3 ms·

This assumes that consumer use of automobiles contributes in a significant way to global warming. Supply chain use of automobiles (trucks, trains, planes, ships

This assumes that consumer use of automobiles contributes in a significant way to global warming. Supply chain use of automobiles (trucks, trains, planes, ships, etc.) continued throughout lockdown as goods still needed to be delivered to consumers.

sleepysysadmin 6y ago
>This assumes that consumer use of automobiles contributes in a significant way to global warming. Supply chain use of automobiles (trucks, trains, planes, ships, etc.) continued throughout lockdown as goods still needed to be delivered to consumers. You are right that we haven't completely ended use of transportation but we have seen decreases in all transportation. That is the prevailing argument is that we need to reduce CO2 which certainly has happened in 2020. If the fix to climate change is far more significant of a reduction. I posit that the fix is untenable or the premise is false. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle#/media/File:Carbon14_with_activity_labels.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle#/media/File:Carbon... Why does climate change people always focus on 1800s to today? Perhaps it has something to do with a very large swing in solar activity?
- cycomanic 6y ago
  This stuff has been debunked over and over. Just one example showing increasing temperatures with low solar activity http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/11/record-heat-despite-a-cold-sun/ http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/11/record... Also arguments about temperature millions of years ago are not really meaningful, humans (and most other of the current species) did not live on earth at the time. But at least the deniers have now as predicted progressed from "it's not happening", to "it's happening but it's not that bad", soon we will be at "it is definitely happening but it's to late now to do anything so might as well do nothing"
  - sleepysysadmin 6y ago
    >This stuff has been debunked over and over. Debunked? I linked the science around the subject. I have never seen anyone debunk these scientific theories. >. Just one example showing increasing temperatures with low solar activity http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/11/record http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/11/record... Your link is looking at 1960s and closer. My links are looking at the last 20,000 years. Solar activity dips are not measured in such a short period of time. The solar activity is in the 'modern maximum' for the entire graph from 1960s on. You are not debunking anything with that link. It is of no surprise to me that during a 'modern maximum' solar cycle that temperatures are going up. >Also arguments about temperature millions of years ago are not really meaningful, humans (and most other of the current species) did not live on earth at the time. The 6 celcius increase in the last 20,000 to 10,000 years ago was something humans greatly benefitted from. The IPCC says that we are going to warm 1.4celcius by 2100. I'm 100% certain that humans can survive and very likely thrive because of this warming. >But at least the deniers have now as predicted progressed from "it's not happening", to "it's happening but it's not that bad", soon we will be at "it is definitely happening but it's to late now to do anything so might as well do nothing" Are you asserting that I am a denier? I have never been a denier. No, my links literally prove climate change is real. My problem is that people like Al Gore who outright lied about Florida being under water right now. Miami should be completely destroyed right now according to Al Gore. The problem I have is that people are exaggerating the risk of climate change for their personal gain. Al Gore has significant investment in that field. My problem is that we have the Mayan Calendar doomsday people now jumping on climate change and saying it's the end times if we dont do something within 10 years. Worse yet, that 'something' is not in line with fixing the problem. It's in line with their political ideology.

sleepysysadmin 6y ago

>This assumes that consumer use of automobiles contributes in a significant way to global warming. Supply chain use of automobiles (trucks, trains, planes, ships, etc.) continued throughout lockdown as goods still needed to be delivered to consumers. You are right that we haven't completely ended use of transportation but we have seen decreases in all transportation. That is the prevailing argument is that we need to reduce CO2 which certainly has happened in 2020. If the fix to climate change is far more significant of a reduction. I posit that the fix is untenable or the premise is false. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle#/media/File:Carbon14_with_activity_labels.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle#/media/File:Carbon... Why does climate change people always focus on 1800s to today? Perhaps it has something to do with a very large swing in solar activity?

cycomanic 6y ago
This stuff has been debunked over and over. Just one example showing increasing temperatures with low solar activity http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/11/record-heat-despite-a-cold-sun/ http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/11/record... Also arguments about temperature millions of years ago are not really meaningful, humans (and most other of the current species) did not live on earth at the time. But at least the deniers have now as predicted progressed from "it's not happening", to "it's happening but it's not that bad", soon we will be at "it is definitely happening but it's to late now to do anything so might as well do nothing"
- sleepysysadmin 6y ago
  >This stuff has been debunked over and over. Debunked? I linked the science around the subject. I have never seen anyone debunk these scientific theories. >. Just one example showing increasing temperatures with low solar activity http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/11/record http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/11/record... Your link is looking at 1960s and closer. My links are looking at the last 20,000 years. Solar activity dips are not measured in such a short period of time. The solar activity is in the 'modern maximum' for the entire graph from 1960s on. You are not debunking anything with that link. It is of no surprise to me that during a 'modern maximum' solar cycle that temperatures are going up. >Also arguments about temperature millions of years ago are not really meaningful, humans (and most other of the current species) did not live on earth at the time. The 6 celcius increase in the last 20,000 to 10,000 years ago was something humans greatly benefitted from. The IPCC says that we are going to warm 1.4celcius by 2100. I'm 100% certain that humans can survive and very likely thrive because of this warming. >But at least the deniers have now as predicted progressed from "it's not happening", to "it's happening but it's not that bad", soon we will be at "it is definitely happening but it's to late now to do anything so might as well do nothing" Are you asserting that I am a denier? I have never been a denier. No, my links literally prove climate change is real. My problem is that people like Al Gore who outright lied about Florida being under water right now. Miami should be completely destroyed right now according to Al Gore. The problem I have is that people are exaggerating the risk of climate change for their personal gain. Al Gore has significant investment in that field. My problem is that we have the Mayan Calendar doomsday people now jumping on climate change and saying it's the end times if we dont do something within 10 years. Worse yet, that 'something' is not in line with fixing the problem. It's in line with their political ideology.