Comments by "" (@louistournas120) on "The epidemic of ‘mentally unstable’ climate activists" video.

@datruth4766 "they can't even forecast the weather next week, how can they forecast the climate in 50 years." ==There is a difference between weather forecast and climate trends. For the climate trend, the measurements have shown that the global average temperature has been going up.
4
@thomasm1964 "Only if you cherry pick your data and conflate several difefrent things can you possibly believe the planet is in any sort of climate crisis." ==I was under the impression that the majority of the experts are in agreement that the global average temperature has been going up. I think for the oceans, it has gone up bu 1 C.
2
@datruth4766 "you don't actually know that, you just believe anything they tell you!" ==I don't have the time or the scientific equipment to do research at a global level, so I trust the professionals. Do you believe that all the scientists got together and decided to fool the entire world population?
2
@jackmcslay "You don't have to imagine, we have history to show. 100 years ago people were also raging about sustainability but instead of climate change the hot topic was eugenics and that we needed healthy people going forward in order not to have a societal collapse, then a guy with an ugly mustache rose to power in Germany and followed it to the letter." ==I think what you are saying is that scientists are always wrong. For example, in the 18xx, when the locomotive was invented, some people the high speed would cause health problems and women would give stillborn births. Some people said flight/planes were impossible. So, I understand you doubt. Science is a world you aren't in contact with. You aren't a scientists and you don't want to trust them since they might be wrong.
1
@seanworkman431 "then i the 1970's the big scare was an impending ice age, we were all going to freeze to death." ==The claim that in the 1970s, a global cooling has been predicated is based on Peter Gwynne Newsweek article in Apr 28, 1975. There were similar articles in Time Magazine, National Geographic, the New York Times. The article is based on facts. From the 1940s to the 1970s, global average temperature was going down. We now know that the reason is soot and aerosols. That has settled out and by the 1980s, there is an upturn and the planet is warming back up and it is rising at a rather rapid pace just like the CO2 level is rising at a rapid pace. Also, climate science was still rudimentary in the 1970s. The number of scientists who though we were heading for an ice age was small and they were correct. We should be in an ice age period. Another larger group of scientists were factoring in human activity and though the planet should be warming up. So, the large group ended up being correct as from the 1980s and onward, global average temperature is just going up.
1
@PlutoniumSlums You can plant trees. Nobody is going to stop you. But you can't stop big petrol. It is a multibillion dollar industry and there is a billion customers using the product. We are also using it, whether it is gasoline, diesel, plastics, medicine and as an energy source to make NH3, HNO3, KNO3 and more. I think very few countries can switch to alternative energy sources. In Quebec, we have a lot of hydro power so there is a strong push to switch to electric cars. The price of electricity is something like 0.07$kWh while other places, it is 0.40 and in some cases, over 1.00$. Quebec doesn't have any petrol fields. The only province that is backwards, conservative, thinking is Alberta where they have lots of petrol.
1
@Mike-tc8ob "We are living in the solution sweet pea. Oil has saved more lives and brought more humans up out of poverty and starvation than any other single product ever discovered or invented on earth." ==That is probably true. The problem is that the past people regarded petrol as being plentiful. I think Ford has stated that there is an ocean worth of petrol under Texas. It wasn't a problem in 1900 to ~1950 but the world population has been quickly going up and more people are joining in on the american lifestyle. So, petrol is not going to last forever. One estimate says that Saudi Arabia has enough for 1400 y. Other estimate say 250 y.
1
@Irish_Georgia_Girl “who tf ever said the global temperature is not SUPPOSED to go up? And who tf said it's being caused by PEOPLE??? NOBODY!” ==The rate of increase of temperature is rather huge. There is also the increase of the ocean acidity. Preindustrial CO2 levels were at 280 ppm while it is now at 420 ppm. That is a 50% increase. CO2 increase is because of people.
1
@notcoleman711 "So you want to virtue signal and protest oil but also protest Nuclear Fusion a proven solution bc logic amiright" ==There are no nuclear fusion reactors. None of them produce more energy than they consume. They are in a research phase.
