Should I be terrified of climate change?

[Frankfooter]

Frankfooter is pissing his pants because the alarmist propaganda is going.... up in smoke

the data is what the data is

here is canada 1980 to 2021
trend going down
last year was probably up



View attachment 318819

here is the global trend from 1910
source Journal of Geophysical research

View attachment 318820

here is the global trend from 1910, different view same result

View attachment 318824

crop yields are rising & famine deaths are decreasing




View attachment 318821


Frankfooter is going to have to come up with a different plan to bring in communism via the back door

FYI Frankfooter.
young people have been abandoning Trudeau like a bad smell in the elevator ......because they figured out he was making life too expensive for them
What do you think is going to happen when they figure out the cost of Climate Alarmism ?

larue, you are a one trick pony.
You post old charts, cherry picked charts, bait and switch and a bit of just faked data.
First you argue about forest fires because for the most part the world has gotten much better at controlling them and deforestation means there are less forests every year, so the numbers had been going down due to government actions and now, while the numbers of fires aren't rising the damage from them is rising quite massively.

Chart #1 again tries to use country based data in a global argument. It ignores the fact that while there are sometimes fewer numbers the fires have been getting bigger and the damage bigger,.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/climate/wildfire-season-2023-wrap-1.6999005

Cut and paste #2 is an opinion from Bjorn Lomborg, who is an oil lobbyist.

The Latest Data Confirms: Forest Fires Are Getting Worse

New data reveals that forest fires are becoming more widespread, burning nearly twice as much tree cover today as they did 20 years ago.

www.wri.org

Chart #3 says its from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center. Sounds like lobbyists to me, not an impartial source.

Your last two charts are accurate but also miss the point.
Those numbers are starting to go down due to climate change crop loss, scientists have been warning this is coming for decades but the shit is now hitting the fan.

Global Climate Change Impact on Crops Expected Within 10 Years, NASA Study Finds – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Climate change may affect the production of maize (corn) and wheat as early as 2030, according to a new NASA study.

climate.nasa.gov

 

[JohnLarue]

larue, you are a one trick pony.
You post old charts, cherry picked charts, bait and switch and a bit of just faked data.
First you argue about forest fires because for the most part the world has gotten much better at controlling them and deforestation means there are less forests every year, so the numbers had been going down due to government actions and now, while the numbers of fires aren't rising the damage from them is rising quite massively.

Chart #1 again tries to use country based data in a global argument. It ignores the fact that while there are sometimes fewer numbers the fires have been getting bigger and the damage bigger,.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/climate/wildfire-season-2023-wrap-1.6999005

Cut and paste #2 is an opinion from Bjorn Lomborg, who is an oil lobbyist.

The Latest Data Confirms: Forest Fires Are Getting Worse

New data reveals that forest fires are becoming more widespread, burning nearly twice as much tree cover today as they did 20 years ago.

www.wri.org

Chart #3 says its from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center. Sounds like lobbyists to me, not an impartial source.

Your last two charts are accurate but also miss the point.
Those numbers are starting to go down due to climate change crop loss, scientists have been warning this is coming for decades but the shit is now hitting the fan.

Global Climate Change Impact on Crops Expected Within 10 Years, NASA Study Finds – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Climate change may affect the production of maize (corn) and wheat as early as 2030, according to a new NASA study.

climate.nasa.gov

yawn

 

[Frankfooter]

yawn

As usual, you can't answer.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1780429270331826313

 

[canada-man]

Point Of No Return

2014 : Passed Point Of No Return
2018 : Nearing Point Of No Return
2022 : Past Point Of No Return
2023 : Nearing Point Of No Return

 

[Frankfooter]

Point Of No Return

2014 : Passed Point Of No Return
2018 : Nearing Point Of No Return
2022 : Past Point Of No Return
2023 : Nearing Point Of No Return

2014 - we hit 1ºC warming around then, didn't we
2023 - we hit 1.5ºC

We are now committed to 1.5ºC of warming which will trigger some big tipping points.

 

[Skoob]

You are the one that idiotically asked why I picked an old example with nazis because you don't understand when the deaths attributed to communism happened.

But you'll do anything to avoid being on topic and discussing climate.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1668996655532654593

Ah yes dropping the trolling Trump remark.
Tells me you are desperate to distract away from your failure,
You lose...again.

 

[Frankfooter]

Ah yes dropping the trolling Trump remark.
Tells me you are desperate to distract away from your failure,
You lose...again.

How many posts on this thread have you actually discussed the climate, troll?

If I post warnings about one more tipping point I'm sure you'll just reply by trolling something else instead.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1784200797829632199

 

[Skoob]

How many posts on this thread have you actually discussed the climate, troll?

