New ICE Vehicles Banned in California by 2035

[chipmunk]

Originally Posted by weederr33

Oh STFU already!!!

I would have, but these guys kept dragging it!

[chipmunk]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

If this is the case then there is no point in continuing to demonstrate the data to you because it isn't on a timeline that is long enough to be significant to you.

I will summarize: taking a 150-160 year sample data in light of thousands of years of data is extremely short-sighted. It's borderline manipulative, especially because the previous thousands of years didn't just not have a correlation, but had the reverse causation.

[chipmunk]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Over geologic time scales, with no human inputs, rising temperatures led to increases in CO2 in the atmosphere (which helped further increased warming). Temperature rise caused CO2 rise (which caused further temp rise).

This would result in a spiraling out of control. In your words, a chicken laying an egg, and it becomes into a chicken, which lays another egg, which becomes another chicken, eventually there are millions of chickens and eggs.

The temperatures are no where at historical highs, and yet the emissions are.

What's the source of your 2nd graph? I see a different trend:

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by chipmunk

I will summarize: taking a 150-160 year sample data in light of thousands of years of data is extremely short-sighted. It's borderline manipulative, especially because the previous thousands of years didn't just not have a correlation, but had the reverse causation.

No it is not. Show me another 150-160 year sample where factors have changed so rapidly. You can't just throw this data away because you don't like it.

Believe it or not, the SCIENTISTS who study climate, are WAY tf ahead of you. You may or may not be as smart as they are (I'm guessing the latter), but they have the advantage of having studied closely all of the effects that you have mentioned *and countless other factors*. They aren't pulling these conclusions out of their arses... Those who do, lose their credibility very quickly...

[chipmunk]

Originally Posted by ZDan

No it is not. Show me another 150-160 year sample where factors have changed so rapidly. You can't just throw this data away because you don't like it.

Believe it or not, the SCIENTISTS who study climate, are WAY tf ahead of you. You may or may not be as smart as they are (I'm guessing the latter), but they have the advantage of having studied closely all of the effects that you have mentioned *and countless other factors*. They aren't pulling these conclusions out of their arses... Those who do, lose their credibility very quickly...

Can same thing be said about scientists with counter evidences and counter arguments?

[spcmafia]

This is the song that never eeeennnnddddssss.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by chipmunk

It's only when private-jet-flying doomsday-mongering criminals stick their nose in that this balance gets screwed up. And We The Peasants get the shaft in the end.

Originally Posted by chipmunk

Some (most) people don't realize that they're being played. The same crowd that has convinced them of EVs are the same ones flying private jets around.

Originally Posted by chipmunk

Ironically, none of those who complain about too much population has ever volunteered to solve the problem starting with themselves.

Originally Posted by chipmunk

Yea it's quite ironic! All of a sudden people put their tinfoil hats on and prophesy how the ice caps will melt, crude will be all gone, earth become a pancake griddle...

Originally Posted by chipmunk

Point me to the actual independent peer-reviewed studies, not just the .gov links. As a past researcher who has done work for .gov myself, I'd much rather rely independent journals.

Originally Posted by chipmunk

Like I said earlier, point me to the underlying scientific studies. IPCC is not a scientific community like ASME or ASC, etc. IPCC is no better than a UN or NATO.
Have you seen my links from earlier?

Originally Posted by ZDan

Look, I know you are SLOW, .

Not "slow" but certainly has an agenda and will make shit fit that agenda no matter how illogical it is.

I think that I have figured it out though!

He has stumbled onto the truth and global warming is all a scam by big business and the combined world governments! The science is all fake or wrong and anybody that try's to say otherwise is just dumb (hey we can't all be PHDs) or are deliberately hiding the truth.

Irace, Spuds, and everybody else are obviously minions of the government and private jet flyers that just lurk around car forums ready to pounce on anybody that finds and try's to expose the truth!

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Irace, Spuds, and everybody else are obviously minions of the government and private jet flyers that just lurk around car forums ready to pounce on anybody that finds and try's to expose the truth!

My private jet has a prop and only seats two, do I still qualify?

[chipmunk]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

I think that I have figured it out though!
]

Whatever floats your boat, man! Strawmanning is a great way to end the discussion after all.

[WolfpackS2k]

chipmunk, just let it go. You won't convince them. Let them continue to think the sky is falling; they'll figure it out eventually.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by chipmunk

What's the source of your 2nd graph? I see a different trend:

You must be kidding... "Air temperatures in *Greenland*"? First of all, you cannot just look at LOCAL temperatures. Changing climate can be *very* different for different regions, and you can *cherry-pick* a location that magically suits your desired conclusions.

Quick search suggests this is "data" from denialist quacks "Carter, Spooner, et al". John Spooner is a *cartoonist*. and Bob Carter was a geologist specializing in palaeontology, stratigraphy, marine geology, and "environmental science" (right) (1942-2016).

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by ZDan

You must be kidding... "Air temperatures in *Greenland*"? First of all, you cannot just look at LOCAL temperatures. Changing climate can be *very* different for different regions, and you can *cherry-pick* a location that magically suits your desired conclusions.

Quick search suggests this is "data" from denialist quacks "Carter, Spooner, et al". John Spooner is a *cartoonist*. and Bob Carter was a geologist specializing in palaeontology, stratigraphy, marine geology, and "environmental science" (right) (1942-2016).

Several of his links are from conspiracy theorists. I'm convinced he is going to some other dark hole on the internet and asking his QAnon friends about what he should say next here. Bla bla bla, deep state, bla, bla, bla, Gore and Gates, bla, bla, bla.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

chipmunk, just let it go. You won't convince them. Let them continue to think the sky is falling; they'll figure it out eventually.

Or he will figure it out eventually. The timeline for ozone layer denial is playing out very similarly to global warming denial.

https://debunkingdenial.com/the-ozon...rsy-part-ii-2/

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

We're already witnessing a disaster first hand, almost entirely brought to you by the left leaning side of most "western" governments.

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Or he will figure it out eventually. The timeline for ozone layer denial is playing out very similarly to global warming denial.

https://debunkingdenial.com/the-ozon...rsy-part-ii-2/

Wasting your breath on that one as well.