Wheezer

To be honest, I don't think anyone understands the current net zero policies. Of course we need to keep fossil fuel products. But tell that to a certain percentage(97%) of the AGW crowd . The problem is we were well on our way in the science field of fossil fuel burning to wonderful new technologies. Cleaner burning energy efficiency was on the fast track , Auto fuel efficiency would be soaring, but those fields and technology will be afraid to or feebly underfunded to move forward or completely abolished because thats the MO of 97% of AGWs

Oh brother, i didn't know that was a disqualifyer , there are so many, I won't use that bad word again.. I don't run when you call me climate denier

If it were a true "weaning " I wouldn't have that view. The Net zero plan in its infancy , in my assumption, which I think I should be allowed to have, is already manifesting or festering in current economies. Higher energy prices have a trickle down effect on every single thing associated with our lives. Foods, goods, transportation, inflation etc. Governments can blame covid for only so long. So glad you brought up the 8 billion nonexistent human beings. That has been one of my points since the religion was started, being that , that is the biggest change that has happened, not the climate. More people and better observational technology make the climate seem more impactful than before

Ok , I'll play along . I believe all the models all the assumptions, and all the science of climate past and climate cycles and natural variability has zero to do with our climate today. Our climate today is 100% do to societies of the past depending on fossil fuel and its products for survival and advancement and less hardship. So called net zero is achievable some day for sure , although it's ridiculous to put a date on it. The problem is the effects on societies and people's lives under the current plans of governments to achieve that will never , never survive the upheaval and chaos when economies suffer severely . What good is a fossil free world , when that world will be in utter chaos. Oh, and we would still have the same weather extremes we have now and have had for millions of years past.

Fairly new here, but would like to know the definition of the words "Climate Denier" as it is used so often . Forgive me if this has been explained in detail at an earlier stage

Yes, agree , and well within the mentioned range average. Of course it's higher (and lower) during anomalies, such as the recent super El-nino.

With more than 80 percent of its 1,190 coral islands standing less than 1 meter above sea level, the Maldives has the lowest terrain of any country in the world. Sea level rise has remained consistent for decades/centuries, 2-4mm per year. Yet Somehow this is now not a natural progression

One would think the Muldi's would help the cause by restricting the number of tourists flying to their luxurious lands , instead they wish to expand their airports to accommodate millions more and have given the contract to build, worth nearly a billion dollars to the the world's leader in fossil fuel burning, China. Yet they want ransom money for their modeled future ultimate demise

I didn't know I was arguing and I didn't know using MSM was a disqualifier, apologies. But, since we're talking about the 70s, MSM fits better then , than today. You only had a few news sources to be mesmerized by, television, radio and rags. We can call them Broadcast News Conglomerates if that makes one feel better

Majority of that hub-bub over that rubbish was ginned up by,,,wait for it..... the MSM

I think they know the Net Zero Math is fools gold. They know trying to get there is going to mean extreme hardships to society the world over, resulting in major extreme upheaval. At least this is what my climate model is predicting

So, these scientists know the that fossil fuels caused the putrid winds and will in the future, bit lets keep building more and more . Perhaps they can have a backup diesel generator to run them when low blows come to visit.