Climate Change Environmentalists Duped By And Colluding With Russians

[Sean Renaud]

An ice age is what we're in now. Any period when there is ice at the poles (there has not been, at all periods) is an ice age. And Homo sapiens has lived its entire existence in one, we're not adapted for anything else.

Yeah, I knew that. Paleontology is kinda my jam. Its kinda spooky how business cycles and biological ones have a lot of parallels.

 

[Rightguide]

Since RightGuide is actually ignorant of science, big surprise there right? In a technical sense (as in he's right for the wrong reasons) there are five generally accepted ice ages.

The Huron: starts 2.5 billion years back and ends 2.1 billion years ago
The Cryogenian: Starts at 720 million to 635 million years ago
The Andean-Saharan: Starts 450 million to 420 million years back.
The Late Paleozoic: Starts 360 million to 260 million years ago.
To put this part in perspective 262-66 million years ago is the Mesozoic. Dinosaurs, ALL OF the nonavian dinosaurs lived and died in this two hundred million year gap.
The Late Cenozoic: Starts 2.5 million years ago and proceeds to the Present. We are currently in a fuck mother ice age.

If that looks like a cycle to you its one really, really wonky cycle. Seem to have been coming closer and closer together and then decided to take 262 million years of for. . .reasons.

What you are misquoting are the differences between glacial and interglacial periods if you care to read your own chart. Think of those as longer version of a normal seasonal change which deals primarily with two issues. The Earth's orbit is neither circular, nor consistent. The sun isn't the only thing exerting a gravitational pull on the Earth. The Earth also tilts on its axis a few something like 5 degrees.

That part not only is fairly predictable but includes not four (Which should have been your answer, unless you were counting the present, which you were not) but five and again WE ARE CURRENTLY IN ONE!!!!!


Wow, good job googling while I typed. So show me this pattern your claiming.

I did when I posted the graph, dummy. It shows the cycles over the last 450,000 years.

 

[pecksniff]

I did when I posted the graph, dummy. It shows the cycles over the last 450,000 years.

It does not show any cycle of which the present warming could be a natural stage.

 

[Rightguide]

Since RightGuide is actually ignorant of science,

Science isn't the Marxist "settled science" propaganda you've been referring to.

 

[pecksniff]

Science isn't the Marxist "settled science" propaganda you've been referring to.

Marxism has nothing to do with this.

 

[Rightguide]

It does not show any cycle of which the present warming could be a natural stage.

It shows the glacials or glacial cycles which you both claimed didn't exist.

 

[Rotadom]

Marxism has nothing to do with this.

Science is Marxism. Duh.

 

[pecksniff]

It shows the glacials or glacial cycles which you both claimed didn't exist.

No, it shows periods. Which are not the same as cycles. I.e., there is nothing to prove we should expect more of them in the future.

 

[pecksniff]

The good news is that according to the latest IPCC report, if we enact aggressive emissions limits now, we could hold the warming to 2°C. That's only HALF an ice age unit, which is probably no big deal.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I did when I posted the graph, dummy. It shows the cycles over the last 450,000 years.

Which was posted after you were talking about how many ice ages have happened in the past. I know you googled that crap, even I forget the name of the one right after the Dinosaurs cus nothing cool happened then. Big lizards gone and it took a while for mammals to get in the game. Crocodilians were out of control. I swear those fucks are like the 3D of the animal kingdom. Every so often someone tries it out, it turns out to be a stupid fucking fad and it goes away after that.

Its okay Right Guide, that why I tried to give every single fucking chance. I find with science and the law its always best to let someone have as much rope as they want.

 

[JohnnySavage]

It's absolutely settled science. The only questions are how much did humans contribute and will we ever stop fucking up our house.

That's the truth. That climate changes is a fact. As for the other two; I suppose reasonable minds can differ, but with the Atmo so thin, and so many humans living and working in it, it's reasonable to assume there would be some impact. And no, we will not stop. The developed world will never lower their standard of living, and the developing world will not striving to parity.

We should be investing in mitigating the effects of climate change. Reversing it isn't possible. At it's root cause: There are too many people.

 

[HisArpy]

This thread has gone absolutely hysterical.

"Climate Change Consensus!"

"The Hockey stick graph is fake."

"That lie's been debunked."

"Data from Glacial Cycles prove otherwise."

"But, but CLIMATE CHANGE CONSENSUS!"


If there was even a smidgen of true "consensus" then there wouldn't be a debate over what any of the data shows.

 

[pecksniff]

This thread has gone absolutely hysterical.

"Climate Change Consensus!"

"The Hockey stick graph is fake."

"That lie's been debunked."

"Data from Glacial Cycles prove otherwise."

"But, but CLIMATE CHANGE CONSENSUS!"


