Thanks

[AlbertaFarmer5]

What other negative impacts? I have asked you over and over and over again to list any negative impacts of increasing beneficial CO2 and improving climate. You have never come up with anything.
Life on Earth is improving by every possible measure during this supposed climate crisis due to increasing co2.
Every apocalyptic prediction has been proven wrong.

every time you get back into this corner you default to Future doomsday scenarios, ignoring the decades of existing data showing the exact opposite to be occurring.

[chuckChuck]

So your only comeback is there are no negative consequences? Its all good!

Your an idiot if you believe that denier crap! LOL

[chuckChuck]

• [url]https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/effects/[/url]
• We already see effects scientists predicted, such as the loss of sea ice, melting glaciers and ice sheets, sea level rise, and more intense heat waves.
• Scientists predict global temperature increases from human-made greenhouse gases will continue. Severe weather damage will also increase and intensify.

The magnitude and rate of climate change and associated risks depend strongly on near-term mitigation and adaptation actions, and projected adverse impacts and related losses and damages escalate with every increment of global warming

[AlbertaFarmer5]

I asked for present tenseexamples. Your response involved the words:
Predict
Predicted
Will( future tense)
Will also (. Future tense )
Projected.

[chuckChuck]

All in the present from NASA:

"We already see effects scientists predicted, such as the loss of sea ice, melting glaciers and ice sheets, sea level rise, and more intense heat waves."

Run away A5! LOL

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Why would loss of sea ice, melting glaciers or ice sheets be negative?
The rebounding polar bear population and penguin populations and their food chains seem to disagree that this is a negative outcome.
Plants and trees colonizing altitudes and latitudes previously too cold for Life seem to disagree.
If you were in charge of the climate dial, how much of the Earth surface should be covered in ice? What is the ideal coverage that would maximize the flourishing of life on Earth?

[chuckChuck]

Coastal flooding! You have heard of it?

And hotter and more frequent heat waves is good?

"We already see effects scientists predicted, such as the loss of sea ice, melting glaciers and ice sheets, sea level rise, and more intense heat waves."

You are a climate change denial idiot!

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Is coastal flooding something new? You are aware of that sea levels have been rising for 20,000 years since the peak of the last glacial maximum? Do you think a CO2 tax in Canada will reverse a process that has been going on for 20,000 years?
You are aware that heat waves have been declining in both intensity and quantity since the 1930s?

[AlbertaFarmer5]

By the way, what are you doing posting so prolifically on a Sunday so late in the morning?
This is out of character for you, have the overtime hours been increased because of the upcoming US election?
Or because of Trudeau's disastrous polling numbers?

Either way, aren't you grateful that I'm now done combining and the jobs I'm doing now allow me a free hand to debunk your propaganda? I apologize that I haven't been fulfilling my obligation as much as I should be during harvest.

[foragefarmer]

Like thinking $20 canola was the norm

You oughta rethink that one, or have you just missed what's happened since it hit $24.00/bu. in May/June of 2022, regarding buying and renting land, or auction sale prices.

I do recall it posted by an Agriville staffer who was willing to wager the farm that canola would hit $53.00/ bu.

Seems to me many others out there never got your memo.

[chuckChuck]

Is coastal flooding something new? You are aware of that sea levels have been rising for 20,000 years since the peak of the last glacial maximum? Do you think a CO2 tax in Canada will reverse a process that has been going on for 20,000 years?
You are aware that heat waves have been declining in both intensity and quantity since the 1930s?

Look at the NASA graph again. There are several glacial and interglacial periods in the last 800,000 years with 300ppm or less and now we have 420 and its still rising relatively rapidly.

Within that 800,000 years ocean levels rose and fell several times with relatively small changes.

No dispute there.

But CO2 levels are 1.4 times the previous maximum in the last 800,000 years. A massive change on the high end.

And temperatures are rising and ice sheets and glaciers are melting. Along with all the other negative consequences that NASA lists.

And you are going to claim its all good?

Name one scientific organization that says more CO2 is good for the planet and not a problem.

Show the science that there is nothing to worry about or shut up!

No doubt you are going to argue that all the climate scientists in multiple world class organizations are wrong and you are right.

A farmer fool who has never studied climate science?

What a laugh you are!

Give up!

[AlbertaFarmer5]

And temperatures are rising and ice sheets and glaciers are melting. Along with all the other negative consequences that NASA lists.!

By what metric have you concluded that the net effect of ice sheets and glaciers melting will be negative?

What is the correct extent of the glaciers and ice sheets?

Is there any upper limit?

[blackpowder]

"A farmer fool who has never studied climate science? "
Let's see your credentials jackass.

[chuckChuck]

Show me evidence from world class scientific organizations that proves NASA, NOAA, and all the other scientific organizations who do have the credentials are wrong.

If you can't do that you have no case!

I quote and link these organizations frequently and A5 answers with irrelevant questions at best and often offers dimwitted flaky ideas and opinions that aren't backed up by any scientific organizations!

A5 said there was no ice left on the planet at 300 ppm and ocean levels were much higher during the interglacial periods. But now we are far beyond 300 at 420 and apparently he thinks the oceans wont rise again? LOL

Current warming is occuring at the rate of 10 times faster than the rates after those previous ice ages! And you still think there is nothing to worry about?


Ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain glaciers show that Earth’s climate responds to changes in greenhouse gas levels. Ancient evidence can also be found in tree rings, ocean sediments, coral reefs, and layers of sedimentary rocks. This ancient, or paleoclimate, evidence reveals that current warming is occurring roughly 10 times faster than the average rate of warming after an ice age. Carbon dioxide from human activities is increasing about 250 times faster than it did from natural sources after the last Ice Age.³ ([url]https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/#footnote_3)[/url]

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Chuck you have deflected almost every thread into a climate change debate. And you post the same thing in every thread.

As for NASA, they are the source of the massive beneficial global greening data.

NASA is the source indicating that Antarctic ice mass is growing.

Are you sure they are still a credible scientific organization, and not a far right denier organization?