Climate Change

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,771
113
There is a difference between observable science and what those observations are actually used for.
"How they are interpreted" would be more helpful. There are two ways that science is being used today: (1) science strictly for the sake of science, which means theories are altered or rejected once new data comes to light OR (2) "science" for political purposes in order to promote a certain false narrative. Everything about COVID19 was from category two, and no one has been held accountable.

Carbon dioxide has always been beneficial and increased CO2 has actually improve vegetation and forests. God planned to have plants use up the CO2 and release oxygen, which is brilliant. Oxygen is what humans and animals heed to survive.

The really harmful gas is methane, and scientists at MIT have come up with a "dirt cheap" solution. "Now, a team of researchers at MIT has come up with a promising approach to controlling methane emissions and removing it from the air, using an inexpensive and abundant type of clay called zeolite. The findings are described in the journal ACS" Environment Au, in a paper by doctoral student Rebecca Brenneis, Associate Professor Desiree Plata, and two others." " "With special treatment, minerals called zeolites — commonly found in cat litter — can efficiently remove the greenhouse gas from the air, researchers report."
https://news.mit.edu/2022/dirt-cheap-solution-common-clay-materials-may-help-curb-methane-emissions

There are numerous sources of methane, not just dairy or beef cattle. But will anyone tell you that? No they want to destroy dairy farming and animal husbandry because destruction is their goal. The vast majority of emitted methane comes from such sources as slash-and-burn agriculture, dairy farming, coal and ore mining, wetlands, and melting permafrost. “A lot of the methane that comes into the atmosphere is from distributed and diffuse sources, so we started to think about how you could take that out of the atmosphere,” she says. " So a proper handling of methane could kill Climate Alarmism, and end the propaganda of the globalists. There would be no need for Net Zero (which is a fantasy to begin with).
 

Inquisitor

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2022
2,859
845
113
"How they are interpreted" would be more helpful. There are two ways that science is being used today: (1) science strictly for the sake of science, which means theories are altered or rejected once new data comes to light OR (2) "science" for political purposes in order to promote a certain false narrative. Everything about COVID19 was from category two, and no one has been held accountable.
You still fail to understand that there are two distinct types of science.

Observational science such as meteorology where you record the temperature every day.
There are no theories regarding the reading of a thermometer. Temperature records
can never be replaced by some alternate theory. Temperature records cannot be debated
by anyone. If Nasa or some other organization tells you the temperature is rising, then
that is a scientific fact.

Then there is theoretical science such as the Big Bang, here today but might be gone tomorrow.
There are other theories on the origin of the universe. Scientific fact derived from observation really
has nothing to do with any theory.

A theory not only explains known facts; it also allows scientists to make predictions of what they
should observe if a theory is true. Scientific theories are testable. New evidence should be compatible
with a theory. If it isn't, the theory is refined or rejected. The longer the central elements of a
theory hold, the more observations it predicts, the more tests it passes, the more facts it explains,
the stronger the theory
.

Observational science such as temperature records cannot be tested.

Covid-19 was a deadly flu like virus that threatened elderly people.

In my country we only had fifteen deaths from 23 million vaccine doses. Our government let the
medical authorities run the show and we had a very low number of fatalities from Covid-19.

There is a new virus now, MonkeyPox (MPox).

Mpox can be transmitted to humans through physical contact with someone who is infectious,
with contaminated materials, or with infected animals. Touch no unclean thing.
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
13,003
4,315
113
Hello CSI.

I would think that one would need to know whether the temperature around
the world is going up or not. A solution for a changing climate is another
matter altogether. There is a powerful difference between these two subjects.

If the temperature is actually rising worldwide then that is a serious problem
that we need to address. Yet, internal or external national, or world events,
or even political events, may have a much higher priority.

The USA is at the crossroads now and it's future as the major power in the
world is at stake. Perhaps even the US economy is under direct threat from
foreign powers.

I can understand that a US citizen has been observing over the last two decades
that even the fabric of US society. Is in tatters, the structure of the workplace
is changing fast. Life twenty years ago was better and forty years ago was much
greater than life in the USA today.

Surely you can understand that someone in Gaza, Ukraine, or even Russia. Has
no time for small talk about climate change. I understand that.

That is why the five super powers will continue with business as usual.
These five nations do not have any other choice to make. They generate
the greatest waste, the highest pollution, and they need the cheapest
resources. No one can stop these nations from doing what they have been
doing for decades.

To talk about climate change is an utter waste of time. That is why we
cannot stop climate change and we are accelerating a changing climate.

I knew more than a decade ago that a real solution for climate change
was never possible. In fact, we were twenty to thirty years too late to
slow down climate change, in any significant way.

You can accept climate change is happening, which it is. Then choose
to ignore a national response to that threat. That's fine, almost every other
country in the world is doing the same. Simply because a deep alteration
to power generation from coal and oil, to solar, wind, nuclear, is expensive.
So many countries in colder climates cannot employ solar or even wind power
generation. What do they do, you tell me.

