What's your view on Global Warming?

[Dargil]

It's GOTTA be true!!!

[Lliam]

I'm not buying the hype. The Earth's weather fluctuates from year to year and from decade to decade over centuries. The global temperature fluctuates over centuries and millennia. There have been hot spells and mini-ice ages during recorded history. There have been major ice ages and periods of major global warming over 10s of thousands and millions of years. The last ice age ended 11,700 years ago.

What has driven those changes?

The idea that too much "man-made" CO2 in the atmosphere is overheating the planet is absurd. We've seen dire predictions for decades and they haven't materialized. Despite claims, there is no scientific consensus on the issue.

CO2 and sunlight are necessary for photosynthesis. The Earth eats CO2.

I think the "climate change" narrative is a scam to sell electric vehicles and SMART (spy) appliances. It is also a way to enforce control over people's behavior, minimize their activities, force them into 15 minute SMART cities, facilitate the theft of real estate, monopolize natural resources and food production, and cut the global human population.

Focusing on the CO2 released by average individuals in their daily lives distracts from other things that effect the climate like air and water pollution, killing the oceans, clear cutting forests and jungles, modern agricultural practices that sterilize soil and wipe out billions of creatures, mining, industrialization, energy production, military activity, and private jets.

It's also a way to mask weather modification activity, direct energy weapons, 5G capabilities, and acts of arson. It's easy to say that those things are mere conspiracy theories and blame everything on "climate change".

It's one of the means used by the WEF, UN and globalists to institute their goal of One World Government/New World Order/Great Reset.

[Pohjolan]

Then go ahead and prove that our current measurements on radiation absorption/adsorption and our understanding of molecules reacting to radiation are wrong and earn yourself a nice Nobel prize.

[Kelley1]

You are 100% correct. There is no man-made global warming. Furthermore, CO2 is a trace gas with no measurable effect on temperature. Because there is 8 times as much, water vapor has 8 times the effect on temperature. If anything more CO2 aids plant growth that absorbs sunlight resulting in lower temperatures. However, even that is questionable. 500 million years ago, CO2 levels were 12 times current levels but the temperature was about the same. The fact is, for billions of years, the earth has been losing C02 and now it is C02 starved.

[Pohjolan]

@Kelley1
"Furthermore, CO2 is a trace gas with no measurable effect on temperature."
That's a lie.

[Kelley1]

@Pohjolan People like you are a pain You believe the media's lies because you have lost all ability to think for yourself.

[Pohjolan]

@Kelley1
Media? Bitch please you are claiming that our physics books are wrong and all our measurement devices are broken long before media had heard about it.

[Lliam]

@Kelley1. Exactly.

[John_And_Elijah]

How the hell are you so well-informed on these worldly agendas that most of the morons on this website would laugh at, yet you're an atheist? It just baffles me that you're incapable of seeing the big picture behind it all.

[SomothErgai]

The evidence clearly shows a sharp trend in higher and higher temperatures after humans hit the industrial age. Like, there's not denying that it's happening and we're the cause.

The thing is, now that the genie is out of the bottle, the cats out of the bag, and the toothpaste has come out of the tube. There's not a god damn thing we can do about it. The problem isn't us. As in first world countries. The problem is developing nations who have every right to try and make the same progress we did.

Unless you want to go to war with 80% of the planet and wipe out those entire populations, there is nothing at all we can do about it.

Is this a problem that will eventually kill a lot of humans? Yes. Is it preventable? No.

[Kelley1]

The fact is, as soon as the current interglacial warm period ends, it is going to get cold; much colder than you could ever imagine and billions of people will die.

[SomothErgai]

@Kelley1 that's one possibility. If we haven't pumped too much c02 and methane into the atmosphere by then, then sure. It's also possible that it will be too late and the atmosphere will trap too much heat. Causing widespread fires which will release even more c02, which will make it even hotter. And so on and so on. Either way, there's no stopping it at this point. So yeah. Lot of people going away.

[goaded]

Of how about we share renewable technology with the emerging economies, so they don't have to go through the poluting route?

[SomothErgai]

@goaded i'm gonna try to not be a dick here but, are you aware of the numbers on this issue? the amount of resources we would need to be able to do that don't exist. including the money it would cost to do that. there are currently billions of people in still developing nations. we can barely care for our own 300 million. And really, we can't even do that. the money and resources to play savior to the rest of the planet simply does not exist. and even if we could get all the other rich countries to join in it still wouldn't be enough for the same reason. they have their own people to worry about. the numbers on this problem are simply too big.

we may already be past the point of no return and it's pointless to even try any way. but even assuming we aren't and there's still time to turn things around. the only way to do that would be to wipe out the worst offending nations. which would be the entirety of the 3rd world and quite a bit of the first as well.

