ADVERTISEMENT

Global Climate Changes

It is heartening to me that we have climate science experts (a whole bunch of em) right here on the Cat Paw. Thanks guys.
 
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/08/us/glaciers-national-park-2020-trnd/index.html#:~:text=(CNN) The signs at Glacier National Park warning,Geological Survey, park spokeswoman Gina Kurzmen told CNN.


(CNN)The signs at Glacier National Park warning that its signature glaciers would be gone by 2020 are being changed.
The signs in the Montana park were added more than a decade ago to reflect climate change forecasts at the time by the US Geological Survey, park spokeswoman Gina Kurzmen told CNN.
In 2017, the park was told by the agency that the complete melting off of the glaciers was no longer expected to take place so quickly due to changes in the forecast model, Kurzmen said. But tight maintenance budgets made it impossible for the park to immediately change the signs.
They can change them now that Congress is passing a bill!!
 
Because of how much money we print... and we are gonna print tons more... smdh.
i used to be firmly and vehemently against excess spending, but now my house had more than doubled in value and so has my IRA. Spend away
 
Last edited:
^it's untenable long term.

-also real estate values and cash/investments are worth 18% less in the past year alone due to inflation. The number might be bigger...but the buying power of the dollar that is parked in said assets is less than it was a year ago.

-rate hikes are necessary medicine to right the ship...but if they have to be paired with spending cuts or they are useless.
 
^it's untenable long term.

-also real estate values and cash/investments are worth 18% less in the past year alone due to inflation. The number might be bigger...but the buying power of the dollar that is parked in said assets is less than it was a year ago.

-rate hikes are necessary medicine to right the ship...but if they have to be paired with spending cuts or they are useless.
True and I agree, I was attempting a take that would rival these head in the sand climate change deniers.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Mdnerd and P19978
No solutions are allowed because that means political power goes away. Political power lies in the existence and persistence of an "unsolvable" problem.
Solutions are there, but big oil is in control of the country. Hydrogen could have us off
Diesel fuel
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Mdnerd
I find it fascinating that people deny what’s in front of their face in order to support a political belief.
The record high for Louisville for August 2 is evidently 99. We are expecting a high of 88 today (less than the historic average of 89). Looking good! That is what is in front of my face and what you get when your mix weather with discussions about climate.
 
The record high for Louisville for August 2 is evidently 99. We are expecting a high of 88 today (less than the historic average of 89). Looking good! That is what is in front of my face and what you get when your mix weather with discussions about climate.
😂😂😂and record flood killing many.
 
It is heartening to me that we have climate science experts (a whole bunch of em) right here on the Cat Paw. Thanks guys.
You are welcome. I got my certification from TV the same institution that gave me expertise and the right opinions to have during COVID and never question.

As a moderate, it is clear that we can legislate our way out of bad weather.
 
Last edited:
You may think flooding and death is funny. I disagree. Climate experts also renounce the knee jerk weather is climate ignorance you espouse.
Not funny at all. I pray for all people affected by the flood, especially my uncle in Jackson.

I was laughing that you cite a Louisville temp, while eastern Ky was currently in a flood.
 
Not funny at all. I pray for all people affected by the flood, especially my uncle in Jackson.

I was laughing that you cite a Louisville temp, while eastern Ky was currently in a flood.
Then you don’t understand my point, and the point made by climate experts. We can point to events throughout history, recent and long past, that were extreme or even historical. Those are not evidence of the climate, which is not premised upon short term events. Heavy flooding is not prima facie evidence of the climate change any more than a below average temperature is. This is not part of the debate, except by politicals who don’t care about science.
 
I am just glad the government is in charge of this and all the other problems we have. I rest easy knowing that as long as everyone votes for it, it has to be the way to go. And if we didn't vote for how they are fixing it, at least we voted for the people who are fixing it. And even if i didn't vote for the people who are fixing it, more people did, which must mean they are right. Look at the geniuses up there now. And last time, and for the last forty years, sixty years, eighty years. Hell, I cant hardly believe we have problems seeing as how we have government...and that is before i get to all the experts we have. Man, the experts...
 
Then you don’t understand my point, and the point made by climate experts. We can point to events throughout history, recent and long past, that were extreme or even historical. Those are not evidence of the climate, which is not premised upon short term events. Heavy flooding is not prima facie evidence of the climate change any more than a below average temperature is. This is not part of the debate, except by politicals who don’t care about science.

Obviously just one data point but if we were in a crisis of global proportions and the "world" was being impacted wouldn't we at least see some indicator pretty much everywhere?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhDcat2018
If the climate situation is truly getting worse then tomorrow should be worse than today and so on. It isn't.

Anytime a locale breaks a heat or cold record, climate nuts scream. If they'd just look, usually that record stood for decades. If the situation is getting so bad, why'd it take so long?

If climate pandering was accurate, every year we'd have a new record high. We don't.

Nevermind the fact we only have data from recent history. For all we know the climate cycle is way longer than anyone knows.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhDcat2018
If the climate situation is truly getting worse then tomorrow should be worse than today and so on. It isn't.

Anytime a locale breaks a heat or cold record, climate nuts scream. If they'd just look, usually that record stood for decades. If the situation is getting so bad, why'd it take so long?