Seventy five percent of the world's nations cannot afford to go green.

Climate change is merely an interesting topic to discuss.

By the way, neither the Democrats or Republicans can rescue the US from
it's downward spiral. The competition between nations now is reaching fever pitch.
These nations today are aggressive and determined to hold on to their wealth
and power. It is fundamental human nature to wave the flag and they all do it.

Hold onto your chair because it's going to get a lot tougher for us all, as time
goes by. We were destined for this.
First off, no one can control the temperature and base the pseudo-science on a few years when they can tell us what the temperature was 1000 years ago. I just came back from the Glacier in AK. No one is underwater there .


Climate control is a false narrative that was birthed out of the failed Global freezing and then global warming. That was a Lie pushed over the last 50 years and more. So the four seasons we have, they took and called it climate change oh, my

A created term for political reasoning and control and causing chaos.

Just like them, many other demonic words and terms Demonized people create to control people and sell their souls to a lie.

Here are a few :

  • Transgender no science for it
  • The non-Binary opinion that forces all to accept No Science
  • "Social Justice" Marxism, which they try to hide
  • Minor-attracted people, aka Child molesters
The very Idoliges of those who hold to such things were formed out of


  • Evolution
  • Atheism
  • Marxism
  • Communism
It might make it right. There's no GOD. We are GOD, and we have the power to fix our own problems without a God that does not exist.


Those with power become corrupted as absolute power corrupts absolutely. The SIN and spirit of Anti-Christ are alive and well, and many " Christians" have fallen to the lie of the devil by compromising on the word of GOD to fill seats in the "church" instead of telling the TRUTH sets men free.


Please forgive me if I don't agree with you at all. America is hanging on by Thread. And God is the only one who can control the climate. The American church needs to return to its first Love. many in my state of CA fled to safer states that are more Christian-friendly than CA.

I and many others Stayed in CA and are seeing the gates of hell, NOT Prevail.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,771
113
You still fail to understand that there are two distinct types of science.
No I don't. The Big Bang Theory si pure fantasy from those who reject the Bible. Like evolution, it should be rejected out of hand.

As to observational science, it still needs interpretation, which means a theory as to why temperatures are remaining stable, rising, or falling. If the global temperature has risen by 0.18 C over 50 years, that was a steady rise since 1970.

Then we have this: "For comparison, the El Nino influence in 2016 was +0.16 °C. In all, this places 2022 directly on the latest 50-year (1973–2022) trend, which remains at 0.19 ± 0.01 °C/decade."
Steady global surface warming from 1973 to 2022 but increased warming rate after 1990 | Communications Earth & Environment (nature.com)


This paper also points out that climate scientists have not taken the 50-year trend into account. So there is no need for Climate Alarmism. Simply8 making every effort to reduce emissions without destroying economies should be sufficient.
 

Inquisitor

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2022
2,859
845
113
No I don't. The Big Bang Theory si pure fantasy from those who reject the Bible. Like evolution, it should be rejected out of hand.

As to observational science, it still needs interpretation, which means a theory as to why temperatures are remaining stable, rising, or falling. If the global temperature has risen by 0.18 C over 50 years, that was a steady rise since 1970.

Then we have this: "For comparison, the El Nino influence in 2016 was +0.16 °C. In all, this places 2022 directly on the latest 50-year (1973–2022) trend, which remains at 0.19 ± 0.01 °C/decade."
Steady global surface warming from 1973 to 2022 but increased warming rate after 1990 | Communications Earth & Environment (nature.com)


This paper also points out that climate scientists have not taken the 50-year trend into account. So there is no need for Climate Alarmism. Simply8 making every effort to reduce emissions without destroying economies should be sufficient.
Your posts are slowly improving.

No one knows whether the Big Bang theory is correct or not. That is why it is called a theory.
There are some deep problems with the Big Bang theory also. We may never know how the universe
began, if it even began at all.

The problem I have with science is at the very beginning. You must take a step up to start
the scientific methodology. You must assume a number of things to begin scientific enquiry.

To believe in Science you must accept that reality, i.e., the universe, is a visible entity. The universe
can be observed, can be measured. We can't see X-Rays but we can measure X-Rays, therefore
X-Rays exist.

Here is the where the problem exists, because Science is really only concerned with a physical
reality. A reality that can be measured. There is a propensity to not accept the possibility of a
spiritual realm. Because a spiritual universe cannot be tested, cannot be measured,
cannot be understood.

The very assumptions of science exclude the possibility of the existence of an invisible God.

So don't be surprised that many scientists will be atheists also. Not all scientists but many are.

It is never safe to assume anything in any way. That is the real problem with Science.
They assume that they can understand all things scientific and that is impossible.

