COP27 climate summit

sparau

Super Anarchist
1,177
236
Sunshine Coast Aus
How is a warmer world a "degraded" environment? You think that ice ages are better for the environment than not being in an ice age?
Mass extinction is a degraded world, do you really want to live in a world minus all the variety of animal life, knowing you egged it on?
Historically speaking the larger animals do worse in mass extinctions, do you really think our modern society could survive the plankton food web crashing in combination with crop failures as rainfall shifts?
Oh wait, you're in America, you'll be fine cause of all the guns and well regulated militia LOL
 

veni vidi vici

Omne quod audimus est opinio, non res. Omnia videm
5,803
1,256
Mass extinction is a degraded world, do you really want to live in a world minus all the variety of animal life, knowing you egged it on?
Historically speaking the larger animals do worse in mass extinctions, do you really think our modern society could survive the plankton food web crashing in combination with crop failures as rainfall shifts?
Oh wait, you're in America, you'll be fine cause of all the guns and well regulated militia LOL
All living organisms have been adapting to global warming since the end of the last ice age !
The Science!
The only thing able to change global warming is politician's, money from the peasants, and lemming cheerleaders
lol
 

jzk

Super Anarchist
12,722
454
Mass extinction is a degraded world, do you really want to live in a world minus all the variety of animal life, knowing you egged it on?
Historically speaking the larger animals do worse in mass extinctions, do you really think our modern society could survive the plankton food web crashing in combination with crop failures as rainfall shifts?
Oh wait, you're in America, you'll be fine cause of all the guns and well regulated militia LOL
Which species have gone extinct as a result of human emitted CO2?
 

Steam Flyer

Sophisticated Yet Humble
45,426
10,207
Eastern NC
Which species have gone extinct as a result of human emitted CO2?


Actual knowledge... not a good substitute for internet bullshit, but some people prefer it anyway
 

jzk

Super Anarchist
12,722
454


Actual knowledge... not a good substitute for internet bullshit, but some people prefer it anyway
Billions of species have gone extinct. And you cite 2 that "some scientists" say that went extinct due to "climate change?"

A warmer earth is generally speaking better for biological diversity. Further, our emissions have greened the planet causing a significant increase in the amount of vegetation on the planet.

Meanwhile 15% of mankind has no access to electricity and clean water. Real people are dying every day because virtue signalling assholes like you prevent their access to cheap, plentiful energy.
 

Steam Flyer

Sophisticated Yet Humble
45,426
10,207
Eastern NC
Billions of species have gone extinct. And you cite 2 that "some scientists" say that went extinct due to "climate change?"

A warmer earth is generally speaking better for biological diversity. Further, our emissions have greened the planet causing a significant increase in the amount of vegetation on the planet.

Meanwhile 15% of mankind has no access to electricity and clean water. Real people are dying every day because virtue signalling assholes like you prevent their access to cheap, plentiful energy.
It's not "virtue signalling" if there is actual virtue.
And I am not denying anybody cheap, plentiful energy. If anybody is, it is the fossil fuel industry demanding more money.
 

jzk

Super Anarchist
12,722
454
It's not "virtue signalling" if there is actual virtue.
And I am not denying anybody cheap, plentiful energy. If anybody is, it is the fossil fuel industry demanding more money.
The fossil fuel industry has razor thin profit margins and a whole lot of opposition from virtue signalling assholes like you.
 

veni vidi vici

Omne quod audimus est opinio, non res. Omnia videm
5,803
1,256


Actual knowledge... not a good substitute for internet bullshit, but some people prefer it anyway
Russian Collusion?
 

Grrr...

▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰ 100%
10,263
2,675
Detroit
The fossil fuel industry has razor thin profit margins and a whole lot of opposition from virtue signalling assholes like you.
You still have not provided a cite supporting your assertion that Biden intends to stop all fossil fuels without having anything else in place. (Even though that assertion itself is unlikely, because Biden doesn't control any of the refining done overseas.)

I did a quick google on the profit margins of those fossil fuel companies. They don't look so razor thin to me.

1669735416032.png


I see you are also still pushing your idea about Co2. Every reputable source I've found claims that what you're saying is wrong.


