climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

[prop_joe]

you got a spare shiny hat mate?

Here you go, better protect those brain cells of yours, because they are clearly functioning!

They shouldn't be according to the Gov . Bang, there goes any smidgen of cred i ever had, funny old world

[foilholio]

Well there you go, more BS in science or should I say government. Alcohol is more dangerous than pot.

ps - working my way through GH and RD on JRE. Had never even heard of Gobegli Tepi before, very interesting.

It is very interesting and I am not saying any of it is true, but listen and look. The evidence is quite compelling, if you look at the progression of our history, like we suddenly become farmers? Then built pyramids? It doesn't make sense. If history actually progressed over say 40 or 60 thousands years and then exiting the iceage destroyed most of that evidence, that actually makes more sense logically.

Randall Carlson has a lot of interesting things to show and say about the iceage and the transition out of it. It is very relevant to the current climate debate, but so is the treatment of Graham Hancock showing new evidence and conclusions.

There is little bits through JRE on other Hominids. There has been a quite large variety of homonids alive at the same time as humans, we have even interbred. Forrest galante on JRE even proposed that dragons could have possibly been real, to some extent. I think a lot of our history is highly likely hidden from us.

[jumptheshark]

Dragons! Seriously? Various earlier civilizations happened upon the occasional TRex skull and got imaginative.

[Pemba]

Anyone else find it funny/ironic/weird that what this thread essentially boils down to... is a group of people going 'Arrrrrrrgh we're gonna die!' and two of them saying 'calm down everyone, it's gonna be fine' and those are the two taking most of the sh*t What other scenario does this happen? I'm well aware it's much more nuanced than that and they have brought it on themselves but i just thought i'd point that out If it is all totally legit the various Govs must be loving it because they get to play out all their fear mongering tactics and games without getting called on it! FF... your got a spare shiny hat mate?

ps - working my way through GH and RD on JRE. Had never even heard of Gobegli Tepi before, very interesting.

What I find funny is that "the deep state", the marxists, the bolshies, even Julian Assange's fake (?) sex allegations are brought in, to support an argument ? Essentially the believers are basically being called stupid for believing what appears/appeared to be consensus, with the one obviously taking most of the sh*t being Slide (I think Marlboroman kind of enjoys taking a bit of sh*t actually). It's a bit like being called an idiot for not believing in aliens. There's no proof that they don't exist either. That's how I (a believer - though maybe a bit more cynical now) feel anyway. But yes, some interesting stuff is coming out.

[Havre]

One of the arguments I often hear, maybe even the argument I would hear the most frequently, is that the changes in temperature we now see are happening more quickly than ever before. I can see the point that when something happens quickly nature will struggle to adapt quickly enough and you could possibly have unknown consequences (potentially very bad ones). Then I randomly end up researching a bit about the end of the Younger Dryas - which also was discussed in one of those Joe Rogan conversations. In that video it is claimed that the warming that ended the "ice age" (or that the glaciers started to retract) might have happened in as few years as five. FIVE.

Sounds quite significant doesn't it? Never even heard about that before. Trying to find more sources and reflections about that period, but finding it difficult.

"The most spectacular aspect of the YD is that it ended extremely abruptly (around 11,600 years ago), and although the date cannot be known exactly, it is estimated from the annually-banded Greenland ice-core that the annual-mean temperature increased by as much as 10°C in 10 years."

http://ocp.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/div/oc ... ples.shtml

I cannot say that this is one of those "facts" that are approved by 97% of all scientists (or whatever the number now is for man made climate change), but if I was one of those scientists that would have triggered my curiosity to understand. If this is true - how could it happen?

Very much appreciated if there are someone on here with more information about that even.

[foilholio]

Ding ding ding. We have a winner! Havre it appears you have brains! Would you like a foil hat to protect them. I have a few more.

But serious.

I suggest you look into sea level change for those periods. You see sea level change IS a proxy for global average temperature. And sea levels have changed at rates DRASTICALLY greater than now. Now that is not to say the current sea level change rate is not going to increase, because I think it is likely.

What I find funny is that "the deep state", the marxists, the bolshies, even Julian Assange's fake (?) sex allegations are brought in, to support an argument ?

It would depend which argument really. I was just listening to some more on Karl Marx and well some of the parallels to the climate movement's ideas are stark.

the one obviously taking most of the sh*t being Slide

I thought he was the one posting the most. Anyway it is not considered rude to abuse robots.

It's a bit like being called an idiot for not believing in aliens.

Well by probabilities aliens are more likely than not, so not believing in them is actually stupid. If you are talking about aliens visiting us? abducting people etc? Well that is a lot less likely.

aliens. There's no proof that they don't exist either.

There is strong evidence they exist in our solar system, but not the highly evolved, intelligent, space fairing type you may be referring to.

[prop_joe]

Dragons! Seriously?

That was my reaction too Agree with him or not at least he's amusing.

I think the following is the sort of thing FF was alluding too? Ignore the douchey title and to skip to 1min 45secs. Bit off the orignal topic but relevent to the discussion.

[jumptheshark]

Dragons! Seriously?

That was my reaction too Agree with him or not at least he's amusing.

Joe is hilarious, but you just cant give much serious credibility to any program that has to use fleshlight and online encryption/anonymity services as their primary sponsors! Lends a bit of insight into the primary target audience.

[Pemba]

Ding ding ding. We have a winner! Havre it appears you have brains! Would you like a foil hat to protect them. I have a few more.

But serious.

I suggest you look into sea level change for those periods. You see sea level change IS a proxy for global average temperature. And sea levels have changed at rates DRASTICALLY greater than now. Now that is not to say the current sea level change rate is not going to increase, because I think it is likely.

What I find funny is that "the deep state", the marxists, the bolshies, even Julian Assange's fake (?) sex allegations are brought in, to support an argument ?

It would depend which argument really. I was just listening to some more on Karl Marx and well some of the parallels to the climate movement's ideas are stark.

the one obviously taking most of the sh*t being Slide

I thought he was the one posting the most. Anyway it is not considered rude to abuse robots.

It's a bit like being called an idiot for not believing in aliens.

Well by probabilities aliens are more likely than not, so not believing in them is actually stupid. If you are talking about aliens visiting us? abducting people etc? Well that is a lot less likely.

aliens. There's no proof that they don't exist either.

There is strong evidence they exist in our solar system, but not the highly evolved, intelligent, space fairing type you may be referring to.

Hmm.. for someone that "doesn't always reads literally but often contextually" it seems you're arguing semantics now.. Anyways, sea level as an indicator of average global temperature sounds reasonable I guess and I'm sure it has changed a lot and suddenly in the past. So your point is that this is likely to happen again at some point and what we are trying to do with CO2 emissions really won't make any difference because of that ?

[grigorib]

Funny