I love Teslas

You still haven't answered the question

 

I've answered it repeatedly. The climate models that you claim are fake and a joke, but that the oil companies not only don't challenge, but agree with when asked point blank (even though those models essentially decimate the oil companies' business in the very long term) are correct.

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login

So, where are we on this graph ?

Basing climate change on the last 100 years is BS

 

Not sure why you think you think posting a graph without any context means anything.

However, to answer your question very specifically, we are on a path of human-induced climate change that will delay the next glaciation period from anywhere from a few thousand years, to hundreds of thousands of years.

Don't believe me? I'm sure you don't. Yet it is from the same source your graph was cherry-picked from (omitting the surrounding text).

I've provided a copy of your chart below, this time with the surrounding text included, which makes it very clear that human-caused climate change is radically changing the trends going forward. In other words, the future trends are radically different from what would have been expected from the prior 450,000 years of history (relevant comments highlighted in yellow).

The oil companies have everything to lose with the current models showing climate change -- and they agree with those models (not that they want to, but math is math and they can't disprove that math (especially since their internal math showed the exact same trends)). Your data sources that say climate change is fake are lying to you. The oil companies absolutely love that so many of you are making these arguments for them, but they can't and won't make those claims themselves because their own math shows fossil fuels to be causal in climate change.

Source for your graph: https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Glacial_and_interglacial_periods

Your Graph (this time with surrounding text included):
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

97% of scientists agree [emoji41]


Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat

 

The hockey stick has been debunked. The models can’t be back tested. There is no absolute argument that the earth is warmer because of carbon or if there are carbon level increases because of warming. Actually, the math doesn’t work relative to any warming being “man made”.

If you say something loud enough, with enough conviction and enough times people will believe it. However, that doesn’t make it true.



Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat

 

Hmmm. Every electric car disciple should watch this for a reality check.

 

https://www.instagram.com/reel/C0Pc1nZr-ri/?igsh=MTRyZjZoOHlxbGtlbw==


Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat

 

I must have missed it in your post. Where exactly was it debunked?

 

Thanks, I’ll stick to filling up my diesel once a week and doing 1000km on a tank and take comfort in knowing I’ll find a buyer easily if I want to sell. Whom will buy a used electric car?

 

Not WHOM..

 

I can see you in a new electric Macan…..stopped in GI for hours charging up on a GG.


Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat

 

FANTASTIC a QANTAS A380 just flew over heading to L.A fuel burn 12 tons P/H..

 

https://www.theunion.com/opinion/norm-sauer-mann-s-hockey-stick-a-documented-hoax/article_5e9bee14-1468-59aa-90d9-6d1e82f584cf.html


Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat

 

Great article, well referenced.

 

So the oil companies have already taken a significant hit from Tesla, and are at significant risk of losing a large chunk of their trillions of dollars of revenue if the 2035 EV aspirations happen, missed this smoking gun declaring them innocent in climate -- that this one person (Norm), who has absolutely no background in anything remotely related to weather or climate or science has found. Not only did not figure it out themselves, they missed Norm's article.

The link to Norm's original post is missing (https://www.theunion.com/news/18234522-113/norm-sauer-if-you-can-control-carbon-you/ - 404 message if you click it). Norm commits the same issue of using a graph with all context omitted. The issue with should that should obvious from post #1704 in response to @moretti 's graph. The graph norm referenced was always a rough estimate based on very old techniques and is localized data to central England, not the globe (https://interpretingcc.wordpress.com/2023/06/24/ipcc-1990-schematic-of-temperature-during-the-last-1000-years/). There were no recorded temperatures prior 1600AD. Even if the middle age temperature was accurate, the middle age temperature has been surpassed (that chart ends at 1990).

THIS -- an editorial from somebody with no background in anything he is talking about -- is what you rely on for science???? Common sense tells you the oil companies would jump all over any one of these articles disproving climate change, if they were true. Listen to that common sense. It's pretty hard to ignore. Trillions of dollars of oil company revenue are on the line.

 

Yeah yeah, to quote an uneducated, autistic, Scandinavian delinquent, "Blah, blah, blah". You talk about oil companies and their trillions a lot. Let's follow the climate hysteria money: get funding, create hysteria, get more funding. Now there's a way to milk the system. And nobody can check up on it for decades. Climate change isn't science, it's religion and all the Chicken Littles out there with their ardent fervour and shiny-eyed zeal are forgetting one thing - who's Foxy Loxy?

 

I'll be guided by a SC beach Babe ta .
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Meanwhile, fron TheAustralian today. This is a Chinese-owned, coal fired nickel refinery in Indonesia. No emission controls, massive local contamination, out of sight of 1st world activists. You extract nickel from ore using sulphuric acid at extreme high temperature and pressure. China dumps the nickel on the world market, putting cleaner refiners out of business. This has been their business model for 40 years, but they're communists so they get free pass.


Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Ok. We both know non-climate “scientists” also are part of the boiling planet crowd. So, “he isn’t qualified” won’t fly. Just study who’s included in the “97% agree”. What a joke.

We’re in the wrong thread for this anyway but it’s been fun. Time will tell and history will record it. That said, my prediction is earth ain’t gonna die from heat, carbon overload or other man induced natural disaster. Thermonuclear war maybe, but not weather.


Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat

 

Glad to see your concern for Indo's environment... China's IWP plant is just one of many in the region operating under Indo's (virtually nonexistant) controls.
https://cri.org/indonesia-huge-nickel-project-driving-climate-rights-environmental-harms/

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Doesn’t mean much. how much of the global products are made there. All it meant is the world had exported their carbon emissions.

 

Rubbish,how many coal-fired power stations ?

 

Not only are the climate models science, they very closely match Exxon's internal math that predicted very accurately how much burning of fossil fuels would increase temperatures.

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/01/harvard-led-analysis-finds-exxonmobil-internal-research-accurately-predicted-climate-change/