I did manage to find a bunch of studies that claimed more C02 is better, but the ones I found were all funded by the fossil fuel companies. Those represent a pretty significant conflict of interest. I particularly liked the self-serving pdf that the Co2coalition.org put out. The fossil fuel companies have funded organizations to claim C02 is a good thing. Sounds very tobacco-esque to me.

I'm concerned that your outside biases are preventing you from evaluating this with an objective view.
 
Last edited:

Steam Flyer

Sophisticated Yet Humble
45,426
10,207
Eastern NC
The fossil fuel industry has razor thin profit margins and a whole lot of opposition from virtue signalling assholes like you.
Razor thin.


1669735416032.png

And remember, the people in grinding poverty don't have electricity because... duh, people want to slow down fossil fuel pollution.

Well one might think that in the 150+ years of the fossil fuel industry, they would have been able to provide energy more widely at lower cost, what with their huge profits (and remember, net profit is calculated -after- paying out those hunny-millyun salaries) and of course their lack of virtue-signalling.
 

Grrr...

▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰ 100%
10,263
2,675
Detroit
And remember, the people in grinding poverty don't have electricity because... duh, people want to slow down fossil fuel pollution.

Well one might think that in the 150+ years of the fossil fuel industry, they would have been able to provide energy more widely at lower cost, what with their huge profits (and remember, net profit is calculated -after- paying out those hunny-millyun salaries) and of course their lack of virtue-signalling.
That is pretty clearly a red herring argument, and I didn't even bother to address it. The phone company is an excellent parallel. The only reason rural areas have phones and powerlines in the US is because the law demands it.

Left to their own, the fossil fuel companies will only serve the areas that are profitable. It's also a clear parallel to the broadband companies. Which is why true broadband is still out of reach for most rural Americans.

In fact, the lying happens in both arenas as well. American broadband companies have been using census blocks to report coverage. If a single person in the census block has broadband, then the companies were legally allowed to claim everyone in the census block had broadband. That is why, so often, people will search if broadband is available in their area and the government response is "YES!" even though the reality is No.... No it isn't.

On a side note, Comcast is raising prices substantially, including raising a misleading "Broadcast TV" Fee to 27 dollars. The actual bill will likely be 40-70% more than their advertised price. But that's perfectly ok and moral for them. This follows on the heels of announcements by charter and WOW to do similar price hikes.

JZK, so far, does not appear to have a single valid argument that can't be easily disproven. However, I'm still waiting for cites to back up some of his assertions. This is the fourth time I've asked. It really shouldn't be that hard to produce.
 

jzk

Super Anarchist
12,722
454
You still have not provided a cite supporting your assertion that Biden intends to stop all fossil fuels without having anything else in place. (Even though that assertion itself is unlikely, because Biden doesn't control any of the refining done overseas.)

I did a quick google on the profit margins of those fossil fuel companies. They don't look so razor thin to me.

View attachment 556557

I see you are also still pushing your idea about Co2. Every reputable source I've found claims that what you're saying is wrong.


I did manage to find a bunch of studies that claimed more C02 is better, but the ones I found were all funded by the fossil fuel companies. Those represent a pretty significant conflict of interest. I particularly liked the self-serving pdf that the Co2coalition.org put out. The fossil fuel companies have funded organizations to claim C02 is a good thing. Sounds very tobacco-esque to me.

I'm concerned that your outside biases are preventing you from evaluating this with an objective view.
Here is the actual data.


"Factorial simulations with multiple global ecosystem models suggest that CO2 fertilization effects explain 70% of the observed greening trend, followed by nitrogen deposition (9%), climate change (8%) and land cover change (LCC) (4%)."

There is no shortage, however, of articles written by religious believers that will say "but, but, but, the negatives are "likely" to outweigh the positives."

Again, Exxon 5 year profit margin is 4.41%. Who would even want to invest in that?

For now, think hard about where your food comes from and how it is brought to you.

Or just be on the side of the shrew that went extinct. I am on the side of the billion people trying to get out of such poverty that you can't even imagine it.
 

jzk

Super Anarchist
12,722
454
That is pretty clearly a red herring argument, and I didn't even bother to address it. The phone company is an excellent parallel. The only reason rural areas have phones and powerlines in the US is because the law demands it.