And since people tend to get a little upset when people are genocided, I don't see us really doing that. Especially when the vast majority of those under fire would be various shades of brown. It's just not a good look for us. So our only solution, the final solution if you will, is to sit back and lat nature do it for us.

[goaded]

I think you think I'm talking about giving stuff away. I'm not. I'm talking about helping them produce their own solar panels and wind turbines, electrical storage, etc.. How much coal do you think Africa has to burn to provide its energy? You could power all of Europe with solar panels covering just a fraction of the Sahara Desert.

"Do nothing" is a terrible idea, because it's not really doing nothing, it's continuing to make the situation worse.

[SomothErgai]

Your idea sounds appealing on the surface, but in practice, there are so many obstacles that make it completely unworkable, especially in many African nations.

First off, the cost of renewable energy technology is prohibitively high. While solar panels and wind turbines have become cheaper over the years, the upfront costs are still far too expensive for most developing nations to afford on their own. It’s not just the panels and turbines themselves, it’s the energy storage systems required to stabilize the grid since solar and wind are intermittent sources of energy. You can’t generate solar power at night or during cloudy weather, and wind is unpredictable. Large-scale battery systems, like lithium-ion, are incredibly expensive and rely on rare materials that are already in short supply. On top of this, most African nations would need massive upgrades to their electrical grids to handle these new energy systems, further increasing the cost.

Even if the cost could somehow be covered, solar and wind technologies are far from efficient. Solar panels, for example, convert only about 20-22% of the sunlight they capture into usable energy. Wind turbines are dependent on consistent wind conditions, which many areas in Africa don’t have. These inefficiencies mean that even with significant investment, the energy output would fall short of what’s needed to power large-scale development. The technology just isn’t there yet to make renewables a truly viable option for regions starting from scratch.

[SomothErgai]

@goaded The environmental cost of creating these renewable systems is another massive issue. Building solar panels, wind turbines, and especially the batteries for energy storage requires mining huge amounts of rare earth metals like lithium, cobalt, and nickel. The mining process is devastating to the environment, leading to deforestation, water pollution, and significant carbon emissions. Ironically, many of these materials are mined in developing nations, including some in Africa, exacerbating local environmental damage and exploiting vulnerable communities. When you factor in these emissions, the long-term benefits of renewables start to look a lot less impressive compared to the immediate harm caused by the mining process.

On top of all this, African nations have far more pressing concerns that need attention before renewable energy can even become a consideration. Millions of people still struggle with food insecurity, lack of healthcare, poor access to education, and even basic necessities like clean water. For many governments, building solar farms isn’t even on the radar when they’re focused on keeping their populations alive and meeting their most urgent needs. Diverting resources to renewables, even with external investment, would make little sense when people are starving or lack access to medicine.

Another critical issue is corruption and mismanagement. Even when foreign aid or investments are directed toward renewable energy projects, a significant portion of that money often ends up lining the pockets of corrupt officials. Without stable, accountable governments, these projects are doomed to fail or be exploited. The political and economic instability that plagues many regions of Africa makes long-term projects like renewable energy almost impossible to sustain.

[SomothErgai]

@goaded In short, while the idea of renewables for Africa might sound ideal in theory, it falls apart when you consider the realities on the ground. The costs are astronomical, the technology is inefficient, the environmental toll of building these systems would be catastrophic, and most nations have far more immediate priorities like food, healthcare, and education. Combined with corruption and instability, the idea becomes not just impractical but entirely unworkable in the current context.

Underneath the surface, the numbers make this idea even less viable. Transitioning Africa to renewable energy would demand an astronomical amount of materials. Producing just one megawatt (MW) of solar power requires 5 to 10 tons of aluminum for the panel frames, about 30 to 50 tons of glass for the panels, and other materials like silicon and silver. Wind turbines are even more resource-intensive, each standard 3 MW turbine needs approximately 335 tons of steel, 4.7 tons of copper, 1,200 tons of concrete, and 3 tons of aluminum. They also rely on rare earth elements like neodymium and dysprosium for their magnets, materials that are notoriously difficult and environmentally destructive to mine.