If I post warnings about one more tipping point I'm sure you'll just reply by trolling something else instead.

First of all, YOU are the king troll on this board. Everyone knows that including you.

Second, if discussing the climate was something so important to you on this thread, to the point where you are attacking people about staying on topic, then why was your very first post (#17) about something unrelated to the climate?

Tell us you're a hypocrite without telling us you're a hypocrite.

 

[Frankfooter]

First of all, YOU are the king troll on this board. Everyone knows that including you.

Second, if discussing the climate was something so important to you on this thread, to the point where you are attacking people about staying on topic, then why was your very first post (#17) about something unrelated to the climate?

Tell us you're a hypocrite without telling us you're a hypocrite.

Another troll post, skoob.

I'll take every post that you don't debate as confirmation that you know these posts are correct and can't argue the facts or science.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1783461509584048620

 

[canada-man]

 

[HungSowel]

You forgot 2018: 5g will cause famine

 

[Frankfooter]

Another tipping point.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1784200797829632199

 

[niks9009]

the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world
View attachment 316697


Richard Siegmund Lindzen (born February 8, 1940) is an American atmospheric physicist known for his work in the dynamics of the middle atmosphere, atmospheric tides, and ozone photochemistry. He is the author of more than 200 scientific papers. From 1972 to 1982, he served as the Gordon McKay Professor of Dynamic Meteorology at Harvard University. In 1983, he was appointed as the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he would remain until his retirement in 2013.[2][1] Lindzen has disputed the scientific consensus on climate change and criticizes what he has called "climate alarmism".[3][4]

Oh why am I not surprised that a man who has been a "speaker" at a conference funded by the Koch brothers holds these views. What about the hundreds of other scientists who do agree that rising carbon in the atmosphere is causing all of the earth's mechanisms to be pushed to extremes? Somehow you only listen to the one voice that confirms your pre-existing biases?

 

[JohnLarue]

Oh why am I not surprised that a man who has been a "speaker" at a conference funded by the Koch brothers holds these views.

oh why am i not surprized some uninformed, uneducated lefty fool would try character assassination on a very accomplished atmospheric physicists who has 200+ published papers to his credit.
Dr. Lindzen was also a contributor to the IPCC until he quit in disgust.

character assassination is not relevant in science
either the repeatable scientific observations support the proposed hypothesis or they do not & the hypothesis is rejected. That is how science works !

character assassination does say a lot about the would be assassin

What about the hundreds of other scientists who do agree that rising carbon in the atmosphere is causing all of the earth's mechanisms to be pushed to extremes?

428 parts per million of atmospheric plant food is not causing all of the earth's mechanisms to be pushed to extremes
and no scientist worth his salt would ever make such a ridiculous claim

The IPCC defines our climate as a decoupled , nonlinear, chaotic system
changes in parts per million of an inert odourless, colorless trace gas does not control our decoupled , nonlinear, chaotic climate system
our climate is immensely more complex than that

CO2 is plant food and the basis for all life on the planet
its absorption spectrum is also saturated at the all important 15 micron wavelength

Somehow you only listen to the one voice that confirms your pre-existing biases?

somehow i am guessing you have not taken any scientific training beyond high school and you have allowed others & propaganda to make up your mind for you
that confirms your pre-existing biases

there are numerous scientists who dispute the catastrophic AGW , including the 2022 noble prize winner in physics Dr. John Clauser.

so will you devote your time to
a) learning the skeptical side of the story (learn some actual science along the way)
or
b) desperately searching for dirt on Dr. John Clauser to perform another despicable & cowardly character assassination?
or
c) running away

Are you surprised now ?

 

[JohnLarue]

As usual, you can't answer.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1780429270331826313

name the pre-Trudeau govt department /program writing the so called subsidy cheques to oil companies ?
As usual, you can't answer.

 

[Frankfooter]

name the pre-Trudeau govt department /program writing the so called subsidy cheques to oil companies ?
As usual, you can't answer.

Unpacking Canada’s Fossil Fuel Subsidies

Fossil fuel subsidies hold us back and incentivize pollution. How much do Canada's governments subsidize fossil fuels, and why does it matter?

www.iisd.org

Subsidy name	Who gives it?	Who gets it?	How much is it worth?*
LNG Canada investment	Canada	LNG Canada	$275 million
Direct spending & budgetary transfers**	Canada	Oil and gas companies	$318 million
Crown royalty reductions	Alberta	Oil and gas companies	$1.136 billion
Tax exemptions for certain fuels & uses in industry	Alberta	Industry	$287 million
Royalty reductions, including deep drilling and infrastructure credits†	British Columbia	Oil and gas companies	$631 million
Reduced tax for aviation fuel††	Ontario	Aviation Industry	$273.5 million
Tax exemption for coloured fuels used in agriculture	Ontario	Agricultural industry	$275 million
Fuel tax exemptions and reductions	Quebec	Industry and other consumers	$303.5 million

 

[Frankfooter]

oh why am i not surprized some uninformed, uneducated lefty fool would try character assassination on a very accomplished atmospheric physicists who has 200+ published papers to his credit.[

If he's a paid oil lobbyist that should be known.
Its not character assassination to point out his paid job.