Left to their own, the fossil fuel companies will only serve the areas that are profitable. It's also a clear parallel to the broadband companies. Which is why true broadband is still out of reach for most rural Americans.

JZK, so far, does not appear to have a single valid argument that can't be easily disproven. However, I'm still waiting for cites to back up some of his assertions. This is the fourth time I've asked. It really shouldn't be that hard to produce.

Red herring? There is one commodity that you rely upon more than anything else for your very life, and that is fossil fuel. We don't have fossil fuel because the ff companies have conned and bribed their way into existence, we have fossil fuel because it is the very best energy source for human flourishing, especially for the ordinary person. Elites can buy Teslas and set up big victron systems in their mansions, but ordinary people rely on ff for their very survival.
 

Grrr...

▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰ 100%
10,263
2,675
Detroit
Here is the actual data.


"Factorial simulations with multiple global ecosystem models suggest that CO2 fertilization effects explain 70% of the observed greening trend, followed by nitrogen deposition (9%), climate change (8%) and land cover change (LCC) (4%)."

There is no shortage, however, of articles written by religious believers that will say "but, but, but, the negatives are "likely" to outweigh the positives."

Again, Exxon 5 year profit margin is 4.41%. Who would even want to invest in that?

For now, think hard about where your food comes from and how it is brought to you.

Or just be on the side of the shrew that went extinct. I am on the side of the billion people trying to get out of such poverty that you can't even imagine it.
I was trying to figure out why you are using the 5 year profit margin. Now I know.

1669741344071.png



It seems awfully disingenuous to include that huge Covid Dip, doesn't it? Those profit margins would be the envy of nearly any company in business.

While your link to the nature article does explain the greening, it is merely a summary. Reading deeper into the article and reading comments by the co-authors reveal a different picture.

“Studies have shown that plants acclimatize, or adjust, to rising carbon dioxide concentration and the fertilization effect diminishes over time.”

In fact, the temporary greening that the study found is helping keep the earth cool. When that temporary effect disappears, we're going to be in even deeper crap than we thought.


I'm sorry JZK, but you are using pieces of the picture to try to assemble a total that simply isn't true.
 

Grrr...

▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰▰ 100%
10,263
2,675
Detroit
Red herring? There is one commodity that you rely upon more than anything else for your very life, and that is fossil fuel. We don't have fossil fuel because the ff companies have conned and bribed their way into existence, we have fossil fuel because it is the very best energy source for human flourishing, especially for the ordinary person. Elites can buy Teslas and set up big victron systems in their mansions, but ordinary people rely on ff for their very survival.
You have yet to provide a cite, despite me asking for one 4 times, that states that we are simply going to shut off fossil fuels without having replacements in place. I think that is because even you realize that is ridiculous.
 

Steam Flyer

Sophisticated Yet Humble
45,426
10,207
Eastern NC
.... I am on the side of the billion people trying to get out of such poverty that you can't even imagine it.

That sounds like virtue signalling... except that you actually ain't doing shit except trying to pimp the status quo, which is how those people sank into poverty in the first place.
 

jzk

Super Anarchist
12,722
454
I was trying to figure out why you are using the 5 year profit margin. Now I know.

View attachment 556573


It seems awfully disingenuous to include that huge Covid Dip, doesn't it? Those profit margins would be the envy of nearly any company in business.

While your link to the nature article does explain the greening, it is merely a summary. Reading deeper into the article and reading comments by the co-authors reveal a different picture.

“Studies have shown that plants acclimatize, or adjust, to rising carbon dioxide concentration and the fertilization effect diminishes over time.”

In fact, the temporary greening that the study found is helping keep the earth cool. When that temporary effect disappears, we're going to be in even deeper crap than we thought.


I'm sorry JZK, but you are using pieces of the picture to try to assemble a total that simply isn't true.
Did they really lose money during covid?

Note that Apple has a 23% 5 year profit margin and not a peep out of fascist Robert Reich about windfall profits taxes on Apple.

What does the data actually tell you about CO2 greening? Skip the religious commentary.
 




Top