At the 7:46 mark there are three statements that illustrate why thinking people have trouble taking you guys seriously. They are: Still subject to large uncertainties due to complex physical processes. Time-lagged with a response time of decades to millennia. Of immense local as well as global relevance. How can the last one be taken seriously, given the first two? Large uncertainty means no one really knows what is going on, but we are expected to believe that it is of immense relevance? This is a joke. Right? Time-lagged with a response time of decades to millennia. Either this is a cop out statement, or evidence that nobody has actually studied the millennia of climate that has preceded the current time. The certainty is that the climate has always changed, will always change, and that the earth has buffers that have enabled its ability to sustain life for a very long time. Another certainty is that by using reliable and capable energy sources, humans can survive the changes. Bird must fly to a warmer place when winter comes, because they can not alter the space the occupy. Humans can, and do. Although centuries ago, even humans needed to migrate as things changed. Another certainty is, if the nonsense against capable and reliable energy sources continues, human prosperity will end. The simple truth is only fossil fuels and nuclear have the reliability we demand and the capacity we need. Hopefully people figure out that the war against reliable energy is a war against human prosperity, before it is too late!
So your high school degree makes you smarter then 2300 climate scientists with BS, Masters and PHDs. These scientists study data from 23 earth orbiting satellites 🛰 and data from 15000 plus temperature station and teams of scientists all over the 🌎 collecting data. Well macsmarty 👖.
@@gehwissen3975 I am sorry you feel this way. Can you justify the hysteria? Can you explain why so many data sets start at a time that shows alarm, when extending the time period shows a completely different scenario? Or are you content to be lead by folks who obviously have an agenda that does NOT include “saving the planet?” Sounds like the latter.
Well this is just Glacier Ice. There were no Ice caps at the Pleistocene when the Earth was only 2'c warmer than the Holocene has been. So Glaciers are actually totally irrelevant on the scale of Sea Level Rise. The Sea Level Rise will be in the range of 25Meters or 90ft. That actually pales into insignificance when we look at Crop Production in a 3'c hotter World. You can walk away from SLR. But the Crop producing Areas will dis-appear as 3'c warming is amplified by 2-4x on Land Masses. Most of our crops and cattle feed grows at 19-26'c. So they will be 25-38'c. Resulting in a 60-90% loss in crop yields. You cannot make Crops Grow in the Desert.
Hmm, I fear it’ll be a long time before then. My guess is the No summer sea ice event in the Arctic is when things really go wrong and that’s just a decade or two away. I’m all for stratospheric aerosol injection but like with all climate change solutions, things are going slowly, there’s not huge interest, it’s underfunded and there’s inertia. The usual
At the 7:46 mark there are three statements that illustrate why thinking people have trouble taking you guys seriously. They are: Still subject to large uncertainties due to complex physical processes. Time-lagged with a response time of decades to millennia. Of immense local as well as global relevance. How can the last one be taken seriously, given the first two?
Large uncertainty means no one really knows what is going on, but we are expected to believe that it is of immense relevance? This is a joke. Right?
Time-lagged with a response time of decades to millennia. Either this is a cop out statement, or evidence that nobody has actually studied the millennia of climate that has preceded the current time.
The certainty is that the climate has always changed, will always change, and that the earth has buffers that have enabled its ability to sustain life for a very long time.
Another certainty is that by using reliable and capable energy sources, humans can survive the changes. Bird must fly to a warmer place when winter comes, because they can not alter the space the occupy. Humans can, and do. Although centuries ago, even humans needed to migrate as things changed.
Another certainty is, if the nonsense against capable and reliable energy sources continues, human prosperity will end. The simple truth is only fossil fuels and nuclear have the reliability we demand and the capacity we need.
Hopefully people figure out that the war against reliable energy is a war against human prosperity, before it is too late!
So your high school degree makes you smarter then 2300 climate scientists with BS, Masters and PHDs. These scientists study data from 23 earth orbiting satellites 🛰 and data from 15000 plus temperature station and teams of scientists all over the 🌎 collecting data. Well macsmarty 👖.
Wordy bs
@@gehwissen3975 I am sorry you feel this way. Can you justify the hysteria? Can you explain why so many data sets start at a time that shows alarm, when extending the time period shows a completely different scenario? Or are you content to be lead by folks who obviously have an agenda that does NOT include “saving the planet?” Sounds like the latter.
You smell fraud. That's always possible. So you can spread doubt.
I doubt you're a real person.
Well this is just Glacier Ice. There were no Ice caps at the Pleistocene when the Earth was only 2'c warmer than the Holocene has been. So Glaciers are actually totally irrelevant on the scale of Sea Level Rise. The Sea Level Rise will be in the range of 25Meters or 90ft. That actually pales into insignificance when we look at Crop Production in a 3'c hotter World. You can walk away from SLR. But the Crop producing Areas will dis-appear as 3'c warming is amplified by 2-4x on Land Masses. Most of our crops and cattle feed grows at 19-26'c. So they will be 25-38'c. Resulting in a 60-90% loss in crop yields. You cannot make Crops Grow in the Desert.
Asked scientist : Why does the Earths magnetism change direction.
Why does the dangers come electrified particles in the solar wind ?
obviously have not read the 5th or 6th IPCC Assessment Reports as they contradict every thing that has said at this event
We will be almost half way back to the Medevil warm period and a quarter of the way back to the Roman empire period!
Year 2300 mankind wont be around
Hmm, I fear it’ll be a long time before then. My guess is the No summer sea ice event in the Arctic is when things really go wrong and that’s just a decade or two away. I’m all for stratospheric aerosol injection but like with all climate change solutions, things are going slowly, there’s not huge interest, it’s underfunded and there’s inertia. The usual
@@deanfowles3707 you are advocating for worldwide atmospheric pollution. people like you need to go away and put some long trousers on.
@@deanfowles3707 The fundamental climate argument: "Just you wait, it's going to be bad, you'll see". Repeat decade after decade in perpetuity.
@@anthonymorris5084you busy busy exxon...
@@gehwissen3975 No an argument. Do better.