If climate pandering was accurate, every year we'd have a new record high. We don't.

Nevermind the fact we only have data from recent history. For all we know the climate cycle is way longer than anyone knows.
That's not the way it works at all. I suspect you know this.
 
If you were right, that's exactly how it would work; but it doesn't. So you're wrong.

It's really that easy.
False. It really isn't "that easy." But of course the Dunning-Kruger Gang is convinced that their opinions are just as valid as the opinions (and facts) of the people that actually do this stuff for a living. As I said, the Paddock is full of experts on every subject under the sun. . . just ask them. Nobody will ever convince you RWNJs that maybe someone knows more than they do about a given subject and not everything is some left-wing conspiracy. But you do you, QAnon
 
  • Haha
Reactions: bigblueinsanity
False. It really isn't "that easy." But of course the Dunning-Kruger Gang is convinced that their opinions are just as valid as the opinions (and facts) of the people that actually do this stuff for a living. As I said, the Paddock is full of experts on every subject under the sun. . . just ask them. Nobody will ever convince you RWNJs that maybe someone knows more than they do about a given subject and not everything is some left-wing conspiracy. But you do you, QAnon

Lol all you have are ad hominem attacks. Sure sign of defeat. Using simple logic, the global warming/climate change/climate crisis comes unraveled in mere seconds.
 
Lol all you have are ad hominem attacks. Sure sign of defeat. Using simple logic, the global warming/climate change/climate crisis comes unraveled in mere seconds.
No it's a "sure sign" of the fact that I'm dealing with someone with an overly inflated opinion of their own intelligence when it comes to the subject matter and that no matter what anyone tried to tell you, you'll be the proverbial pigeon on the chess board. There is a global consensus among people that actually know the subject matter (you don't), but nosiree Bob, big blue insanity from Cat Paw is onto it. You're full of shit, and "ad hominem" (if you want to call it that) is what it deserves. Again, there is nothing anyone could say to you because your crazy ass political beliefs will always hold sway over what is otherwise settled science...and it is settled science whether you want to believe it or not. Yours loony tunes
 
There is a global consensus among people that actually know the subject matter (you don't), but nosiree Bob, big blue insanity from Cat Paw is onto it. You're full of shit, and "ad hominem" (if you want to call it that) is what it deserves.

So I guess half the of the meteorologists in America are FOS too.

In 2012 the American Meteorological Society (AMS) surveyed its 7,000 members, receiving 1,862 responses. Of those, only 52% said they think global warming over the 20th century has happened and is mostly man-made (the IPCC position). The remaining 48% either think it happened but natural causes explain at least half of it, or it didn’t happen, or they don’t know. Furthermore, 53% agree that there is conflict among AMS members on the question.

97% Consensus
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhDcat2018
No it's a "sure sign" of the fact that I'm dealing with someone with an overly inflated opinion of their own intelligence when it comes to the subject matter and that no matter what anyone tried to tell you, you'll be the proverbial pigeon on the chess board. There is a global consensus among people that actually know the subject matter (you don't), but nosiree Bob, big blue insanity from Cat Paw is onto it. You're full of shit, and "ad hominem" (if you want to call it that) is what it deserves. Again, there is nothing anyone could say to you because your crazy ass political beliefs will always hold sway over what is otherwise settled science...and it is settled science whether you want to believe it or not. Yours loony tunes
Settled science. Like climate change is some fundamental law handed down by the climate Pope. (actually, maybe it is. lol).

The very definition of science requires theories to be subject to review, testing and change. "Settled science" is the CC cult's way to shutdown debate.
 
No it's a "sure sign" of the fact that I'm dealing with someone with an overly inflated opinion of their own intelligence when it comes to the subject matter and that no matter what anyone tried to tell you, you'll be the proverbial pigeon on the chess board. There is a global consensus among people that actually know the subject matter (you don't), but nosiree Bob, big blue insanity from Cat Paw is onto it. You're full of shit, and "ad hominem" (if you want to call it that) is what it deserves. Again, there is nothing anyone could say to you because your crazy ass political beliefs will always hold sway over what is otherwise settled science...and it is settled science whether you want to believe it or not. Yours loony tunes

I literally destroyed your entire life's dream in just a few simple sentences. I'm sure it's hard to absorb
 
Settled science. Like climate change is some fundamental law handed down by the climate Pope. (actually, maybe it is. lol).

The very definition of science requires theories to be subject to review, testing and change. "Settled science" is the CC cult's way to shutdown debate.

So I guess half the of the meteorologists in America are FOS too.

In 2012 the American Meteorological Society (AMS) surveyed its 7,000 members, receiving 1,862 responses. Of those, only 52% said they think global warming over the 20th century has happened and is mostly man-made (the IPCC position). The remaining 48% either think it happened but natural causes explain at least half of it, or it didn’t happen, or they don’t know. Furthermore, 53% agree that there is conflict among AMS members on the question.

97% Consensus
Oh the Fraser Institute eh? There's an excellent source.
 


But, but but it's da gubmint!11!!1 The dipshits on Cat Paw know better.
 


But, but but it's da gubmint!11!!1 The dipshits on Cat Paw know better.

You're posting here too
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT