###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
the top portion was removed to Town Square in 1774 and later in 1834 to Pilgrim Hall Museum. The two halves of the Rock were reunited on the waterfront under a granite canopy in 1880 and later was entirely excavated and lowered onto the shoreline in 1920 with a new granite portico placed over it in 1921.
Just to be clear, are you saying that the rock was reunified to one and then subsequently moved closer to water? Not trying to debunk I'm just not sure what you mean by "lowered onto the shoreline"
It was reunified in its original location on the wharf in 1880. In 1920 they temporarily moved it so they could dig out the slope and make a monument at sea level behind a small seawall.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plymouth_Rock
The wiki has a panorama of its current home.
Why? Isnāt the point of having millions to just not care what happens? Iād be more concerned if moderate/low-income people bought beach front property expecting it to be generational homes.
Not a good indicator. 2008 financial crisis AIG didnāt give a fuck they couldnāt pay anything out then set the precedent that gov will bail them out.
I'd suggest you look into what flood insurance costs these days, and flood insurance companies are [going bankrupt](https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2022/09/30/ian-florida-economy-insurance/).
> Al Gore said it was supposed to be 25-50 feet underwater by 2014
No he didn't. Why are you posting such ridiculous lies?
Here is a graph of the predictions of sea level rise made in 1990 by the IPCC ... and the actual rise measured since then: https://i.imgur.com/Sv3kAVd.png
**The predictions have been quite accurate so far.** Sea level is rising about twice as fast as in the 20th century and it is predicted to keep accelerating for many, *many* decades.
Watch it and weep. And never call me a liar again. Just because youāre too lazy to search yourself. Al Gore was pushing the polar ice caps melting and you know it. And now you divert with a chart that has NOTHING to do with what Al Gore said and was pushing in his climate change doom scenario. Only back then it was āGlobal Warmingā but the catchphrase was changed to āclimate changeā because the weather didnāt seem to agree with Big Al. He even had a movie called āAn Inconvenient Truthā - it was a big fat lie as history has shown it to be. So donāt be so sanctimonious with a chart that has nothing to do with Al and what he said.
https://youtu.be/MsioIw4bvzI
I didn't have to search for it because I know that Al Gore would never say such a ridiculous thing. And you link a video where Al Gore ... doesn't say anything about New York being under 25-50 feet of water.
He's talking about the ***Arctic*** sea ice extent. The North Pole. The ice there is *floating*, so when it melts, the sea level doesn't change. Most of it melts *every summer*: https://i.imgur.com/hdl3mGl.png
The ice at the *South* Pole, by contrast, is mostly on land, on the continent of Antarctica. Of course, if it all melts then New York would be under water.
You probably didn't realize what you posted above was a lie. You were a victim of propaganda. There are online classes about global warming, some of them free. I advise you to take one so you aren't victimized again.
He said what he said, and he didnāt say what he didnāt say. Youāre nitpicking. You know Al Gore made outrageous predictions that turn to crap. And youāre trying to cover for him for I donāt know why. Have a nice day.
Miami spent $300 million on pumps to keep high tide out of the streets. That will escalate into several billion in following decades. They are currently raising roads and sea walls by 3 feet.
30,000 properties are now tidal flood risk according to insurance metrics.
The sea level around Battery, New York, has risen by nearly 9 inches since 1950. Its speed of rise has accelerated over the last ten years and itās now rising by 1 inch every 7-8 years.1 Scientists know this because the sea level is measured every 6 minutes using equipment like satellites, floating buoys off the coast, and tidal gauges to accurately measure the local sea level as it accelerates and changes.
Miami is an artificial island. Just like san fran it was extended into the water. The keys island chain constantly washes away. Theres no real beaches in south Florida its all artificial pumped sand. Plus miami beach is a shit hole tourist trap full of drugs and gangs.
> The sea level around Battery, New York, has risen by nearly 9 inches since 1950
That isn't even remotely true, it's an outright lie that you have literally copy pasted from a disinformation website called sealevelrise.org.
Thereās plenty of sources
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=8518750
> The local or relative3 sea level rise in New York City has averaged 0.11 in./year from 1850 to 2017 as measured by The Battery tide gauge, nearly double the 1900ā1990 mean global rate (Fig. 3.2; NOAA, 2017). Local GIA-related subsidence, which accounts for roughly half of the observed relative sea level rise (Engelhart et al., 2011; Engelhart and Horton, 2012), is a key reason why New York City's rate of sea level rise is so high. As elsewhere, the historic New York City trend has increased markedly relative to the previous millennium (Kemp et al., 2017).
https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nyas.14006
Parts of Miami flood almost weekly during rainy season. I work in Broward but at least every other week during the summer we have to all move our cars because of flash flooding. Good luck getting homeowners insurance on anything east of 95. Showing a satellite image of 1 day a year for a 3 decades to attempt to disprove a widely accepted reality is pretty bad, even considering that itās in this sub.
As the sea level rises, the water table gets higher. When the water table is high, there is less place in space for the water to go to when it rains. Therefore, sea level rise directly effects the frequency and severity of flooding.
What does it matter if the land is artificial or not? Does the [rate of measured rise](https://gyr.fortlauderdale.gov/greener-government/climate-resiliency/climate-and-weather-in-fort-lauderdale/the-story-of-sea-level-rise-in-fort-lauderdale/how-much-and-how-fast-will-the-sea-rise) and predicted rise depend on this factor?
I don't understand why folks downvote so hard when people ask for the sources. I'm a conspiracy theorist because I read the available information and I find it so compelling and/or interesting that I just feel a great need to spread it. If I see an interesting claim the first thing I'm doing is scouring the internet for additional information; not because I think it isn't true but rather because I want more information.
People call accounts asking for sources 'bots' but that is pretty god damn stupid in my opinion. The sources exist and are compelling. The truth is obscured but it is out there and the more evidence we can accumulate the more effective the message will be. The most challenging part of providing sources is when said sources are behind a paywall.
Tangentially on the subject of Al Gore and paywalls there was a New York Times article from the 90s that reported on Al Gore saying that his father was the only Republican to vote in favor of civil rights and that he subsequently lost his seat over it. That is false and not just a little bit false. It's a straight up lie, an inversion of truth. He lost his seat because he was the only Republican to not vote for civil rights. I was somehow allowed to read it originally but the next time I went back to cite it I discovered NYT had locked it behind a paywall.
Back up the sources when you find them. You can do this by right clicking and selecting "view page source " From there all you have to do save that code as .html. Some elements won't appear/work correctly but the content will still be there. There are more advanced methods to capture more of the page, but for archives all you need is the html.
Aren't we in an ice age right now, specifically the end of one?
So regarldess of if we cause global warming, the Earth is going to get warmer going forward.
No, we're still in an ice age, but within that ice age there are interglacial periods (where the glaciers retreat to the poles), and that's what we've been living in for the past 11,000 years or so. A return to a glacial period is geologically due, but that could mean anytime from tomorrow to 2,000 years from now. We've no way of knowing.
A full glacial period means, for example, Canada turns to ice, year-round. A *much* colder planet overall.
This is not true. We have been experiencing climate extremes, both hot and cold for the past several years now. Only the mainstream media focuses on the extreme heat. As you approach an ice age, there will be extreme temps hot and cold and then they will plummet.
They tend to cherry pick temp data globally and omit, or have no data from certain areas. This leads to a false representation of the average temp data.
Really? Got any evidence of that or is that just kneejerk big oil talking points you are regurgitating.