The environmental costs of extracting and processing these materials are staggering. Mining operations lead to deforestation, water contamination, and habitat destruction. The carbon emissions associated with producing these materials are immense, manufacturing a single ton of steel, for example, releases around 1.85 tons of CO₂, and concrete production adds another 0.9 tons of CO₂ per ton produced. Given the scale of materials needed for solar and wind projects, the emissions generated during the setup phase would be astronomical, likely offsetting any benefits for decades. Ironically, many of these mining operations would take place in developing countries, including parts of Africa, worsening local environmental and social issues.

[SomothErgai]

@goaded On top of that, the financial cost of building the infrastructure is overwhelming. According to the International Energy Agency, reaching net-zero targets in emerging economies would require over $1 trillion in annual clean energy investments by the end of this decade, more than seven times what’s currently being spent. This cost includes not only the materials and manufacturing of the technology but also the construction of massive energy storage systems and the upgrading of electrical grids, which in many African nations are severely underdeveloped or nonexistent. Without these grid upgrades, solar and wind energy can’t be efficiently distributed, making the investment essentially worthless.

Even if this enormous price tag could be met, the logistics of implementing such a system are daunting. Factory construction to manufacture solar panels and wind turbines would have to scale up drastically, which means more emissions and years of planning and building. The workforce would need to be trained for these highly specialized industries. Meanwhile, many of these countries are struggling with food insecurity, poor healthcare, and a lack of education infrastructure. Prioritizing renewable energy over these urgent needs is simply not realistic when people are still fighting to meet their basic needs for survival.

Corruption and political instability further complicate the situation. Even when foreign aid or investments are directed toward infrastructure projects, significant amounts of money are siphoned off by corrupt officials or mismanaged entirely. This isn’t a theoretical risk, it’s a well-documented reality in many nations. Without accountable governments and stable political systems, there’s no guarantee that renewable energy projects would even be completed, let alone maintained over the long term.

[SomothErgai]

@goaded And then there’s the fundamental question of who would fund such an effort. Developed nations, already struggling with their own energy transitions, have little incentive to pour resources into African renewable projects when there’s nothing in it for them. These investments wouldn’t directly benefit their economies, and the idea of shouldering such a monumental cost purely for the sake of another continent’s development is unlikely to gain traction. When viewed through a global economic lens, this entire endeavor seems far beyond what the world is even capable of financing.

Ultimately, while the idea of renewable energy for Africa might seem appealing, the sheer scale of the costs, materials, environmental damage, and logistical challenges makes it completely unworkable. There’s no realistic way to overcome these obstacles, especially when the countries in question are already struggling to address much more immediate and pressing concerns.

[goaded]

"The environmental cost of creating these renewable systems is another massive issue."
Sorry, but I'm going to stop reading there, despite the fact that you'll pretend I'm putting my head in the sand.

There are newer technologies coming out all the time to counter those problems, like zinc batteries that work well in stationary situations without the mining problems.

We ALL suffer if we do nothing, just like the ozone hole and acid rain we need to have international cooperation.

Like I said, your idea of "do nothing" is doing something: continuing to make things worse and worse. I don't know about you, but I kind of like civilization.

[SomothErgai]

@goaded if you're not going to read the explanation of the realities then yeah, you are burying your head in the sand. Or more accurately sticking your fingers in your ears and telling "I can't hear you". The facts of the situation are what they are. My solution isn't to do nothing. There is no solution. That's my point. The thing I've been trying to explain to you is that it is not possible to fix the problem. Three technology simply dies not exist. And even if it did, it didn't exist at the scale it would need to. And getting to that scale would make the situation several times worse than it already is.

We could wipe out a huge portion of the early population. That could work. But I'm going to guess that the largest genocide in human history doesn't appeal to you either.

[goaded]

You're just repeating what the oil lobby has been pushing for half a century now, except back then it would have been far cheaper to act. It's like you're in a car heading towards a crowd of people and deciding that just because you can't avoid hitting some of them, there's no reason to take your foot off the gas.

[SomothErgai]

But now we have ways to reduce the amount of food we give the bear. so if we could just convince other people to do what we did we could band together and take the bear out before it kills us all. We'd still have to feed it some for a while. but at least we could get it to slow down or even stop the bus entirely. But there's too many people who don't even believe there is a cliff and see no reason to bother. and those that do believe, think that the cliff isn't really that high and at least some of us will survive and/or it's more important to use the reliability of the food from the bear to keep feeding their kids.