428 parts per million of atmospheric plant food is not causing all of the earth's mechanisms to be pushed to extremes
and no scientist worth his salt would ever make such a ridiculous claim

CO2 is plant food and the basis for all life on the planet
its absorption spectrum is also saturated at the all important 15 micron wavelength

So your theory is that changes in CO2 levels won't change the size of the greenhouse effect but it will affect plant growth?
wacko

 

[JohnLarue]

Unpacking Canada’s Fossil Fuel Subsidies

Fossil fuel subsidies hold us back and incentivize pollution. How much do Canada's governments subsidize fossil fuels, and why does it matter?

www.iisd.org

Subsidy name	Who gives it?	Who gets it?	How much is it worth?*
LNG Canada investment	Canada	LNG Canada	$275 million
Direct spending & budgetary transfers**	Canada	Oil and gas companies	$318 million
Crown royalty reductions	Alberta	Oil and gas companies	$1.136 billion
Tax exemptions for certain fuels & uses in industry	Alberta	Industry	$287 million
Royalty reductions, including deep drilling and infrastructure credits†	British Columbia	Oil and gas companies	$631 million
Reduced tax for aviation fuel††	Ontario	Aviation Industry	$273.5 million
Tax exemption for coloured fuels used in agriculture	Ontario	Agricultural industry	$275 million
Fuel tax exemptions and reductions	Quebec	Industry and other consumers	$303.5 million

LNG investment was 2019 Trudeau -you should vote him out of power

from your source
Table 1. Quantifiable non-tax subsidies, amount in CAD millions Investment Fiscal year (FY) 2018/19 FY 2019/20 Description LNG Canada investment 275 A one-time contribution to LNG Canada’s LNG facility in British Columbia provided through the Strategic Innovation Fund and the Western Economic Diversification Fund (Government of Canada, 2019).

again trudeau

from your source
Electric Vehicle and Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Deployment Initiative ?? yeah lets kill that
Clean Growth Program ?? yeah lets kill that
Low Carbon Economy Fund ?? yeah lets kill that
Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC) ?? SDTC has removed “Unconventional Oil and Gas” as a priority funding area (Sustainable Development Technology Canada, 2019), yeah lets kill that

you are soo stupid you do not take the time to review your links

Investing in Canada Plan Several investments from this initiative have gone to fossil fuel projects in the past few years, including from the Green Infrastructure Fund and the Arctic Energy Fund. This includes upgrades of diesel-based power plants (Infrastructure Canada, 2019a). In addition, up to CAD 83.6 million was earmarked for the Peace Region Electricity Supply Project in BC (Government of British Columbia, 2019)
this has nothing to do with oil and gas companies

upgrades of diesel-based power plants in the far north, where the solar panels and wind mills do not provide enough juice to run a toaster
you are soo stupid you do not take the time to review your links

Strategic Innovation Fund Includes CAD 49 million for a polypropylene complex in Sturgeon County, Alberta (Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, 2019a) and CAD 10 million for the Clean Resource Innovation Network (CRIN) (Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, 2019b). An additional CAD 90 million will be allocated to CRIN from 2020 to 2022 (three years).

that is not oil and gas, that is plastics, again Trudeau

Fuel supply & storage capacity in NWT 21.8 A one-time investment from the Disaster Mitigation and Adaptation Fund to add 13.2 million litres of fuel storage capacity (Infrastructure Canada, 2019b).

again, nothing to do with oil and gas companies

speak to Justin

2.2 Tax-Related Subsidies

your wako author should also list the tax emptions available to all Canadian business including the auto, steel, cement, pharma, electronics, aerospace , forest products, mining, transportation , software and agriculture industries
the tax code is written to promote investment in the business promote economic growth
it is called capital cost allowance

buy a new cement kiln & get a deduction from taxable income
spend billions designing a new passenger jet & get a deduction from taxable income Bombardier

Bombardier has received millions + millions from federal/ Quebec govt
its a family business

spend millions on new drug development get a deduction

Crown royalty reductions - a reduction in tax is not a subsidy
Tax exemptions for certain fuels & uses in industry - a reduction in tax is not a subsidy
Royalty reductions, including deep drilling and infrastructure credits†- a reduction in tax is not a subsidy
Tax exemption for coloured fuels used in agriculture- a reduction in tax is not a subsidy -


seriously you need to finish high school so you can learn what a subsidy is

 

