.

 

[Starfire6369]

That is incorrect. Models do account for all factors including solar cycles.

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/couldnt-sun-be-cause-global-warming

So if your assessment is based on flawed assumptions, then your conclusions are also flawed.

And again someone does bare minimum research. If you take the data from before a cherry picked 1900 and go back centuries and millennium you'll see further evidence of continual climate change in cycles. Also that article was only concerned with global warming, what about record Lows and snowfall we've hit the past couple years?
Sunspot activity is only part of the solar forcing issue and that report ignores the earths weakening magnetic field. The earths magnetic field is now down 25% of what it was in 1900.

 

[ll74]

And again someone does bare minimum research. If you take the data from before a cherry picked 1900 and go back centuries and millennium you'll see further evidence of continual climate change in cycles. Also that article was only concerned with global warming, what about record Lows and snowfall we've hit the past couple years?
Sunspot activity is only part of the solar forcing issue and that report ignores the earths weakening magnetic field. The earths magnetic field is now down 25% of what it was in 1900.

Your assertion is that natural cycles aren't included in climate models and that is not correct. As your qualifier was that none are included, sourcing one single example is enough to refute your statement.

All models include natural forces in their warming estimations....some overcompensate while others undercompensate.

 

[SubzeroGirl]

How many carbon credits will be required to offset the explosive fireworks releasing their chemical pollution into the air all over the world tonight? Waiting for the environmentalists to start their protests over this.

No one cares about the environment.

 

[JoePepsiCo]

EPAs Own Data Shows Only 19% of All Climate Stations Reported Warming Since 1948​

GREGORY WRIGHTSTONE FROM CO2 COALITION 12:10 PM on December 02, 2023
As reported by EPA, only 19% of all weather stations report an increase in the number of hot days since 1948!

Below is an important chart that somehow slipped by EPA’s “consensus” censorship squad. It is a map of all 1,066 weather stations across the United States. The change in the number of hot days for that station are ID’d as increasing (red), stayed the same (blank) or decreasing (blue).

A total of 863 stations, or 81%, reported either a decrease or no change in the number of hot days! Any guesses on how long this map will remain up on their site?

More here: https://hotair.com/headlines/2023/1...-stations-reported-warming-since-1948-n596149

But Greta says...

Not going to bother, this topic is like abortion, for too many people it defines who they are, gives them the stature of a movement (Eric Hoffer, The True Believer), but I'm willing to bet that that is going to be deemed "unadjusted" or "improperly adjusted" data.

Like when we never adjusted the temperatures when more rustic measuring outposts became more urbanized with concrete and dark roofs...


Have a fun thread!


~~ toodles ~~

 

[ll74]

"not going to bother"

But here is my opinion.......

 

[RobDownSouth]

Folks, there is a reason we mock Rightguide here.
He posts his own hot take on an article he found on some third tier propaganda site called "C02 Concern".
The carefully massaged data references "actual EPA sources".
It does do that.
BUT...in order to spin the article to fit a preconceived bias, it makes one critical adjustment.
It drops the word "unusually" from the EPA report.
The EPA reports that the vast majority of temperatures were hotter than previous year, and 19% of the hotter temperatures were "unusually hot", i.e. more than 5% higher than expected averages.

Drop the word "usually" and voila (or "wall uh" in Ishmael speak), "only" 19% of "all" EPA temperatures reported hotter temps last year.

See for yourself with the original un-massaged report from the EPA here: https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-high-and-low-temperatures

So in summary:

• Rightguide is a fucking liar
• Rightguide has always been a fucking liar
• Rightguide will always be a fucking liar

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

In a surprise to no one 2023 is the hottest year on record.
https://www.foxweather.com/weather-news/record-warm-heat-planet-change

 

[Chernosoth]

As natural climate change delivers ten or a hundred groin kicks, the fossil fuel industry decides what the hell, one more kick won't hurt that much. Exactly how much climate change is caused by humans can be debated forever, but we will be living with the effects long after the fossil fuels are gone.

 

[davion2308]

This always get me. Let's say there's ZERO human climate change. We didn't do anything to change the earth's climate.

Is it bad to move forward with environmentally-sound practices and try to reduce our negative impact with pollution? I just ... Climate Change deniers don't sound silly because they disagree with what I think, they sound silly because it's like they don't care if we continue polluting the earth and don't make changes to move toward solar power or other more sustainable members.

