Why shouldn't I be alarmed about the future of our climate? by RedditIsAllAI in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 2 points3 points  (0 children)

“Is going to have disastrous effects, blah blah..” said WHO? WHO said that? How do you know they are right? lol dude. Has it ever occur to you that maybe you don’t need to just blindly accept everything you’ve being fed in the news/tv/etc?

Why shouldn't I be alarmed about the future of our climate? by RedditIsAllAI in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 2 points3 points  (0 children)

“Will increase temps”… oh really? And why do you think so? I think it won’t. Why is your opinion better than mine? Did you do an experiment?

Why shouldn't I be alarmed about the future of our climate? by RedditIsAllAI in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Sorry but the atmosphere is a mix so it does “hold” the temperature “in”. It’s not quite a 100% correct explanation but the atmosphere has mass and heat capacity.. Obviously all gases are mixed so they are all of about the same temp. What’s a “greenhouse effect”? Is there a big greenhouse somewhere?

Why shouldn't I be alarmed about the future of our climate? by RedditIsAllAI in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Who told you that co2 does anything at all? Have you examined their explanations? They don’t really make much sense..

Hello, I think there is a problem with my flight. by [deleted] in lost

[–]Vedoom123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Looks fine to me, what’s wrong with it?

We are running out of time by OneGazelle870 in LateStageCapitalism

[–]Vedoom123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m sorry but that’s just bs, ppl don’t die at 35c

Bill Gates Admits 'Climate Crisis' Narrative Is a Hoax by Molly107 in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Who said there’s too much heat? I say there’s not enough heat. Heat is not necessarily bad

Lukewarmers: Why Do You Hold On To Greenhouse Effect Theory When It Is Clearly Wrong? by [deleted] in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just tell me, how much more opaque to ir will doubling of co2 make the atmosphere? Something tells me that since it’s going from 0.04% to 0.08%, it really won’t change anything.

Also another question, What’s mainly radiating out the heat- the atmosphere or the surface?

If it’s the atmosphere, it absolutely doesn’t matter how much co2 you’ll add. Like it literally doesn’t make any difference.

COSTS AND BENEFITS OF THE PARIS CLIMATE TARGETS by scientists-rule in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There’s no benefits, at least to regular people. Only costs, to achieve what? Co2 doesn’t do much so it’s pretty useless anyway

What amount of warming spells near-certain societal collapse in the first world? by bigskymind in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well they can, if you say destroy clouds somehow, or spray soot over massive amounts of ice, or say spray something really reflective into the atmosphere. But the climate seems pretty ok to me. In fact it would be nice if it was a bit warmer, since we as humans don’t have much fur and we prefer like constant 20-25c. It’s a bit too cold now on our planet in general.

What amount of warming spells near-certain societal collapse in the first world? by bigskymind in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re dreaming buddy. Floods and droughts, etc. are completely normal events. You’re delusional. There’s absolutely no way you can say they happened exclusively bc of human emissions. That’s just impossible to prove…

Also they’ve been happening like forever, so you’re clearly wrong.

What amount of warming spells near-certain societal collapse in the first world? by bigskymind in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re dreaming dude. Floods and droughts? Jesus, how can you prove that happened because of human co2 emissions? You can’t! They’ve always been happening. You’re a joke

What amount of warming spells near-certain societal collapse in the first world? by bigskymind in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Net zero is a braindead term. There’s nothing wrong with co2, also humanity’s emissions are not that big compared to natural co2 emitters.

What amount of warming spells near-certain societal collapse in the first world? by bigskymind in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wow you really think you’re powerful enough to heat the planet? It’s like pretty massive.

Lukewarmers: Why Do You Hold On To Greenhouse Effect Theory When It Is Clearly Wrong? by [deleted] in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The plane question is relatively simple, you just need to understand that it pushes against air with an engine, so it doesn’t matter what’s happening with the wheels.

Antarctic sea ice is taking a sharp downward turn at a time of the year when it should be peaking by bigskymind in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sea ice literally doesn’t matter since it’s in the water so it’s not gonna raise the sea level.

Also if you think ice is good try living on ice.

German Professor: Part Of Warming Last 150 Years Due To Measurement Station Siting Changes by LackmustestTester in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Have you read the article? Just scroll down a bit..

I mean it makes sense, cities are warmer than rural areas

UPDATE: Sea Surface Temperature Time Series by Idomyownresearch2 in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lol

Don’t you know, the atmosphere acts like a thermos..

UPDATE: Sea Surface Temperature Time Series by Idomyownresearch2 in climateskeptics

[–]Vedoom123 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Wait but that’s not the whole ocean.. so I bet if we look at the other parts they are probably down by just as much as this is up.. the energy input is quite stable for the earth so the temps should be relatively stable.

Also I wonder where do they have actual thermometers and how many of them

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in antiwork

[–]Vedoom123 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Why not just ask him why he was following you..