That, and they don't have the same access to food generators that we do and could not possibly implement them in the numbers or time-frame needed to be able to focus on taking out the bear. So they keep feeding the bear and it keeps getting bigger and bigger. and now. That bear is so huge and so powerful that it's unlikely we could take it out even if every single one of us banded together and stopped feeding it entirely and tried to fight it off of the steering wheel.

Then someone comes along and says, why don't we (the first people to really start feeding the bear) just stop feeding the bear? At least we should set the example and stop feeding it to make things worse. Failing to understand that we still need the food the bear gives us too. we might have some food generators but they aren't enough to sustain us. we can feed the bear less and rely on its food less. but we still need it or we and our kids will starve.

[SomothErgai]

@goaded But now we have ways to reduce the amount of food we give the bear. so if we could just convince other people to do what we did we could band together and take the bear out before it kills us all. We'd still have to feed it some for a while. but at least we could get it to slow down or even stop the bus entirely. But there's too many people who don't even believe there is a cliff and see no reason to bother. and those that do believe, think that the cliff isn't really that high and at least some of us will survive and/or it's more important to use the reliability of the food from the bear to keep feeding their kids.

That, and they don't have the same access to food generators that we do and could not possibly implement them in the numbers or time-frame needed to be able to focus on taking out the bear. So they keep feeding the bear and it keeps getting bigger and bigger. and now. That bear is so huge and so powerful that it's unlikely we could take it out even if every single one of us banded together and stopped feeding it entirely and tried to fight it off of the steering wheel.

Then someone comes along and says, why don't we (the first people to really start feeding the bear) just stop feeding the bear? At least we should set the example and stop feeding it to make things worse. Failing to understand that we still need the food the bear gives us too. we might have some food generators but they aren't enough to sustain us. we can feed the bear less and rely on its food less. but we still need it or we and our kids will starve.

[SomothErgai]

@goaded And that's true for everyone else on the bus too. but to an even greater degree since they don't even have our fancy food generators. Well why don't we just share our generators with them? or teach them how to make their own? Again failing to understand that the sheer numbers of generators needed and the cost to create them is too high to be realistic.

there simply aren't enough resources, there simply isn't enough time, the cliff is too close and the bear is too big. maybe we could have done something a long time ago when the bear was still small enough to fight. but that time has passed. Our only realistic option is to buckle up, and prepare for impact.

[SomothErgai]

@goaded Ah shit. i messed up posting my response. this was supposed to be first

no man. the analogy would be like... let's see if i can accurately come up with one...

Let's stick with the vehicle thing. it's ironically appropriate. Imagine you're on a bus filled with people. but in the driver's seat is a newborn grizzly bear. Don't ask how it's driving this is just an analogy. It's not big enough to really hurt anybody yet. we and a few others start feeding it. and feeding it a lot because in return, i dunno, it hands out food that we use to feed our kids that are on the bus with us. the more we feed it the more food it gives us. but, the more it also grows. then more people on the bus see that we get food when we feed it. so they start doing it. then all of them. and there's way, way more of them than there are of us.

far off in the distance we can see a cliff that the grizzly is headed straight toward. and we realize, ah shit we should probably stop this thing before we drive off that cliff and kill everybody. But that grizzly is fucking huge now. too big for us to fight it off ourselves, and we still need the food it's handing out. some people, in fact most of the other people on the bus don't believe there's really a cliff we're going to drive off of. and to them, feeding their kids is too important so they refuse to stop.

[goaded]

"most of the other people on the bus don't believe there's really a cliff"
That's the problem. The right wing and big business have spent fifty years telling people there's no cliff. They've been lying.

[SomothErgai]

@goaded yes. they have. but you're not seeing the bigger picture. that's just the US. we are a contributor to c02 emissions for sure. but we are far, far from the only ones. the right wing isn't telling the entire rest of the planet what to believe. their own people are doing that. there is a general mistrust of science across the world and that becomes more and more true the less and less educated people are.

And the least educated countries in the world also happen to be the largest contributors to those emissions. you can blame republicans and right wingers all you want but that is an almost irrelevant slice of the global pie. sure they don't help matters. but they're contribution is like throwing a single bag of garbage into a global dump.

The problem is far, far bigger than them. and as i said in my analogy. even the people in these countries that do understand the problem, don't believe it will be that severe. and their need to feed their families outstrips their concern for the environment for the rest of the world.

[goaded]

No, I am talking about the whole world, which came together to combat CFCs that made a hole in the ozone layer and pollution that created acid rain in neighbouring countries.

Every climate scientist in the world knows that global warming is happening, and the basic mechanism has been known since the 19th century. Again, "there is a general mistrust of science across the world" BECAUSE they have been lied to, again and again, particularly from the political right, where money and power are the only important things.

Talking about the cost of avoiding the effects of global warming is ridiculous. How much does it cost to relocate a single city of 8 million people? How much for all of them?

IIRC, the US has 5% of the world's population and generates 25% of the greenhouse gases, even ignoring that, say, China wouldn't produce as much if they weren't manufacturing for the US. Of course a reduction in America's emissions makes a bigger difference than the same reduction in most other countries.

[PeachyPie93]

I don't really care since the big money companies keep destroying and polluting everything.. not much we can do about it since consumerism is almost unstoppable since there are way more stupid people than smart.. Plus look at all the rich people catching flights for something they can drive to in like 40 minutes..🤷‍♀️

[FreyaRed]

Earth orbits sun in it's outer atmosphere. Every small change of sun activity changes temperatures on earth. Of course greenhouse gases have an effect on general climate on earth but cyclic IR radiation intensity changes of our central star have much higher influence.

[Pohjolan]

@freyared
Did you sleep in physics class?
If sun was the cause of this then the upper atmosphere would also be getting hotter, not colder as it is.

[FreyaRed]

It's hotter and it gets hotter since last ice age 11k years ago. Some anomalies like snow in Florida are caused by higher dynamic of earth atmosphere and ocean stream what again is caused by slightly higher temperature.

[Pohjolan]

@freyared
No, the UPPER atmosphere is currently cooling down. Its not the sun that is causing this.

[FreyaRed]

What part of UPPER atmosphere? Higher parts of earth atmosphere heat up due collision with sun particles not due photons emitted by the sun. Less particles doesn't mean automatically sun is colder on surface

[Pohjolan]

@freyared
So you DID sleep in physics class.

[CalmUntilAbused]

In the words of President Donald Trump... Drill, baby drill! Or, to adapt them to Poland... Mine, baby, mine! You know, since Poland's trump card is coal and not oil... Only we don't really have a Polish President Donald Trump to play that trump card...

Now, back to dead serious... The "global warming" is a hoax so obvious that they substituted the expression with "climate change". Now, that's much more to the point, but it's still not the humans' fault. Therefore, again... Drill, baby, drill!

[goaded]

A Republican wordsmith (who now claims to regret it) coined the term "climate change" because it sounds less scary than global warming.

[Pohjolan]

It's sad how popular the conspiracy theories on par with flat earth have become despite of undeniable objective proof providing otherwise.

It's also tells about the level of physics/chemistry education. 100% of conspiracy theorists believing that it's fake are not even able to explain why its supposed to work.

They never question the physics on a molecular level because they don't understand it.

Like someone saying that nuclear power plants are actually combustion based because they don't understand how fission is possible.

It's sad and pathetic.

[lil_will_12]

y'all, to deny climate change and global warming is literally denying the truth. People have charted the climate over the years and clearly it is going up very fast rn. Just bc there is snow in southern states doesn't make this less true lmao. “Climate change isn't real bc why is it really cold here then?”🤡

[CalmUntilAbused]

Come on... It used to be "global warming", now that people have seen some distinctly warm areas getting colder instead, it's called "climate change"... If that's not a hoax cover-up, I don't know what is. The climate is sure changing bit by bit, but human activity has little, if anything, to do with it... It's a natural process!

[Anonymous]

"Last time we saw snow like this was 130 years ago"
Which is to say it has been around longer than these calls about global warming.

It happens every few thousand years, people have just been selfishly trying to safe themselves by slowing down natures processes.

[Anonymous]

The earth naturally warms and freezes every 20-40,000 years and we are overdue how much effect mankind is having is hard to say. But far more prominent is mankind's affect on local environments through mismanagement and abuse of the land for short term profit. Such abuses can affect weather patterns in neighbouring countries. We are seeing this in california.

[monorprise]

The Current Ice age cycle is around 100 thousand year periods of Ice broken up by around 10-14k of less ice. We are at just over 10k into the 'less ice' phrase.
So the glacial cycle will return at anytime and based upon the record it would happen relatively quickly in geologic times. So that is still slow.