If there was even a smidgen of true "consensus" then there wouldn't be a debate over what any of the data shows.

Of course there would. Business interests are at stake. Which means ideological interests are at stake. See post #104 -- some idiots actually call the science here "Marxist."

 

[phrodeau]

This thread has gone absolutely hysterical.

"Climate Change Consensus!"

"The Hockey stick graph is fake."

"That lie's been debunked."

"Data from Glacial Cycles prove otherwise."

"But, but CLIMATE CHANGE CONSENSUS!"


If there was even a smidgen of true "consensus" then there wouldn't be a debate over what any of the data shows.

True, there will never be consensus between the science community and the right-wing idiots.

 

[GeorgeSoros]

If there was even a smidgen of true "consensus" then there wouldn't be a debate over what any of the data shows.

Physicists disagree about what is an electron. That doesn't mean there's no consensus that electricity exists, or is induced by electric fields.

 

[pecksniff]

True, there will never be consensus between the science community and the right-wing idiots.

See intelligent falling.

 

[Rightguide]

Not in your lifetime or your great-great-great-great-grands'.

I didn't say it would, Mr. Master Of The Obvious. It will happen again and again as history evolves, as it has in the past.

 

[pecksniff]

I didn't say it would, Mr. Master Of The Obvious. It will happen again and again as history evolves, as it has in the past.

Then it doesn't matter now. We can't count on any ice-age cycle to ameliorate anthropogenic climate change, which is a real thing, and an urgently presssing danger, and a thing without precedent in Earth's history.

 

[pecksniff]

That's the truth. That climate changes is a fact. As for the other two; I suppose reasonable minds can differ, but with the Atmo so thin, and so many humans living and working in it, it's reasonable to assume there would be some impact. And no, we will not stop. The developed world will never lower their standard of living, and the developing world will not striving to parity.

We should be investing in mitigating the effects of climate change. Reversing it isn't possible. At it's root cause: There are too many people.

And too little of everything else.

 

[Rightguide]

Then it doesn't matter now. We can't count on any ice-age cycle to ameliorate anthropogenic climate change, which is a real thing, and an urgently presssing danger, and a thing without precedent in Earth's history.

We can now get back to the subject of the thread, Russian/Communist influence in the environmental movement.

 

[pecksniff]

We can now get back to the subject of the thread, Russian/Communist influence in the environmental movement.

Russian is one thing, Communist is another, and every suggestion in this thread of either influencing the environmental movement has been proven either false or irrelevant.

Certainly Russia has no vested interest in phasing out fossil fuels. And Communism hardly matters at all any more -- even in Communist countries.

 

[Rightguide]

Russian is one thing, Communist is another, and every suggestion in this thread of either influencing the environmental movement has been proven either false or irrelevant.

Certainly Russia has no vested interest in phasing out fossil fuels. And Communism hardly matters at all any more -- even in Communist countries.

No, it hasn't. The Congressional report I posted says different. Even Hillary thought so.

 

[pecksniff]

No, it hasn't. The Congressional report I posted says different. Even Hillary thought so.

"II. Republicans and Democrats agree the Kremlin is manipulating environmental groups in an attempt to carry out their agenda The Kremlin has a motive to disrupt U.S. energy markets and influence domestic energy policy, since American energy represents a direct threat to Russian energy interests. Russia’s efforts to influence U.S. energy policy are well documented in the public domain. U.S. presidential candidates, European officials, and the U.S. intelligence community have all publicly noted that Russia and its government corporations are funding a covert anti-fracking campaign to suppress the widespread adoption of fracking in Europe and the U.S., all in an effort to protect the influence of the Russian oil and gas sector.22 Anders Fogh Rasmussen, then Secretary General of NATO, told reporters in 2014, “Russia, as part of their sophisticated information and disinformation operations, engaged actively with so-called nongovernmental organizations—environmental organizations working against shale gas—to maintain dependence on imported Russian gas.”

So what? We are no longer importing Russian gas -- a consequence of the war that Putin should have foreseen. None of this makes any difference at all to the calculus of climate-change remediation.

 

[Rightguide]

So what? We are no longer importing Russian gas -- a consequence of the war that Putin should have foreseen. None of this makes any difference at all to the calculus of climate-change remediation.

Only after Biden was dragged kicking and screaming to the conclusion he had to shut it off to survive politically. Now he will do one of three things, He will open our energy sector to solve the problem, he will attempt to impose his green new deal and collapse our economy and destroy the nation, or he will roam the world sucking up to every despotic regime, or dictator, to "beg" for their oil and pay much more for it.

 

[pecksniff]

he will attempt to impose his green new deal and collapse our economy and destroy the nation

It wouldn't do that.