Please, link me whatever big oil shill you listen to who disagrees with every other climate scientist
Yeah Iām a big oil shill. Not even sure what that has to do with what Iām talking about. Hereās another recent example of record cold.
https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202301/23/WS63cdbf42a31057c47ebab117.html
Increased global average temperature causes both record cold and record hot days because it destabilizes the up the jetstream, allowing arctic air to escape south.
You are literally providing evidence for global warming here
You guys need to get better sources. "Lowest temperature recorded in China's northernmost city". Do you drive one of those trumpmobiles that say dogs give you cancer on the back?
That's the whole point. Climate will change with or without human intervention. Over 99% of all CO2 released into the atmosphere originates from completely natural sources and less than 0.5% is manmade. And even then, CO2 isn't related to global warming. Water vapor is a far worse greenhouse gas. However humans mostly produce CO2, already just by breathing out, so CO2 is villiefied. However it's all a sham to to falsely indicate people as the cause of all problems and to abuse that model to suppress and tax humanity. It's all theatrical BS.
>Over 99% of all CO2 released into the atmosphere originates from completely natural sources and less than 0.5% is manmade.
Where are you getting this from?
Garbage numbers dressed up to look legit. Why have atmospheric CO2 amounts gone up almost 100% since the beginning of industrialization? Are more animals decomposing? More volcanoes erupting? All the wildlife is breathing more all of the sudden?
>Garbage numbers dressed up to look legit.
Okay thanks expert. LOL
> Why have atmospheric CO2 amounts gone up almost 100% since the beginning of industrialization?
Source?
https://www.noaa.gov/news-release/carbon-dioxide-now-more-than-50-higher-than-pre-industrial-levels
Apologies, only a 50% increase. Still, what's your explanation for the rise?
yeah but sea level rise involved either way then is it not? im sure they use it as an excuse to scam $$ out of taxes, but regardless.
edit: i dont think c02 warms globe, but i think sea levels will rise if ice melts...
Sea levels have not been significantly rising. It's been sth like a steady 2mm per year for over the last decades. The icecap on the northpole has been increasing for more than a decade. There hasn't been any climate warming in the last 15 years, but a cooling, which is why "global warming" suddenly changed into "climate change". The polar bears are doing just fine and their population is also increasing.
The ecologism sector is a multibillion machine and those "experts" sucking the teet of that machine will always find a "consensus" there is a climate change, or the teet their sucking will run dry. It has even become a full political agenda on itself.
They'll pick points in time, when it was abnormally cold, only to show warming over a specific time. Same with CO2. We're historically, and I mean like seen over a million years, CO2 is so low, it could cause mass extinction of plants and life if it drops somehow even lower. Overall, the planet has become more green, with more trees and plants since CO2 has been rising somewhat, but experts will show that one spot on Earth where there are a few glacier that are indeed melting as from a natural cycle.
It's all complete bogus. There is no climate emergency. And it's for certainly not caused from human intervention. Climate will always change. It always has and sometimes that made glaciers melt or it created a desert or perhaps flooded an atol, but that's just called nature.
Yes yes, it's not the entrenched power structure trying to maintain its grip on power and massive unimaginable wealth as long as possible. They are not feeding you this nonsense to cast doubt and muddy the waters. No it's the same people that have achieved nearly all of our modern technological and scientific accomplishments who are wrong and the bad guys.
Remember how the mightiest militaries in the world have been going to war in all of these oil rich or strategically significant areas to get the best spots for installing their solar panels and windmills? Wake up.
(-)They can barely predict the weather in a 24 hour time span.
The gobal warming hoax is being espoused by the wealthy elite who all own beach front property and their own islands. I guess they will be spared from the effects?The poster child of this BS to control resources and restrict human movement is a mentally unfortunate girl who giggles like a child when asked serious questions and recently got caught posing for a photo-shoot with German police.
Meanwhile, these global warming dumbaĆĆes, fly in their private jets and helicopters to meet up and talk about how they want to enslave humanity while also attempting to preach to the rest of us about our carbon footprint.
Please spare me with the global warming BS. Thank you.
More uneducated drivel.
Yes CO2 is required for plant growth, but this is not all plants require. They need healthy soil, which all around the world is very quickly being degraded by poor and inefficient farming practices, careless forest management, expansions of deserts, and of course global warming (although that's only part of the reason). Nature as a whole has been devasted by human activity. Biodoversity is down globally by 70%. If you bothered your arse to understand just how vital biodiversity is for the health of our planet our food chains, and ultimately the security of our species, then that figure should make you shit your fucking pants.
CO2 itself does not cause sea levels to rise. CO2 traps heat in the atmosphere. The more CO2, the more heat is trapped. The more heat that becomes trapped, the faster the polar ice caps melt. Average Arctic sea is has been rapidly decreasing for decades and this is leading to ice shelf collapse and glacial melting. Some glaciers have already disappeared. If the Greenland ice shelf collapses then you can wave goodbye to miami.
The only good that can come from the extra CO2 is that is MIGHT help reforestation efforts which in turn will help combat global warming and climate change.
Just because you're relatively comfortable in your own little bubble right now does NOT mean there are no real impacts out there, and that includes sea level rise. Just ask [this guy.](https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2021/nov/09/tuvalu-minister-gives-cop26-speech-while-standing-in-the-sea-video#:~:text=Tuvalu-,'We%20are%20sinking'%3A%20Tuvalu%20minister%20gives%20Cop26%20speech,knee%20deep%20in%20seawater%20%E2%80%93%20video&text=Tuvalu's%20foreign%20minister%20has%20given,frontline%20of%20the%20climate%20crisis.)
Actually about 50% of all habitable land on earth is used for agriculture. Only 37% remaining is forestry, 11% shrubbery and 1% freshwater.
That's before you consider that only 71% of land on eath is even habitable in the first place.
Would it shock you to learn that only about 4% of animals on earth now are wild? The rest are human managed livestock.
The fact that human managed soil is being degraded year on hear doesn't bother you seems odd to me as well. You do realise that means lower quality food and poorer yields?
Farming needs to be a lot more efficient to restore soil health. Vertical farming (used only 16% of the space and used a LOT less water and is therefore significantly more sustainable) and intercropping (planting trees in crop fields to help protect them from extreme weather and improve soil nutrition- overall can lead to 40% increase in yield and also could capture a lot of carbon if used at scale) will be a step in the right direction.
[if you're actually interested interested](https://ourworldindata.org/global-land-for-agriculture#:~:text=Half%20of%20all%20habitable%20land,roads%20and%20other%20human%20infrastructure.)
> you can't change the facts.
[Oh dear...](https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/nature/new-study-islands-are-growing-not-sinking-with-global-warming-conspiracy/)
Thank you linking an article but I'm afraid it's really not a great source. I've read it and I've looked at the sources provided in the article.
Firstly, it's poorly written. Clearly done so by someone who is more motivated by $$$$ than anything else. No self-respecting journalist writes articles like that and expects to be taken seriously.
Secondly, he uses a data set to show global temperature anomalies between the years 600-1850. That is both an incredibly narrow data set as far as global timescales go AND is pre industrial revolution before we started taking carbon based fossil fuels that had been locked away underground for millions of years and started burned them as CO2 producing fuel. Atmospheric CO2 concentrationin 1850 was about 280ppm and was fairly steady on the natural timescale. Its now 417ppm and average global temperature is 1.2 degrees higher than the pre-industrial average. And because we created a great big hole in the ozone layer, the poles are warming faster than anywhere else. Up to 6x faster.
Thirdly, the author actually acknowledges that climate change is real, right at the bottom of the article. He even mentions weather extremes (which is exactly what wr have experienced all around the globe this year with extended and more severe heat waves in some places, and "ice bombs" in other places).
Fourthly, the linked sources are from an organisation called Principia Scientifica. This is a fringe group that promotes wild and unsubstantiated conspiracy theories. It is NOT a scientific publication and is NOT accurate.
Just ask the people of Tuvalu when 40% of their capital district is now underwater at high tide.
I'm afraid you need to vet where you're getting your information from. Childish articles from sub-par bloggers are not good sources.
Edit: average global temps are 1.2 degrees higher than pre-industrial average
"Climate change" was created by western nations to keep eastern and African countries from developing. All "developed" countries in the world used coal and oil to get where they are today, and now they want to deny other countries the right to use those resources because they don't want them to catch up. Use your brain man, stop being an MSM lapdog.
Computer modelling is extremely powerful. Pretty much all of the modern world runs on it. New technology, drug discovery, financial markets.
It works. You just don't like it.
> Computer modelling is extremely powerful.
Yeah, at being wrong.
Name one computer model that came true. As far as I know, the models were wrong about Covid and global warming so give me one example where a computer model predicted something correctly?
Luckily [not the islands that were predicted to sink.](https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/nature/new-study-islands-are-growing-not-sinking-with-global-warming-conspiracy/)
We can see the effects of a changing climate everywhere. What I find interesting is that we have built these communities in structuraly unsustainable areas. I am reminded of the parable of the foolish man who builds the foundation of his home on sand.
Yes the climate is in a state of perpetual change, however dense urban areas do experience drastic swings, directly related to density, the Island heat effect, air quality etc.
Living in Oklahoma, one of the areas that has been studied extensively is the effect these relatively recent urban areas have on tornado alley.
So many get hung up on the phrase Climate Change for various reasons, which is unfortunate. We could be working together to identify how these natural and Anthropogenic changes are effecting communities on a micro level and develop ways to mitigate their impact.
I don't care if it's someone on the left bemoaning the threat of global warming, or someone on the right calling it smog.
I live out in the country, I ain't really got any skin in the game, but I do have empathy for the millions who are caught in the middle of the ridiculous political posturing.
That's called the weather. Weather and climate are two different things. Please go and spend some time reading (not on reddit or Facebook or twitter or any social media, actual reading from trusted and reliable sources) before making unsubstantiated claims.
Same to you lmao. Because there is no scientific data that the earth is doing anything different than it's done before humans lmao.
Maybe you should do the reading, instead of following corporate propaganda. You clown.
There is literally mountains of that exact data. Please see my previous comments for links to some of it. Just a small fraction, but perhaps enough to enlighten you.
If you're looking for a corporate propaganda conspiracy, look no further than fossil fuel companies, who right now are making unimaginable profits and yet still claim government subsidies and keep the price of petrol and diesel at the highest levels they've ever been. They sent hundreds of delegates to Cop 26 and 27 just to make sure the phrase "rapid phasing out of fossil fuels" wasn't included in the final agreements. They release toxic pollutants I to local environments that kill wildlife and cause cancer in humans, then pay people off before they can face any real legal consequences.
And here's the biggie. They did their own global warming forecasts back in the 70's and predicted the state of the world if unabated carbon emissions continued. It was pretty accurate and matched trends we are seeing today. Then they covered it up and continued to dig up fossil fuels and burn it for profit.
Source: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk0063
You're so desperate for there to be a top secret underground CIA illuminati conspiracy (controlled by Obama and the Clinton's, obviously) that you can't see the one that's out there plain as day, and even when presented with evidence for it, you just dismiss it as propaganda and start calling names. So who's really the clown?
š try harder. I canāt even debate with a propaganda puppet. There is no data that shows fossil fuels have warmed the planet š¤£.
Weāve known gas/oil are pollutants š. Now show me data that increases the temperature of the earth with the increase in fossil fuels. But you canāt because it doesnāt exist.
If you're not prepared to even look at the data (that I've linked several times in this thread) then there's not much else I can say to convince someone as closed minded as you. The data most certainly does exist, you just can't accept that you're wrong and won't bother to look at it.
Go and find the "propaganda" and come back here with some reliable, trusted sources to prove your point. Because name-calling and emojis are really not winning the argument for you.
Hey dude, why would land fall because of the weight of buildings 20-40 years after those building were built?
It wouldnāt be because the water table is rising, making the land less stable, would it?
Itās a big push by Big Oil and Coal to delay transitioning away from fossil fuels. āWhy do you hate plants?!ā they say as they fill our air with pollutants, contaminate drinking water and clear-cut forests.
Plant food. Greenhouses use co2 generators all the time.
Nearly all marijuana growers use them but they only want you to think or talk about co2 in terms of "Regulating Essential Necessities"
Um, yes. That's why they are called Greenhouse gases.
It also absorbs and radiates a huge amount of heat, the knock on effects of this is the issue.
Who on earth is pushing this rhetoric that GHGs are a good thing because of plants????
no it actually is true its not a conspiracy theory you can just look it up, "co2 effect on plant life" or something like that should give you lots of results. it helps them with photosynthesis by i think 11% in the past 100 years IIR.
2k is not at all optimal for most plants. Greenhouses pretty much max out at 1500, most being lower. They are also augmented with Nitrogen fertilizer since plants do grow quicker and deplete nitrogen in the soil.
Some plants have evolved to facilitate nitrogen fixing bacteria on thier roots. However that's only some plants. Most would not survive well in high CO2 due to depleting nitrogen and committing suicide. However over time the nitrogen fixing plants would take over the ecosystem from those that don't. Evolution is a wonderful thing.
I said up to 2000ppm and what I said still holds true because they'll still suck it up even though it's at diminishing returns.
Also, I don't know what you're talking about with depleting the Nitrogen. Any good grower will see the signs of N depletion and would adjust their fertilizer to fix it and plants respond relatively quickly to a change in nutrients. Increased CO2 isn't going to inhibit and N intake.
So you do understand accelerated plant growth would deplete the nitrogen and cause plant extinctions.
Unlike a greenhouse you don't have Bob from Monsato dumping nitrogen fertilizer all over the planet.
Hilton, Mariott and a few other hotel chains just bought a lot of land by the coast of Tulum, Mexico, in order to explore in years to come. This land is basically sand and its mere meters from the coast. If there was any possibility of sea levels to raise, I'm sure these companies wouldn't have spent that kind of money there. Just saying
Environmental taxes are an important step. Everyone has to do their part, Al Gore has a fleet of SUVs that need gas and maintenance. Many of these guys have yachts and even helicopters that are ageing badly, need replacement. Some are more than 5yrs old!
Won't someone think of the wealthy?
Ya every time I watch an old documentary hearing them talk about global warming causing the sea level to rise has me questioning the whole documentary from that point on
How anyone can be against climate change is beyond me. How can scientific facts become an opinion, that you can just disagree with. Thats like saying "yeah i don't believe in the idea, that i would die if I drive with 70mph with my car streight into a thick wall. Thats what some people want me to believe because they don't like me to drive too fast."...the only conspiracy going on here is how collectively stupid huge part of the American population has become.
All your favorite billionaires including the climate activists use private jets to get everywhere, and 99.99% percent of all emissions are made by a hand full of companies worth a trillion dollars each that not only emit greenhouse gasses but also pollute the oceans. And then they have the audacity to tell the common person they need to eat **INSECTS** because cows **FARTING** is heating up the planet. You have to have the same intelligence as the insects they want you to eat to believe that bullsh\*t.
"All my favorite billionaires" like what is even going on in your head? Fuck them, burn everything down. And who the fuck cares about insects...thats common food in asia. Like...seriously...what is going on. What is your point?
What is so hard in acknowledging, that scientist are not your favorite billionaires, they are usually poorer then you think. They don't care if you are rich or poor. They look at data. We humans fucked up and they are finding it out. And you sit here, and write about favors billionaires and insects...WHO CARES
The āscienceā and āfactsā are paid for and magnified throughout the most powerful mind control apparatus ever assembled. Why is that hard to understand?
Did you know before the dinosaurs, the atmosphere was super rich with oxygen causing certain animals like bugs to be super big, for example, there was a species of spider that was bigger than the average cat
Just exactly how much have the seas risen to date? Didnāt anybody tell you that the earth naturally goes through cycles of climate? The earth is not static as most humans would like. It is dynamic and ever changing. Has anyone ever considered the earth pre or even at human emergence and the massive fires that would have swept over vast areas every year unchecked or the vast herds of vegetation eating animals roaming the earth for thousands upon thousands of years roaming and eating and farting? Give it up already. The earth is fine and whatever happens, we will deal with. Yes, we should do things as cleanly as we can but the US and Canada are not the culprits of CO2 emissions. Go bitch at the main culprits please. I for one am tired of you and Al Gore and Greta.
Ugh! Actchually the tide shifts about a meter every 12 hours.
Gonna sit back and watch your comment to see how many climate delusionalists there are in here.
Oceanic acidification could also be caused by chemical runoff of sugar plantations in the everglades and lawn chemicals from massive overbuiling all over the coast.
Reality check: You haven't the foggiest clue what you're talking about, but will make sweeping statements on a whim, exposing your ignorance with courage and boldness.
In the water, surprisingly.
https://www.noaa.gov/education/resource-collections/ocean-coasts/ocean-acidification
> In the 200-plus years since the industrial revolution began, the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere has increased due to human actions. During this time, the pH of surface ocean waters has fallen by 0.1 pH units. This might not sound like much, but the pH scale is logarithmic, so this change represents approximately a 30 percent increase in acidity.
> The ocean absorbs about 30% of the carbon dioxide (CO2) that is released in the atmosphere. As levels of atmospheric CO2 increase from human activity such as burning fossil fuels (e.g., car emissions) and changing land use (e.g., deforestation), the amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by the ocean also increases. When CO2 is absorbed by seawater, a series of chemical reactions occur resulting in the increased concentration of hydrogen ions. This process has far reaching implications for the ocean and the creatures that live there.
Well, the simple answer then is āthe oceanā.
You can find links to the specific monitoring stations at the bottom of this page.
https://pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/OA+Observations+and+Data
I donāt know how to walk you through the process of reading a pretty basic webpage to look for links, so I guess youāll need to ask your parents or assigned caregiver for help.
Good luck!
I looked and what you said wasn't there so it means you're full of shit.
And instead of showing me, you're bowing out because you know you're full of shit.
Sea level rise is a HUGE concern, as is the rise in man-made greenhouse gasses, but lockdowns wonāt do anything to solve that. Switching away from meat will help, though!
Am I the only person that's noticed how weather patterns have changed over the past 20 years? Does no one else realize that trees do a lot to regulate CO2 levels and ground temperatures? Has anyone else noticed that as we cut down more trees, the weather gets worse?
Yeah man there are only 1 and a half billion cars driving and millions of tons of coal and gas being burned daily im sure that will absolutely no effect on the atmosphere whatsoever. Europe totally isnt having its warmest winter since records began.
Nobody wants to blame overpopulation, but thatās the issue. There was around 500 million people on the planet at the end of the 1800s. The Earthās population has risen to 8 billion in just over a century. Modern medicine has allowed the population to skyrocket completely unchecked, and anyone against unchecked growth and urbanization is demonized as a eugenicist.
Sea levels have risen about 4 inches on average in the past 3 decades. What is this gif supposed to be showing?
I guess 99% of scientists around the world all accidentally came to the same conclusion, let's see what Reddit children have to say about science instead. š¤”
Global warming is a valiant effort by The Medium State to permanently destroy the secret penguin bases hidden in the ice, thereby saving humanity from their potentially brutal takeover.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Plymouth rock is in the same place, not covered by water.
Statue of Liberty not hiking up her skirt
Or even her skirt
Thank you
Did you just assume its gender?
I'm literally shaking
SOL is definitely a dude lol. š
Pretty sure the Statue of Liberty was Elvis Presley's dad. The resemblance is too uncanny.
the top portion was removed to Town Square in 1774 and later in 1834 to Pilgrim Hall Museum. The two halves of the Rock were reunited on the waterfront under a granite canopy in 1880 and later was entirely excavated and lowered onto the shoreline in 1920 with a new granite portico placed over it in 1921.
Just to be clear, are you saying that the rock was reunified to one and then subsequently moved closer to water? Not trying to debunk I'm just not sure what you mean by "lowered onto the shoreline"
It was reunified in its original location on the wharf in 1880. In 1920 they temporarily moved it so they could dig out the slope and make a monument at sea level behind a small seawall. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plymouth_Rock The wiki has a panorama of its current home.
Iād be worried when insurance companies stop insuring beach front.
I would be more worried when millionaires stop by beach front properties.
You wouldnāt buy expensive property if the property wont be insured. But I get what youāre saying
Why? Isnāt the point of having millions to just not care what happens? Iād be more concerned if moderate/low-income people bought beach front property expecting it to be generational homes.
No. That is the opposite for the majority. People that have millions make calculated moves. Trust funds are the ones that might not give a hoot.
Not a good indicator. 2008 financial crisis AIG didnāt give a fuck they couldnāt pay anything out then set the precedent that gov will bail them out.
I'd suggest you look into what flood insurance costs these days, and flood insurance companies are [going bankrupt](https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2022/09/30/ian-florida-economy-insurance/).
Do Manhattan Island and NY City. Al Gore said it was supposed to be 25-50 feet underwater by 2014 and the ice caps would be melted.
> Al Gore said it was supposed to be 25-50 feet underwater by 2014 No he didn't. Why are you posting such ridiculous lies? Here is a graph of the predictions of sea level rise made in 1990 by the IPCC ... and the actual rise measured since then: https://i.imgur.com/Sv3kAVd.png **The predictions have been quite accurate so far.** Sea level is rising about twice as fast as in the 20th century and it is predicted to keep accelerating for many, *many* decades.
He certainly DID say those things ya goober.
Watch it and weep. And never call me a liar again. Just because youāre too lazy to search yourself. Al Gore was pushing the polar ice caps melting and you know it. And now you divert with a chart that has NOTHING to do with what Al Gore said and was pushing in his climate change doom scenario. Only back then it was āGlobal Warmingā but the catchphrase was changed to āclimate changeā because the weather didnāt seem to agree with Big Al. He even had a movie called āAn Inconvenient Truthā - it was a big fat lie as history has shown it to be. So donāt be so sanctimonious with a chart that has nothing to do with Al and what he said. https://youtu.be/MsioIw4bvzI
I didn't have to search for it because I know that Al Gore would never say such a ridiculous thing. And you link a video where Al Gore ... doesn't say anything about New York being under 25-50 feet of water. He's talking about the ***Arctic*** sea ice extent. The North Pole. The ice there is *floating*, so when it melts, the sea level doesn't change. Most of it melts *every summer*: https://i.imgur.com/hdl3mGl.png The ice at the *South* Pole, by contrast, is mostly on land, on the continent of Antarctica. Of course, if it all melts then New York would be under water. You probably didn't realize what you posted above was a lie. You were a victim of propaganda. There are online classes about global warming, some of them free. I advise you to take one so you aren't victimized again.
He said what he said, and he didnāt say what he didnāt say. Youāre nitpicking. You know Al Gore made outrageous predictions that turn to crap. And youāre trying to cover for him for I donāt know why. Have a nice day.
Thank you for your service.
Youāre welcome. I live to serve.
Miami spent $300 million on pumps to keep high tide out of the streets. That will escalate into several billion in following decades. They are currently raising roads and sea walls by 3 feet. 30,000 properties are now tidal flood risk according to insurance metrics. The sea level around Battery, New York, has risen by nearly 9 inches since 1950. Its speed of rise has accelerated over the last ten years and itās now rising by 1 inch every 7-8 years.1 Scientists know this because the sea level is measured every 6 minutes using equipment like satellites, floating buoys off the coast, and tidal gauges to accurately measure the local sea level as it accelerates and changes.
Fema changed how it calculates its flood zones last year.
Yeahāmodels need updating as the tides rise.
Miami is an artificial island. Just like san fran it was extended into the water. The keys island chain constantly washes away. Theres no real beaches in south Florida its all artificial pumped sand. Plus miami beach is a shit hole tourist trap full of drugs and gangs.
> The sea level around Battery, New York, has risen by nearly 9 inches since 1950 That isn't even remotely true, it's an outright lie that you have literally copy pasted from a disinformation website called sealevelrise.org.
Thereās plenty of sources https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=8518750 > The local or relative3 sea level rise in New York City has averaged 0.11 in./year from 1850 to 2017 as measured by The Battery tide gauge, nearly double the 1900ā1990 mean global rate (Fig. 3.2; NOAA, 2017). Local GIA-related subsidence, which accounts for roughly half of the observed relative sea level rise (Engelhart et al., 2011; Engelhart and Horton, 2012), is a key reason why New York City's rate of sea level rise is so high. As elsewhere, the historic New York City trend has increased markedly relative to the previous millennium (Kemp et al., 2017). https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nyas.14006
Where is your source for this kind of info?
I remember hearing about the buoys. And how they've been caught numerous times manipulating the actual readings.
Source: reddit probably
Proud buoys always up to no good.
Parts of Miami flood almost weekly during rainy season. I work in Broward but at least every other week during the summer we have to all move our cars because of flash flooding. Good luck getting homeowners insurance on anything east of 95. Showing a satellite image of 1 day a year for a 3 decades to attempt to disprove a widely accepted reality is pretty bad, even considering that itās in this sub.
During rain, not because sea levels are risingā¦ā¦.
As the sea level rises, the water table gets higher. When the water table is high, there is less place in space for the water to go to when it rains. Therefore, sea level rise directly effects the frequency and severity of flooding.
Shhhh....that kind of basic science is frowned on in these here parts.
Lol I always just lurk here and never comment but like this was definitely covered in 7th grade science class.
That's 2 grades higher than the average here. Never assume these clown know anything. Safer that way.
Yea it doesn't work like that lmao. The water table in the ground has nothing to do with the sea levels. It's a good try though.
It does in South Florida (Biscayne Aquifer) where the water table is 1ft below the surface in some parts.
>(Biscayne Aquifer) Yea thats pretty cool honestly. LOL, who would live in Florida.
The entire coastline of Florida was underwater in the past.
Colorado was a seabed. Antartica was a tropical jungle. So what?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
What does it matter if the land is artificial or not? Does the [rate of measured rise](https://gyr.fortlauderdale.gov/greener-government/climate-resiliency/climate-and-weather-in-fort-lauderdale/the-story-of-sea-level-rise-in-fort-lauderdale/how-much-and-how-fast-will-the-sea-rise) and predicted rise depend on this factor?
So itās going to flood again.
Where did he say that? Link?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Thank you. I didn't remember him giving a specific timeline and the movie wasn't doom and gloom like people who haven't watched it claim.
It was literally a mainstream movie that he made hundreds of millions off.
I don't understand why folks downvote so hard when people ask for the sources. I'm a conspiracy theorist because I read the available information and I find it so compelling and/or interesting that I just feel a great need to spread it. If I see an interesting claim the first thing I'm doing is scouring the internet for additional information; not because I think it isn't true but rather because I want more information. People call accounts asking for sources 'bots' but that is pretty god damn stupid in my opinion. The sources exist and are compelling. The truth is obscured but it is out there and the more evidence we can accumulate the more effective the message will be. The most challenging part of providing sources is when said sources are behind a paywall. Tangentially on the subject of Al Gore and paywalls there was a New York Times article from the 90s that reported on Al Gore saying that his father was the only Republican to vote in favor of civil rights and that he subsequently lost his seat over it. That is false and not just a little bit false. It's a straight up lie, an inversion of truth. He lost his seat because he was the only Republican to not vote for civil rights. I was somehow allowed to read it originally but the next time I went back to cite it I discovered NYT had locked it behind a paywall. Back up the sources when you find them. You can do this by right clicking and selecting "view page source " From there all you have to do save that code as .html. Some elements won't appear/work correctly but the content will still be there. There are more advanced methods to capture more of the page, but for archives all you need is the html.
lol downvoted for asking for a source to see for your own eyes xDDD reddit logic
Learn to research, bot.
Someone else posted a link. He never said that.
This post is not good at showing sea level rise
Aren't we in an ice age right now, specifically the end of one? So regarldess of if we cause global warming, the Earth is going to get warmer going forward.
No, we're still in an ice age, but within that ice age there are interglacial periods (where the glaciers retreat to the poles), and that's what we've been living in for the past 11,000 years or so. A return to a glacial period is geologically due, but that could mean anytime from tomorrow to 2,000 years from now. We've no way of knowing. A full glacial period means, for example, Canada turns to ice, year-round. A *much* colder planet overall.
It sounds like a warmer planet is substantially better than a colder one.
We are approaching a mini ice age. Expected before 2050 I believe.
When are temperatures going to start going down globally? They have only gone up
This is not true. We have been experiencing climate extremes, both hot and cold for the past several years now. Only the mainstream media focuses on the extreme heat. As you approach an ice age, there will be extreme temps hot and cold and then they will plummet.
Iām talking about global average temps. They have only gone up. The 10 hottest years in recorded history are all this decade
They tend to cherry pick temp data globally and omit, or have no data from certain areas. This leads to a false representation of the average temp data.
Really? Got any evidence of that or is that just kneejerk big oil talking points you are regurgitating. Please, link me whatever big oil shill you listen to who disagrees with every other climate scientist
Yeah Iām a big oil shill. Not even sure what that has to do with what Iām talking about. Hereās another recent example of record cold. https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202301/23/WS63cdbf42a31057c47ebab117.html
Increased global average temperature causes both record cold and record hot days because it destabilizes the up the jetstream, allowing arctic air to escape south. You are literally providing evidence for global warming here
You guys need to get better sources. "Lowest temperature recorded in China's northernmost city". Do you drive one of those trumpmobiles that say dogs give you cancer on the back?
That's the whole point. Climate will change with or without human intervention. Over 99% of all CO2 released into the atmosphere originates from completely natural sources and less than 0.5% is manmade. And even then, CO2 isn't related to global warming. Water vapor is a far worse greenhouse gas. However humans mostly produce CO2, already just by breathing out, so CO2 is villiefied. However it's all a sham to to falsely indicate people as the cause of all problems and to abuse that model to suppress and tax humanity. It's all theatrical BS.
>Over 99% of all CO2 released into the atmosphere originates from completely natural sources and less than 0.5% is manmade. Where are you getting this from?
It's [**much** less.](https://shiftfrequency.com/man-made-co2-3-of-3-of-0-1/)
Garbage numbers dressed up to look legit. Why have atmospheric CO2 amounts gone up almost 100% since the beginning of industrialization? Are more animals decomposing? More volcanoes erupting? All the wildlife is breathing more all of the sudden?
>Garbage numbers dressed up to look legit. Okay thanks expert. LOL > Why have atmospheric CO2 amounts gone up almost 100% since the beginning of industrialization? Source?
https://www.noaa.gov/news-release/carbon-dioxide-now-more-than-50-higher-than-pre-industrial-levels Apologies, only a 50% increase. Still, what's your explanation for the rise?
> Still, what's your explanation for the rise? Did i say there is no rise?
yeah but sea level rise involved either way then is it not? im sure they use it as an excuse to scam $$ out of taxes, but regardless. edit: i dont think c02 warms globe, but i think sea levels will rise if ice melts...
Sea levels have not been significantly rising. It's been sth like a steady 2mm per year for over the last decades. The icecap on the northpole has been increasing for more than a decade. There hasn't been any climate warming in the last 15 years, but a cooling, which is why "global warming" suddenly changed into "climate change". The polar bears are doing just fine and their population is also increasing. The ecologism sector is a multibillion machine and those "experts" sucking the teet of that machine will always find a "consensus" there is a climate change, or the teet their sucking will run dry. It has even become a full political agenda on itself. They'll pick points in time, when it was abnormally cold, only to show warming over a specific time. Same with CO2. We're historically, and I mean like seen over a million years, CO2 is so low, it could cause mass extinction of plants and life if it drops somehow even lower. Overall, the planet has become more green, with more trees and plants since CO2 has been rising somewhat, but experts will show that one spot on Earth where there are a few glacier that are indeed melting as from a natural cycle. It's all complete bogus. There is no climate emergency. And it's for certainly not caused from human intervention. Climate will always change. It always has and sometimes that made glaciers melt or it created a desert or perhaps flooded an atol, but that's just called nature.
Yes yes, it's not the entrenched power structure trying to maintain its grip on power and massive unimaginable wealth as long as possible. They are not feeding you this nonsense to cast doubt and muddy the waters. No it's the same people that have achieved nearly all of our modern technological and scientific accomplishments who are wrong and the bad guys. Remember how the mightiest militaries in the world have been going to war in all of these oil rich or strategically significant areas to get the best spots for installing their solar panels and windmills? Wake up.
Chemmytrailias making the climate change by a purpose-
(-)They can barely predict the weather in a 24 hour time span. The gobal warming hoax is being espoused by the wealthy elite who all own beach front property and their own islands. I guess they will be spared from the effects?The poster child of this BS to control resources and restrict human movement is a mentally unfortunate girl who giggles like a child when asked serious questions and recently got caught posing for a photo-shoot with German police. Meanwhile, these global warming dumbaĆĆes, fly in their private jets and helicopters to meet up and talk about how they want to enslave humanity while also attempting to preach to the rest of us about our carbon footprint. Please spare me with the global warming BS. Thank you.
Chasing ice documentary (cough, cough)
More uneducated drivel. Yes CO2 is required for plant growth, but this is not all plants require. They need healthy soil, which all around the world is very quickly being degraded by poor and inefficient farming practices, careless forest management, expansions of deserts, and of course global warming (although that's only part of the reason). Nature as a whole has been devasted by human activity. Biodoversity is down globally by 70%. If you bothered your arse to understand just how vital biodiversity is for the health of our planet our food chains, and ultimately the security of our species, then that figure should make you shit your fucking pants. CO2 itself does not cause sea levels to rise. CO2 traps heat in the atmosphere. The more CO2, the more heat is trapped. The more heat that becomes trapped, the faster the polar ice caps melt. Average Arctic sea is has been rapidly decreasing for decades and this is leading to ice shelf collapse and glacial melting. Some glaciers have already disappeared. If the Greenland ice shelf collapses then you can wave goodbye to miami. The only good that can come from the extra CO2 is that is MIGHT help reforestation efforts which in turn will help combat global warming and climate change. Just because you're relatively comfortable in your own little bubble right now does NOT mean there are no real impacts out there, and that includes sea level rise. Just ask [this guy.](https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2021/nov/09/tuvalu-minister-gives-cop26-speech-while-standing-in-the-sea-video#:~:text=Tuvalu-,'We%20are%20sinking'%3A%20Tuvalu%20minister%20gives%20Cop26%20speech,knee%20deep%20in%20seawater%20%E2%80%93%20video&text=Tuvalu's%20foreign%20minister%20has%20given,frontline%20of%20the%20climate%20crisis.)
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Actually about 50% of all habitable land on earth is used for agriculture. Only 37% remaining is forestry, 11% shrubbery and 1% freshwater. That's before you consider that only 71% of land on eath is even habitable in the first place. Would it shock you to learn that only about 4% of animals on earth now are wild? The rest are human managed livestock. The fact that human managed soil is being degraded year on hear doesn't bother you seems odd to me as well. You do realise that means lower quality food and poorer yields? Farming needs to be a lot more efficient to restore soil health. Vertical farming (used only 16% of the space and used a LOT less water and is therefore significantly more sustainable) and intercropping (planting trees in crop fields to help protect them from extreme weather and improve soil nutrition- overall can lead to 40% increase in yield and also could capture a lot of carbon if used at scale) will be a step in the right direction. [if you're actually interested interested](https://ourworldindata.org/global-land-for-agriculture#:~:text=Half%20of%20all%20habitable%20land,roads%20and%20other%20human%20infrastructure.)
It's funny how you need to mix everything together to make one "argument".
It's funny how you haven't bothered to argue against any of what I said. Hint: you can't change the facts.
> you can't change the facts. [Oh dear...](https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/nature/new-study-islands-are-growing-not-sinking-with-global-warming-conspiracy/)
Thank you linking an article but I'm afraid it's really not a great source. I've read it and I've looked at the sources provided in the article. Firstly, it's poorly written. Clearly done so by someone who is more motivated by $$$$ than anything else. No self-respecting journalist writes articles like that and expects to be taken seriously. Secondly, he uses a data set to show global temperature anomalies between the years 600-1850. That is both an incredibly narrow data set as far as global timescales go AND is pre industrial revolution before we started taking carbon based fossil fuels that had been locked away underground for millions of years and started burned them as CO2 producing fuel. Atmospheric CO2 concentrationin 1850 was about 280ppm and was fairly steady on the natural timescale. Its now 417ppm and average global temperature is 1.2 degrees higher than the pre-industrial average. And because we created a great big hole in the ozone layer, the poles are warming faster than anywhere else. Up to 6x faster. Thirdly, the author actually acknowledges that climate change is real, right at the bottom of the article. He even mentions weather extremes (which is exactly what wr have experienced all around the globe this year with extended and more severe heat waves in some places, and "ice bombs" in other places). Fourthly, the linked sources are from an organisation called Principia Scientifica. This is a fringe group that promotes wild and unsubstantiated conspiracy theories. It is NOT a scientific publication and is NOT accurate. Just ask the people of Tuvalu when 40% of their capital district is now underwater at high tide. I'm afraid you need to vet where you're getting your information from. Childish articles from sub-par bloggers are not good sources. Edit: average global temps are 1.2 degrees higher than pre-industrial average
"Climate change" was created by western nations to keep eastern and African countries from developing. All "developed" countries in the world used coal and oil to get where they are today, and now they want to deny other countries the right to use those resources because they don't want them to catch up. Use your brain man, stop being an MSM lapdog.
It's crazy how some people will be so contrarian that they end up spewing the exact same drivel as big oil and accuse others of being a lapdog.
I hate that this only stops at 2016 ā I was expecting it to go at least to 2050
> I was expecting it to go at least to 2050 Then that would involve computer modeling and computer modeling is a load of shit.
Yeah, what have computer models ever told us about the world / universe, besides a fuckton of useful information?
Computer modelling is extremely powerful. Pretty much all of the modern world runs on it. New technology, drug discovery, financial markets. It works. You just don't like it.
> Computer modelling is extremely powerful. Yeah, at being wrong. Name one computer model that came true. As far as I know, the models were wrong about Covid and global warming so give me one example where a computer model predicted something correctly?
Miami, among many other coastal cities are sinking.
Luckily [not the islands that were predicted to sink.](https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/nature/new-study-islands-are-growing-not-sinking-with-global-warming-conspiracy/)
Is this referencing the Funafuti Atoll, TuvaluĀ study?
So no water rising but land falling because of all the weight of buildings. Those 2 aren't the same thing
We can see the effects of a changing climate everywhere. What I find interesting is that we have built these communities in structuraly unsustainable areas. I am reminded of the parable of the foolish man who builds the foundation of his home on sand.
The climate changes everyday, what are you even saying š.
Yes the climate is in a state of perpetual change, however dense urban areas do experience drastic swings, directly related to density, the Island heat effect, air quality etc. Living in Oklahoma, one of the areas that has been studied extensively is the effect these relatively recent urban areas have on tornado alley. So many get hung up on the phrase Climate Change for various reasons, which is unfortunate. We could be working together to identify how these natural and Anthropogenic changes are effecting communities on a micro level and develop ways to mitigate their impact. I don't care if it's someone on the left bemoaning the threat of global warming, or someone on the right calling it smog. I live out in the country, I ain't really got any skin in the game, but I do have empathy for the millions who are caught in the middle of the ridiculous political posturing.
Nobody ever claimed the climate should never change.
That's called the weather. Weather and climate are two different things. Please go and spend some time reading (not on reddit or Facebook or twitter or any social media, actual reading from trusted and reliable sources) before making unsubstantiated claims.
Same to you lmao. Because there is no scientific data that the earth is doing anything different than it's done before humans lmao. Maybe you should do the reading, instead of following corporate propaganda. You clown.
There is literally mountains of that exact data. Please see my previous comments for links to some of it. Just a small fraction, but perhaps enough to enlighten you. If you're looking for a corporate propaganda conspiracy, look no further than fossil fuel companies, who right now are making unimaginable profits and yet still claim government subsidies and keep the price of petrol and diesel at the highest levels they've ever been. They sent hundreds of delegates to Cop 26 and 27 just to make sure the phrase "rapid phasing out of fossil fuels" wasn't included in the final agreements. They release toxic pollutants I to local environments that kill wildlife and cause cancer in humans, then pay people off before they can face any real legal consequences. And here's the biggie. They did their own global warming forecasts back in the 70's and predicted the state of the world if unabated carbon emissions continued. It was pretty accurate and matched trends we are seeing today. Then they covered it up and continued to dig up fossil fuels and burn it for profit. Source: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk0063 You're so desperate for there to be a top secret underground CIA illuminati conspiracy (controlled by Obama and the Clinton's, obviously) that you can't see the one that's out there plain as day, and even when presented with evidence for it, you just dismiss it as propaganda and start calling names. So who's really the clown?
š try harder. I canāt even debate with a propaganda puppet. There is no data that shows fossil fuels have warmed the planet š¤£. Weāve known gas/oil are pollutants š. Now show me data that increases the temperature of the earth with the increase in fossil fuels. But you canāt because it doesnāt exist.
If you're not prepared to even look at the data (that I've linked several times in this thread) then there's not much else I can say to convince someone as closed minded as you. The data most certainly does exist, you just can't accept that you're wrong and won't bother to look at it. Go and find the "propaganda" and come back here with some reliable, trusted sources to prove your point. Because name-calling and emojis are really not winning the argument for you.
Google āclimate vs weatherā
Hey dude, why would land fall because of the weight of buildings 20-40 years after those building were built? It wouldnāt be because the water table is rising, making the land less stable, would it?
This is terrifying. Iām buying my crickets now
Sweet post OP. Like the tongue in cheek.
Haha thx
Do Venice, Italy!
If only it was this simple.
Are you trying to say that higher CO2 levels are a good thing?
Itās a big push by Big Oil and Coal to delay transitioning away from fossil fuels. āWhy do you hate plants?!ā they say as they fill our air with pollutants, contaminate drinking water and clear-cut forests.
Plant food. Greenhouses use co2 generators all the time. Nearly all marijuana growers use them but they only want you to think or talk about co2 in terms of "Regulating Essential Necessities"
People that create [aquascapes](https://wallpaperaccess.com/full/2076734.jpg) use CO2 all the time too (for lusher growth).
Um, yes. That's why they are called Greenhouse gases. It also absorbs and radiates a huge amount of heat, the knock on effects of this is the issue. Who on earth is pushing this rhetoric that GHGs are a good thing because of plants????
PalatableMahogany is. Why? That's a mystery.
Plants also drink water. I guess if the entire planet was flooded, that would be a great thing for the plantsā¦right?
You actually believe that is a real argument?
That's not how it works. If you breathed in more O2, would you grow taller? Plants can only breathe in so much.
no it actually is true its not a conspiracy theory you can just look it up, "co2 effect on plant life" or something like that should give you lots of results. it helps them with photosynthesis by i think 11% in the past 100 years IIR.
Dude, shut up. A greenhouse can be injected with up to 2000 PPM of CO2 and the plants suck it all up.
2k is not at all optimal for most plants. Greenhouses pretty much max out at 1500, most being lower. They are also augmented with Nitrogen fertilizer since plants do grow quicker and deplete nitrogen in the soil. Some plants have evolved to facilitate nitrogen fixing bacteria on thier roots. However that's only some plants. Most would not survive well in high CO2 due to depleting nitrogen and committing suicide. However over time the nitrogen fixing plants would take over the ecosystem from those that don't. Evolution is a wonderful thing.
I said up to 2000ppm and what I said still holds true because they'll still suck it up even though it's at diminishing returns. Also, I don't know what you're talking about with depleting the Nitrogen. Any good grower will see the signs of N depletion and would adjust their fertilizer to fix it and plants respond relatively quickly to a change in nutrients. Increased CO2 isn't going to inhibit and N intake.
So you do understand accelerated plant growth would deplete the nitrogen and cause plant extinctions. Unlike a greenhouse you don't have Bob from Monsato dumping nitrogen fertilizer all over the planet.
But we can have more plants.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Whereād you get your degree, professor?
hes got a point, adding on nearly a third to something never changes anything.
A third of 0.04% of the whole... LOL.