[goaded]

We figured out the greenhouse effect closer to the start of the industrial revolution than today.

Once he had the answer, Arrhenius complained to his friends that he'd "wasted over a full year" doing tedious calculations by hand about "so trifling a matter" as hypothetical CO2 concentrations in far-off eras (quoted in Crawford, 1997).

[bolverk]

It is an out and out SCAM.

It is being used as an excuse by the likes of the World Economic Forum and their Drones in local and national governments to force changes on people whether they want the changes or not.

There has always been changes in the climate and in the recent geological past it has been cooler than it is now, but that doesn't mean the current temp/CO2 will stay as it is, it is just as likely to go down as it is to carry on going up

[genericname85]

it's gonna happen either way. cause here's the facts: humanity is accountable for roughly 1% of the Atmospheric co2 depending on what source you read it's a bit more or less. so 1% of co2. that's 0.00051% of the entire atmosphere. that's the cold hard facts.

and my opinion about these facts is that it seems very unlikely that a 0.00051% change in the makeup of the atmosphere will cause a 2+ degree climate change.

[genericname85]

arguments made for climate change are always narrowed down to the last 1000 years to "recent geological history". which in my opinion considering the age of the planet and the temperature changes it went through in that broader view makes the current panic very much exaggerated.

[Anonymous]

When you study historical climates and the ice cores you clearly see it does not have to be true and 10 or 20 or 30 years of warmer or cooler weather is not enough to establish even a trend in climate, it's just different weather. We are due for another 20,000 year ice age, but this is not it. It might be in 100 or 200 or 300 years or more from now.

[ABC1x1x]

I'm old enough to remember when there was going to be an iceage by 1995 and when that didn't happen the hole in the ozone was gonna kill us. They been saying the oceans will rise to unsustainable levels in the next 5 years for 20 or more years now. Some days are hot, some days are cold. I don't see any truth to the notion that average temperatures are doing anything out of the 12 year solar cycle norm.

[Snakeyes7]

I remember when Al Gore said that winter was going to be a thing of the past by 2000. I also remember when Greta Thunberg said that the world will be over in like three years and had to delete that tweet after that time arrived and nothing happened.

I'm so tired of this. All it led to was an attempt to plunge the US into a command economy, a massive tax increase and authoritarianism in general.

[Static_In_The_Attic]

Global Warming happens & so does Global Cooling & as for our planet it heats & cools itself all the time or at least Mother Nature tries.

[SofaKingsMart]

What? Humans have only spent generations polluting our waterways and spewing toxins into our atmosphere.
It would be silly to think that that would have an effect on the world around us.
Just silly 🙄

[Dargil]

We have, but that does not mean and there is scientific evidence supporting the man-caused global warming hypothesis. Oil spills, yes. Mini plastics in the oceans, yes. Dismembering birds and killing sea life with wind mills? Yes. Destruction of habitat and frying wildlife with solar farms? Yes. We do all that and it is shameful. But, again, there is zero (0) scientific proof of human caused global warming. Its just a silly pseudo religious trend. It is the greatest mass hysteria in human history, except maybe Islam.

[SofaKingsMart]

@Dargil
We are polluting our world and ourselves along with it, and you want to argue over what they call it?
This is why it will never change.

[Dargil]

But not warming the climate. We can control bad behavior, but only G0d can control the weather.

[SofaKingsMart]

@Dargil
You don’t believe polluting our world has an effect on the weather?
Did I read that correctly?

[lightbulb27]

Its real, who knows the full cause and effect.. there are other influences. We should live more efficiently as part of our society because resources are limited at a given price and competition foe them leads to conflict.

[exitseven]

It is a hoax. Notice that the people that scream the loudest are the ones who make the most money from it.

[Pohjolan]

How come fish, plants and all measuring devices used to measure radiation absorption/adsorption are in on the conspiracy?

[exitseven]

@Pohjolan they are all on the payroll.

[Pohjolan]

@exitseven
Fish and plants are on a payroll now?
Also do you seriously think that Chinese, American, Polish, Iranian and Brazilian scientists all rely on getting paid by the same lizard illuminati?

[Grond21]

It is warming a little, but it was warmer in the 1200s. And its been warming since 1840. So it isn't man made

[Dargil]

Wait 30,000 years. Buy a snow shovel.

