How to argue with a global warming "skeptic"


We would need to dig into your posts, give me time.

In the meantime the last four years were the hottest ever.

This shit is getting real, fast.
It is a global crisis. Australia has been melting down for weeks.


Oh my god, it’s a global crisis!!! :runaway: Time to move away from fossil fuel immediately. Let’s start by gassing up our private jets, flying to an exclusive resort and passing a non-binding resolution. We have to destroy the village to save the village. :roll_eyes:


Yes it is a global crisis especially if food prices go up.
Just cos some rich folks you hate are flying around in jets doesn’t make it less so.
Wonder how this heatwave is going to affect crop yields in Australia? Loads of their wildlife have croaked already.

Indians in big cities with no air con? What do they do when it’s 50c.
And when they do get air con it just pumps out more CO2 and greenhouse gases again.


Oh yeah …Now you accept global warming . Like a lot the other naysayers…You always accepted it. Right. I’ve been on this site long enough to not be fooled.

You just don’t think it’s a big deal.(four hottest years on record the last four years )…Until it’s a big deal…Then you knew that but there’s ’ nothing we can do about it’.

It’s all a greenie conspiracy to shut down coal plants and tax people more.

Global warming deniers should be dumped in New Delhi on a rooftop in Summer and given a chance to reevaluate their position…

Or maybe Europe ?


I don’t hate them, I just find them comical. But I guess Macron found out what happens when you try to pass something that actually is binding.

Talk about global warming! :sunglasses:

Yeah, pretty much. Is it going to keep getting warmer? Nobody knows. Certainly not climate science, with its completely inaccurate models. If it does, is there anything we can do about it? Not much. Although I’m sure some governments will probably make things worse by trying.


Ah it’s all about the inaccuracy now that we determine it’s real and caused by humans.
I see.
Cognitive dissonance breaks down slowly.


Global warming ? It isn’t in evidence today is it. I thought this was meant to be a sub tropical island.



I’m firmly in the AGW-is-real-and-important camp, but whatever small amount of faith I had in TPTB to make the right decisions about it evaporated long ago. The potential solutions are neither complicated, onerous, or expensive, but the climate-change gravy train is enormously popular: in fact it now looks like one of those Indian trains, with hangers-on precariously attached to every conceivable surface. All aboard! Mind the gap!

It could be that our dear leaders are merely grossly incompetent, but I’m starting to wonder if they’re deliberately fucking it all up in order to keep the cash flowing from our pockets to theirs, for as long as possible.


Germany is a good example of this as well. Talks a lot about going green and shuts down their nuclear plants. End up burning more coal to keep up because it’s not that easy and their lack of planning fucks everything up.


That means you are a skeptic.


“There’s no point arguing with a global warming skeptic.”

Sorry to nitpick - but “skeptic” isn’t the right word. To be skeptical is to doubt something in the absence of evidence. There is overwhelming evidence for the reality, cause and probable consequences of human-caused climate change.


Only the South. Although I do feel this Winter has been quite warm in Taipei.


How do they make it worse by trying ?
Seriously, give us something to work with instead of throwing out random sentiments .

  1. By pushing industry to deliver solutions that are technically incorrect or which deliver poor return on investment (or no return at all);
  2. By attempting to shoehorn outdated ways of doing things into an ‘eco-friendly’ box;
  3. By subsidizing things that undermine the development of sensible solutions;
  4. By giving money to “poor” countries so they can piss it down the drain while selling off and/or destroying their natural capital;
  5. By focusing on big fuckoff projects that only they can fund, while ignoring all the simple, cheap stuff which might actually do some good (economically and ecologically), and which would be far more inclusive.

(BTW I hate that word ‘inclusive’, but it’s the only one I can think of that makes sense here).


Well the President don’t believe in global warming / climate change (actually he does not believe in science) so…?


Yes but who gets things right the first time around ?
I’ve looked into it and subsidies were instrumental in getting scale up in renewable industries. Now they barely need subsidies to make money.

Yes govts also subsidise oil and gas which is not good for global warming . But in the case of renewables it seems it’s worked pretty well.

Last video is of floating wind platforms. If they get these things to work in the deep ocean that could be a game changer.


Sure, nobody. However, you’d expect that after 40 years they’d be getting a few things right.


From the numbers it looks like they have been getting it right !
UK could have 33% of electricity from wind power by 2030. Looks pretty good to me.
If battery storage power could catch up that would be pretty awesome.


It’s not hard to imagine all the ways governments can screw things up, here’s one Finley didn’t have on his list.


There’s no need to do anything so risky …yet.