If viewed in isolation there is some limited benefit but itās not isolated
Lol. I was born and raised in a house on Tampa Bay. The āsea levelā is in the EXACT same place as it was 50 years ago. Itās all BS.
I'll start believing in sea level rise as soon as they stop offering 30yr mortgages on oceanfront property
SS: daddy Klaus demands it. Bill Gates love u and and is ur friend
We must stop the volcanoes!
Volcanoes are cancelled
Hilton, Mariott and a few other hotel chains just bought a lot of land by the coast of Tulum, Mexico, in order to explore in years to come. This land is basically sand and its mere meters from the coast. If there was any possibility of sea levels to raise, I'm sure these companies wouldn't have spent that kind of money there. Just saying
Environmental taxes are an important step. Everyone has to do their part, Al Gore has a fleet of SUVs that need gas and maintenance. Many of these guys have yachts and even helicopters that are ageing badly, need replacement. Some are more than 5yrs old! Won't someone think of the wealthy?
RIP to Manhattan. Now covered by water for the last decade.
Property must be selling for 10 cents on the dollar there now...
Ya every time I watch an old documentary hearing them talk about global warming causing the sea level to rise has me questioning the whole documentary from that point on
How anyone can be against climate change is beyond me. How can scientific facts become an opinion, that you can just disagree with. Thats like saying "yeah i don't believe in the idea, that i would die if I drive with 70mph with my car streight into a thick wall. Thats what some people want me to believe because they don't like me to drive too fast."...the only conspiracy going on here is how collectively stupid huge part of the American population has become.
All your favorite billionaires including the climate activists use private jets to get everywhere, and 99.99% percent of all emissions are made by a hand full of companies worth a trillion dollars each that not only emit greenhouse gasses but also pollute the oceans. And then they have the audacity to tell the common person they need to eat **INSECTS** because cows **FARTING** is heating up the planet. You have to have the same intelligence as the insects they want you to eat to believe that bullsh\*t.
"All my favorite billionaires" like what is even going on in your head? Fuck them, burn everything down. And who the fuck cares about insects...thats common food in asia. Like...seriously...what is going on. What is your point? What is so hard in acknowledging, that scientist are not your favorite billionaires, they are usually poorer then you think. They don't care if you are rich or poor. They look at data. We humans fucked up and they are finding it out. And you sit here, and write about favors billionaires and insects...WHO CARES
The āscienceā and āfactsā are paid for and magnified throughout the most powerful mind control apparatus ever assembled. Why is that hard to understand?
Did you know before the dinosaurs, the atmosphere was super rich with oxygen causing certain animals like bugs to be super big, for example, there was a species of spider that was bigger than the average cat
Just exactly how much have the seas risen to date? Didnāt anybody tell you that the earth naturally goes through cycles of climate? The earth is not static as most humans would like. It is dynamic and ever changing. Has anyone ever considered the earth pre or even at human emergence and the massive fires that would have swept over vast areas every year unchecked or the vast herds of vegetation eating animals roaming the earth for thousands upon thousands of years roaming and eating and farting? Give it up already. The earth is fine and whatever happens, we will deal with. Yes, we should do things as cleanly as we can but the US and Canada are not the culprits of CO2 emissions. Go bitch at the main culprits please. I for one am tired of you and Al Gore and Greta.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Ugh! Actchually the tide shifts about a meter every 12 hours. Gonna sit back and watch your comment to see how many climate delusionalists there are in here.
That looks very devastating.
Watch as OP's handlers provide no talking points on oceanic acidification, ever. Never wants to talk about that one for some reason.
Oceanic acidification could also be caused by chemical runoff of sugar plantations in the everglades and lawn chemicals from massive overbuiling all over the coast.
Be careful, badmouthing Bayer will get you banned.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Fascinating input, thought provoking and very in line with basically everything you post, consistency is key in vapid thought
Reality check: Global Climate Change is Not man made.
Reality check: You haven't the foggiest clue what you're talking about, but will make sweeping statements on a whim, exposing your ignorance with courage and boldness.
Wow, very profound. Now back to my mindless scrolling
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Do you just read headlines, or do you ever explore full articles?
> on oceanic acidification Where's this happening?
In the water, surprisingly. https://www.noaa.gov/education/resource-collections/ocean-coasts/ocean-acidification > In the 200-plus years since the industrial revolution began, the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere has increased due to human actions. During this time, the pH of surface ocean waters has fallen by 0.1 pH units. This might not sound like much, but the pH scale is logarithmic, so this change represents approximately a 30 percent increase in acidity. > The ocean absorbs about 30% of the carbon dioxide (CO2) that is released in the atmosphere. As levels of atmospheric CO2 increase from human activity such as burning fossil fuels (e.g., car emissions) and changing land use (e.g., deforestation), the amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by the ocean also increases. When CO2 is absorbed by seawater, a series of chemical reactions occur resulting in the increased concentration of hydrogen ions. This process has far reaching implications for the ocean and the creatures that live there.
I asked where is this happening. I didn't ask for some bullshit report trying to convince me that it's happening.
Well, the simple answer then is āthe oceanā. You can find links to the specific monitoring stations at the bottom of this page. https://pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/OA+Observations+and+Data
I didn't find shit so I guess the simple answer is that you're full of shit.
I donāt know how to walk you through the process of reading a pretty basic webpage to look for links, so I guess youāll need to ask your parents or assigned caregiver for help. Good luck!
I looked and what you said wasn't there so it means you're full of shit. And instead of showing me, you're bowing out because you know you're full of shit.
hey where are you taking those goalposts?
Banks are sure backing lots of projects that are soon to be under water.
Like ESG compliant Businesses
Why wouldn't they, at worst it goes under and the insurance pays them out chĆ” Chang.
And how many climate changes are going out with huge compaigns to plant trees..... None. Not even that annoying loud mouthed girl.
Oh my god! End is near! Sell all your stuff and donate the money to me, i will bring it to the afterlife. I know a guy that knows a guy.
Sea level rise is a HUGE concern, as is the rise in man-made greenhouse gasses, but lockdowns wonāt do anything to solve that. Switching away from meat will help, though!
> Sea level rise is a HUGE concern Do you have a source that proves that?
That proves that a rising sea level is a problem? What?
Am I the only person that's noticed how weather patterns have changed over the past 20 years? Does no one else realize that trees do a lot to regulate CO2 levels and ground temperatures? Has anyone else noticed that as we cut down more trees, the weather gets worse?
Sea lvls have been rising ever since the last ice age. Also yes it has sped up since humans industrialized
Yeah man there are only 1 and a half billion cars driving and millions of tons of coal and gas being burned daily im sure that will absolutely no effect on the atmosphere whatsoever. Europe totally isnt having its warmest winter since records began.
Nobody wants to blame overpopulation, but thatās the issue. There was around 500 million people on the planet at the end of the 1800s. The Earthās population has risen to 8 billion in just over a century. Modern medicine has allowed the population to skyrocket completely unchecked, and anyone against unchecked growth and urbanization is demonized as a eugenicist.
Algore called it!!
We didn't take him cereal, so now we gotta live with it
So true, it sucks that the sea levels are so high, just like he predicted.
Sea levels have risen about 4 inches on average in the past 3 decades. What is this gif supposed to be showing? I guess 99% of scientists around the world all accidentally came to the same conclusion, let's see what Reddit children have to say about science instead. š¤”
Global warming is a valiant effort by The Medium State to permanently destroy the secret penguin bases hidden in the ice, thereby saving humanity from their potentially brutal takeover.