[Grond21]

Lol. Yep

[Fireguy17]

well over 200 million years ago most of north america was covered by glaciers and over time they pretty much all melted.
So at 1 point the planet was warmer, then it cooled off then it got warmer all before man was around.

[Anonymous]

I get you're just a basic internet troll but one snowstorm doesn't change that each year is the warmest in history.

[RavVid]

I think it is disappointing. It is 7:30 am and still cold in peak summer. The sun has been up for an hour already.

I've been sold a pup and want my money back.

[sawno]

I don't believe its man made, but I do believe in climate fluctuations over a long period of time we had ice ages after all.

[seeyounexttuesday]

See see, global warming causes cold weather, steals your girlfriend and that missing sock from your laundry.

[Dongie]

The character that asked about this has blocked me so I can't put it on that page. Would you be so kind?

youtube.com/shorts/Y2q1QUGbsZ8?si=TktedtsA1z9BDH_q

[Brady]

It's probably true. Long ago on the news they said Park City, Utah is gettin less snow probably due 2 it. I no Salt Lake City, Utah's anothr place. It used 2 hav cold winters with lots of snow. Hardly any snow this wintr.

[Staximus]

We've had 5 ice ages according to geology. That means there has been naturally occurring global cooling and warming before humans were even contributors to global warming. We don't know jack about shit, either.

[NicholasRedone]

Its totally true like the Florida photo of snow - those silly Republican believers of anti-global myths

[D_Bone_Steak]

It just turned 20F outside... obviously we're all going to melt to death with all this heat.

[BCRanger10]

It was -5 when I left my house yesterday morning.

[douride2]

Its been going on for millions of years now.

[Astarlessnightsky]

We are fucked. Espacially since Trumps latest bills, he signed within his first 24 hours.

[slatyb]

The data is clear. The correlation with atmospheric CO2 is equally clear.

[AviatorTom]

Global WHAT? Planet Earth didn't get the message. 😐

[lilBigPotato]

Tell me that you're stupid without saying that you're stupid

[DrPepper12]

Earth will shake us off like the parasites we are thanks to our own blind greed and foolish mismanagement. And we would deserve it...

[beefcakebradybatson]

Unusually cold weather except in the Far West and snow/ice in the Deep South are also part of climate change. Don't fall for the banana in the tailpipe, folk, though many G@Ggers will !!!

[dreamstar72]

It a lie to make money and to scare people in believing what they are told.

[ProbablyClueless]

Not thrilled. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a ton we can actually do about it.

[FunkyMonkee]

It doesn't exist!! I'm freezing my fucking tits off!!!

[adventurous-1]

now that Trump has dropped the US out of the Paris accord I see it getting worse.

[IamRight]

Its real but its not the problem leftists makes it out to be.

[Anonymous]

Earth's climate has been cycling between hot and cold for millions of years. The arrogance it requires for some people to think humans are somehow now the cause of all of that is insane.

[KrakenAttackin]

Forecasters can't predict weather give days in advance but want us to believe they can predict global changes decades away? Bullshit.

[princeofromance]

I think it is very real. Just look at the drastic change in weather patterns over the past few years.

[Anonymous]

Only republicans do not believe it, and only then because they were told not to.

[Dongie]

Ha, lol! Nice picture. I believe I feel the same as I did in the 90s. HOGWASH!!

[Twalli]

It exists. It explains some crazy storms and temperatures we have seen an increase in.

[hello4433]

It's fucked up but politicians won't give a fuck about it.

[shortster]

We should encourage it until we get out of the current ice age.

[Cat67]

HOPEFULLY THE WORLD IS COMING TO AN END LET'S HOPE 🙏 🍀 🙏 🍀

[Austrian_Painter]

Snowing here too

[Armygirl9628]

It's fake. It is snowing in Florida new Orleans 👋

[SheScorpio04]

People are self-destructive.

[jimmy2]

Lol just nature at the right time and to quote President Trump drill baby drill

[Stravoula96]

Scary I mean storms keep getting storms.

[Anonymous]

It’s total bullshit just like the Covid scam.

[joehypo1]

Geoengeneeringwatch. org

[Sunrising]

Looks mighty cold there !

[Agape93]

Too late to stop or reverse it

[In_Trance]

A fear tactic. Seems to work well too

[Anonymous]

the world isn't gonna end in 2050

[Babygirl_S]

Yes save the Earth and nature

[Pterodon]

It’s natural and not man made