Are you guys just 'owning the libs' and that's what's important? I'm seriously not trolling, help me understand. "Even if there is no climate change, why fight finding more sustainable power sources?"

Help me here.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

This always get me. Let's say there's ZERO human climate change. We didn't do anything to change the earth's climate.

Is it bad to move forward with environmentally-sound practices and try to reduce our negative impact with pollution? I just ... Climate Change deniers don't sound silly because they disagree with what I think, they sound silly because it's like they don't care if we continue polluting the earth and don't make changes to move toward solar power or other more sustainable members.

Are you guys just 'owning the libs' and that's what's important? I'm seriously not trolling, help me understand. "Even if there is no climate change, why fight finding more sustainable power sources?"

Help me here.

Even if humans aren’t causing climate change, walkable cities are nice, and being stuck in traffic sucks.

 

[Sean Renaud]

They really don't and it's obvious in the way they live.

And I'm not "pointing out hypocrisy." It's more than that. It's not just "saying one thing and doing another."

If these people really believed what they're pushing on others, it would HAVE to have an effect on the way they live. And in a way I guess it does - but it's the opposite effect. Instead of simplifying and making their lifestyle smaller... they peddle the hoax, make a lot of money, buy bigger houses, fly private jets, etc.

Their lifestyles show them not to be mere hypocrites, but liars, frauds, and conmen.

What exactly about the way we live makes it obvious? Cus I do care, I do my share but I know that the answer isn't me. ITs everybody.

 

[Chernosoth]

California is on the list of places becoming much less habitable. The great exodus is steeply raising home prices from Idaho to Texas. Californians who haven't left yet will need to go farther for affordable homes.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Yeah, things are gonna be rough for a while.

 

[LLCox]

I burn three cords of firewood a year. I wonder what my carbon credit score is.

 

[pezzheaddazzler]

EPA at again these bureaucrat's need the carpet pulled from under them. they should have to do a cost benefit analyses and let congress or the public vote on the, not make rulings!

text link


The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced it’s reviewing vinyl chloride under the Toxic Control Substance Act (TSCA), which could lead to restrictions or a ban on the widespread, toxic chemical.

Vinyl chloride is used primarily to make polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastics. The chemical is already classified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a carcinogen, and is linked to higher rates of lung and liver cancer, as well as liver disease, neurological problems and miscarriage. Billions of pounds are produced annually in the U.S.

It is one of five chemicals the EPA will review under TSCA, which is the primary chemical safety law in the U.S. The other chemicals include acetaldehyde, acrylonitrile, benzenamine, and MBOCA.

“Under the Biden-Harris Administration, EPA has made significant progress implementing the 2016 amendments to strengthen our nation’s chemical safety laws after years of mismanagement and delay. Today marks an important step forward,” assistant administrator for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Michal Freedhoff said in a statement.

Under TSCA, the EPA will examine all exposure routes — including air emissions, drinking water and soil contamination — as well as workplace and accident exposure.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

EPA at again these bureaucrat's need the carpet pulled from under them. they should have to do a cost benefit analyses and let congress or the public vote on the, not make rulings!

text link


The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced it’s reviewing vinyl chloride under the Toxic Control Substance Act (TSCA), which could lead to restrictions or a ban on the widespread, toxic chemical.

Vinyl chloride is used primarily to make polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastics. The chemical is already classified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a carcinogen, and is linked to higher rates of lung and liver cancer, as well as liver disease, neurological problems and miscarriage. Billions of pounds are produced annually in the U.S.

It is one of five chemicals the EPA will review under TSCA, which is the primary chemical safety law in the U.S. The other chemicals include acetaldehyde, acrylonitrile, benzenamine, and MBOCA.

“Under the Biden-Harris Administration, EPA has made significant progress implementing the 2016 amendments to strengthen our nation’s chemical safety laws after years of mismanagement and delay. Today marks an important step forward,” assistant administrator for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Michal Freedhoff said in a statement.

Under TSCA, the EPA will examine all exposure routes — including air emissions, drinking water and soil contamination — as well as workplace and accident exposure.

What does this have to do with climate change?

 

[Chernosoth]

I burn three cords of firewood a year. I wonder what my carbon credit score is.

Face cords or full cords?

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Climate change represents an existential crisis. If you have any doubts, check out the Rose Bowl game to see the devastation that’s occurring in Pasadena right now!

 

[LLCox]

Face cords or full cords?

Full, I start a fire in Sept. and end around the first week in May. Mama Bear wood stove that never goes out until May. The worlds best heat.