[Frankfooter]

LNG investment was 2019 Trudeau -you should vote him out of power

from your source
Table 1. Quantifiable non-tax subsidies, amount in CAD millions Investment Fiscal year (FY) 2018/19 FY 2019/20 Description LNG Canada investment 275 A one-time contribution to LNG Canada’s LNG facility in British Columbia provided through the Strategic Innovation Fund and the Western Economic Diversification Fund (Government of Canada, 2019).

again trudeau

from your source
Electric Vehicle and Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Deployment Initiative ?? yeah lets kill that
Clean Growth Program ?? yeah lets kill that
Low Carbon Economy Fund ?? yeah lets kill that
Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC) ?? SDTC has removed “Unconventional Oil and Gas” as a priority funding area (Sustainable Development Technology Canada, 2019), yeah lets kill that

you are soo stupid you do not take the time to review your links

Investing in Canada Plan Several investments from this initiative have gone to fossil fuel projects in the past few years, including from the Green Infrastructure Fund and the Arctic Energy Fund. This includes upgrades of diesel-based power plants (Infrastructure Canada, 2019a). In addition, up to CAD 83.6 million was earmarked for the Peace Region Electricity Supply Project in BC (Government of British Columbia, 2019)
this has nothing to do with oil and gas companies

upgrades of diesel-based power plants in the far north, where the solar panels and wind mills do not provide enough juice to run a toaster
you are soo stupid you do not take the time to review your links

Strategic Innovation Fund Includes CAD 49 million for a polypropylene complex in Sturgeon County, Alberta (Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, 2019a) and CAD 10 million for the Clean Resource Innovation Network (CRIN) (Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, 2019b). An additional CAD 90 million will be allocated to CRIN from 2020 to 2022 (three years).

that is not oil and gas, that is plastics, again Trudeau

Fuel supply & storage capacity in NWT 21.8 A one-time investment from the Disaster Mitigation and Adaptation Fund to add 13.2 million litres of fuel storage capacity (Infrastructure Canada, 2019b).

again, nothing to do with oil and gas companies

speak to Justin

2.2 Tax-Related Subsidies

your wako author should also list the tax emptions available to all Canadian business including the auto, steel, cement, pharma, electronics, aerospace , forest products, mining, transportation , software and agriculture industries
the tax code is written to promote investment in the business promote economic growth
it is called capital cost allowance

buy a new cement kiln & get a deduction from taxable income
spend billions designing a new passenger jet & get a deduction from taxable income Bombardier

Bombardier has received millions + millions from federal/ Quebec govt
its a family business

spend millions on new drug development get a deduction

Crown royalty reductions - a reduction in tax is not a subsidy
Tax exemptions for certain fuels & uses in industry - a reduction in tax is not a subsidy
Royalty reductions, including deep drilling and infrastructure credits†- a reduction in tax is not a subsidy
Tax exemption for coloured fuels used in agriculture- a reduction in tax is not a subsidy -


seriously you need to finish high school so you can learn what a subsidy is

So agree there were subsidies in various forms and they were listed there.

 

[JohnLarue]

So agree there were subsidies in various forms and they were listed there.

no
you need to finish high school so you can learn what a subsidy is

btw

Who needs a windfall tax? Oil and gas companies poured $48 billion into government coffers this year, says RBC

RBC analyst says taxes and royalties paid by public Canadian energy companies have increased 200% this year. Read more

financialpost.com

Who needs a windfall tax? Oil and gas companies poured $48 billion into government coffers this year, says RBC

That could rise to $64 billion in royalties and taxes in 2023 if oil prices stay high

Surging energy prices have propelled the taxes and royalties paid by public Canadian energy companies to around $48 billion this year, a 200-per-cent year-over-year increase, Michael Harvey, an analyst at RBC Capital Markets, the investment banking arm of Royal Bank, calculated.

“The mechanisms are already in place — in both the royalty and tax systems — to provide windfalls for governments when prices are high,” Harvey said in an email.
In his research note, which was sent to RBC clients on July 19, Harvey said higher crude and natural gas prices were driving corporate profitability and setting the stage for higher royalties, taxes, and energy-related fees to all levels of government.
“We present these figures to contextualize the ‘windfall tax’ which we see as already established, and to help frame the conversation as it relates to the impact of Canadian energy policy decisions on Canadians,” Harvey wrote in the note to investors.

morons who want to kill our energy sector are the same fools who demand big govt without a thought for how to pay for a big inefficient govt


note
to give you some perspective in 2021 total federal consumption tax revenue comprised $37.4 billion in Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Sales Tax (GST/HST) revenue