I do believe science will never fully understand our reality because God designed our reality.
To frustrate the wise, the intelligent, to send scientists into a loop of ridiculous questions.

Science thought they were unlocking the secrets of matter itself with atomic theory.
Then they hit the brick wall of Quantum Mechanics. That put them in their place.

That's what I love about life no one really knows anything about life and it's purpose.
 

Inquisitor

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2022
2,859
845
113
No I don't. The Big Bang Theory si pure fantasy from those who reject the Bible. Like evolution, it should be rejected out of hand.

As to observational science, it still needs interpretation, which means a theory as to why temperatures are remaining stable, rising, or falling. If the global temperature has risen by 0.18 C over 50 years, that was a steady rise since 1970.

Then we have this: "For comparison, the El Nino influence in 2016 was +0.16 °C. In all, this places 2022 directly on the latest 50-year (1973–2022) trend, which remains at 0.19 ± 0.01 °C/decade."
Steady global surface warming from 1973 to 2022 but increased warming rate after 1990 | Communications Earth & Environment (nature.com)


This paper also points out that climate scientists have not taken the 50-year trend into account. So there is no need for Climate Alarmism. Simply8 making every effort to reduce emissions without destroying economies should be sufficient.
Here is an extract from your quotation taken from Communications Earth & Environment, nature.com

"this places 2022 directly on the latest 50-year (1973–2022) trend, which remains at 0.19 ± 0.01 °C/decade.
The error is the 5–95% confidence interval of the 50-year regression, using the HadCRUT5 ensemble mean.
"

The trend of climate change over the last fifty years?

"the latest 50-year (1973–2022) trend, which remains at 0.19 ± 0.01 °C/decade"

Can you do the simple multiplication; 5 decades multiplied by the decadal temperature
0.19 equals nearly one degree of warming. That is, our planet is one degree warmer over
a mere fifty years. That is a mind blowing increase of global temperature over a miniscule time
duration. This rapid change in temperature is what really scares the scientists.

Climate change is accelerating and it's not a linear rise in temperature.

Note also, that data from 2023 and 2024 is not included unfortunately. Because
the temperature rise in 2023 and 2024 is much higher than the fifty year average.

We are in uncharted territory and no one can explain fully that huge jump in temperature,
over the last two years.

Your improving Nehemiah6.
 

Inquisitor

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2022
2,859
845
113
Obviously, you do not trust Meteorology and their temperature measurements.

Observational science is a valid discipline, what you see is what you get.
You have no need to make any assumptions before you read a thermometer.

Mwhaaaaaaaa.
 

tourist

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2014
42,550
17,022
113
69
Tennessee
This paper also points out that climate scientists have not taken the 50-year trend into account. So there is no need for Climate Alarmism. Simply8 making every effort to reduce emissions without destroying economies should be sufficient.
The destruction of various economies is problematic. The Green New Deal woke peeps don't care squat about the economic chaos and ensuing poverty. They still drive their limos and fly in their private jets. Bunch of hypocrites not to be taken seriously.
 

NightTwister

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2023
2,086
780
113
65
Colorado, USA
Obviously, you do not trust Meteorology and their temperature measurements.

Observational science is a valid discipline, what you see is what you get.
You have no need to make any assumptions before you read a thermometer.

Mwhaaaaaaaa.
Your first support reference was Wikipedia. You lost all credibility right from the start.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,771
113
Neither, it's a hoax. Regardless, minimal to no effects in our lifetime. I don't lose any sleep over it, that's for sure.
So actual science has shown that the temperature increase/decade has been 0.18 C since 1970. If you go to 2030, that is six decades. If you multiply 0.18 x 6 you get a 1.08 C rise in temperature. But because many efforts are being made to reduce emissions, the trend may go down. The Climate Alarmists claim (empirically) that the global temperature increases should not exceed 1.5 C. So that may not even ever happen.
 

Inquisitor

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2022
2,859
845
113
Your first support reference was Wikipedia. You lost all credibility right from the start.
I can use other sources, Wikipedia is just the quickest source to use.

Credibility is not determined by any source of information.

Credibility is the quality of being trusted and believed in.

The trait of Credibility belongs to Jesus alone.

Unless you wish to boast in your own credibility, can I trust NightTwister?
 

Inquisitor

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2022
2,859
845
113
So actual science has shown that the temperature increase/decade has been 0.18 C since 1970. If you go to 2030, that is six decades. If you multiply 0.18 x 6 you get a 1.08 C rise in temperature. But because many efforts are being made to reduce emissions, the trend may go down. The Climate Alarmists claim (empirically) that the global temperature increases should not exceed 1.5 C. So that may not even ever happen.
Last year I think we passed 1.5 C of warming for six months.

Probably still above 1.5 degrees this year also.

How much will the temperature drop as La Nina kicks in?

This is what nobody knows.