Comments by "" (@Method9) on "Warmest winter on record comes to an end as Spring arrives" video.

  1. Seems to be. The rebates going out to 80% of Canadians are redistributing some cash from the wealthiest polluters. I want to know when we start mitigating climate change by curbing fossil fuel production instead of building more pipelines even now as we breach +1.5C.
    4
  2. CO2 hasn't been this high in millions of years. Last time CO2 was this high, sea levels were 5-25m higher. And if we trigger the feedback loops beyond +1.5C it won't stop there.
    3
  3.  @Gman44324 I'm open to seeing more data, but Environment Canada sources are saying we had temperatures about 5C above average. The margin by which records are broken increases farther north, where it is warming faster.
    2
  4. El Nino alone would be cyclical, not setting all time records.
    2
  5.  @ZenCorvus  A simple google search ruins that notion. "10 communities recorded new daily maximums on Dec. 28, with the warmest being White Rock, which reached 14.1 C, eclipsing the city’s old mark of 11.7 C set in 1929. Whistler came close to setting a record on Thursday, but tied its mark of 5.6 C set in 1956. On Wednesday, 13 B.C. communities set daily records, with West Vancouver reaching an early spring-like 14.0 C." - Global news
    2
  6.  @SiMpLyKaSsIdI He said daily records from the past winter weren't broken. He was wrong. I don't see how that's cherrypicking much of anything. The Canadian average over the past winter was 5 degrees above normal, with even higher temperatures above norms farther north. Expect even greater extremes next El Nino.
    2
  7.  @arkcon714  I went and read the PBO release on their report. Looking forward to the Liberal response, but likely it will be more dogmatic rhetoric. I see a redistribution of a small amount of wealth, the largest polluters being taxed most, and their estimation that 'most' households will see a net loss rather than a benefit. That tells me that most households still need to cut more 'carbon' out of their lifestyles. "Estimates of the net cost of the federal fuel charge to households continue to show a progressive impact, that is, larger net costs for higher income households. The report finds that the largest net cost is for households in the top income quintile in Alberta (2.7% of disposable income) and the largest net gain is for households in the lowest income quintile in Saskatchewan (2.7% of disposable income) in 2030-31." I continue to ask how we're going to afford all of the upgrades we need from mitigating infrastructure like floodwater management and sea walls, to firefighting capabilities, to the modernization of our power grid that will require the construction of many more energy storage facilities. We can mitigate a great deal of the emissions associated with agriculture by using fertilizers that are not produced via the Haber-Bosch process, too. How do we pay for what we need for real carbon neutrality? I don't see us handing a bill to big oil. So the plan is what, to further debase our currency and our savings by printing the cash for all of this?
    1
  8.  @arkcon714 The temperatures for the past winter were recorded on thousands of devices... the west did not have a far colder winter than normal. I live on the west coast and it's been quite balmy. Many cities here set multiple daily heat records. There are measurements taken at ground level and from orbit, take your pick. To be clear, you're disputing modern weather data? As for made up numbers, JT was pretty clear about how he wants the carbon tax to work. The PBO report was clear that the biggest polluters are paying more tax, which is good, and the poorest and smallest polluters are getting the most back, which was also his plan. There are questions to be answered if people aren't getting enough money back, or are still failing to live sustainably as the case may be. We'll see yet how much of this is typical conservative punditry and spin. Or maybe they'll just keep shouting each other down in the HoC. I am not any kind of neoliberal, and I think that climate leaders don't build pipelines. Not for bitumen and tar and not for LNGs' water intensive blends of methane and carcinogens. The PM has been a blatant liar in my eyes since he purchased TMX. Trading the pipeline for the tax was his whole deal. Now AB wants their cake and to eat it too.
    1
  9. All of the fools arguing that humans can't possibly impact the climate.
    1
  10. Burning more fossil fuels sure isn't going to help. Raise the tax 1000% on climate criminals.
    1
  11. 🤣
    1
  12. 100% 🤣
    1
  13.  @seanhiggins2740 Ah yes the great nebulous conspiracy theory for which no evidence exists. Irrational, Delusional, and Denialist Cult Member
    1
  14. Boomers aren't the only scientifically illiterate group! Let's hear it for backwater AB!
    1
  15.  @arkcon714  Not really. Not when you take a systems view of incoming vs outgoing energy on a planetary scale. There are a lot of variables to consider, from albedo and atmospheric composition including the levels of the other GHGs like CH4, to the output of our star, and even things like asteroid strikes, volcanism, and supernovae. None of that prevents CO2 from trapping heat, the vast majority of which is flowing rapidly into the upper 2km of our oceans.
    1
  16. One snowfall offsets a record blowing winter in your mind? Classic boomer math.
    1
  17.  @tonybaloney8401 It literally isn't. It's like none of you ever took a stats class.
    1
  18. Raise the carbon tax 1000%. Make climate criminals pay for their pollution and its damages to Canada.
    1
  19.  @Gman44324 Taxing you much more will reduce demand and combustion. There's no going backwards. The latent heat in the system will take decades if not centuries to fully work its way back out into space.
    1
  20.  @arkcon714 Responded to this in another comment. The TLDR is that radiative forcing isn't dependent on only CO2. Nor was CO2 driving the changes to the climate during those periods, as it trailed temperature changes then, unlike now, for which we have no precedence.
    1
  21.  @thet3504  The point being driven home is that climate is in fact changing, despite the denial of the last 40 years, and humans are clearly responsible for it. Media networks still don't seem to grasp that if we hit 2C we're likely going to be carried beyond 8C by over a dozen self sustaining feedback loops.
    1
  22.  @arkcon714 You're aware that there is more than one greenhouse gas, and more components to radiative forcing than GHGs, right? I'm not lying, you just don't understand the science.
    1
  23.  @PunkrockNoir-ss2pq Enough to stop consumption.
    1