1
@blankeny "Actually, no, just the ones promoted and paid for by the acyivists..." ==You think that activists are paying climate scientists and that thousands of scientists are behaving unprofessionally?
1
@datruth4766 "Yes, I believe 1000s of scientists will act unprofessionally, it happens all the time!" ==Can you give me an example, dated 2000 to 2023 where 1000 scientists are discovered to be colluding? I would like to see an official source, not a private website.
1
@MrWhateverfits “without peer reviewing it thoroughly then yes they are colluding.” ==You started your sentence with an if. Is it is fact that the climate scientists are not peer reviewing their work? I am not saying that all research papers are peer reviewed. So, I am not looking for 1 example. Is there an official source that says that the majority of their research papers are not peer reviewed? Also, how could it be that scientists work independently arrive at the same conclusion? “Did you also know that I can get a Biologist or even Gynecologist to say that the climate is in crises as long as they have a PhD.?” ==Niel Degrass Tyson says that you can find at least one scientists that doesn’t agree with something or says the opposite. “So one you need to look into all of those Scientists and find out what their field of expertise is. You then need to look at who they work for if their field is in fact Climate related.” ==Sure. You didn’t say anything that I disagree with. “so there are plenty of "Scientists" they would say false thing just for a paycheck.” ==I think I understand this sentiment. The idea is that you are a liar and you would lie for a paycheck. Maybe, a customer brings in their car and you make up some lie and change a few parts that don’t need changing. But the thing about scientists is that they are not payed by the job, right? They get payed an X amount per year to do research. We don’t know much about the Earth so there is always data to fetch. Also, since science is an open system, you and anyone can become a scientist and verify for yourself? Would you accept that global warming is caused by humans if a close member of your family said so? Do you trust your family members? “No it is not the climate activists paying them, it is their organization.” ==Someone else said that climate activist are paying them, which is ridiculous. “It is also Western governments and large corporations with interests in EV tech and green energy paying them. You can never fully trust any science unless you look into it yourself and read all data from all sources. It's easy to filter out the repeated stuff and just focus on what data each side is showing.” ==But if you do become a scientist, why would you trust yourself if you don’t have morals? Earlier, you said you would lie for a paycheck. “It is also Western governments and large corporations with interests in EV tech and green energy paying them.” ==It is often the government that gives money to research since research is sometimes not profitable. Do you believe that the majority of climate scientists have decided to become criminals? What makes you say that EV tech companies are paying them?
1
@blankeny “Well duh! When have you known people to not be coerced by cash?” ==I haven’t been bribed and people I know haven’t been bribed. I am wondering about the morals of the people who are claiming that thousands of scientists have been bribed by the western governments and EV companies. Have you been bribed or would you accept a bribe? What about the rest of your entourage? I have asked several people for evidence but none of them provide. Also, why haven’t the petrol companies, the most richest companies of all, why haven’t they offered a counter-bribe to the scientists and governments? Are the western governments refusing their bribes and only accepting bribes by activists and EV companies? Are the scientists only accepting bribed by activists and EV companies? I have heard similar things from flat earthers. They claim that there is a conspiracy going on. All experts are behaving unprofessionally. How is that possible when there is a constant flow of new generation of scientists? None of them are detecting that the Earth is flat? They are all accepting bribes? I have also heard similar things from people who don’t accept that NASA did the Moon landing in 1969. You seem to be of the belief that 100% of the earth’s population is 100% willing to accept a bribe.
1
billkikstra2225 You probably want to reply to me. “so, l take it you're going to give up EVERYTHING that oil & gas has provided YOU???” ==I don’t think that any of us want to give up those things and return to the old days of horse and buggy and being a farmer. It is important to face reality. The claim being made by a couple of people here is that thousands of climate scientists, from around the globe have taken a bribe from EV manufacturers. This is discussed on Wikipedia. Where is the evidence of these bribes? Why are nearly 97% of them being unprofessional? Why aren’t these scientists rich? How much are they taking per y? 50,000$/y? 100,000$/y? So, for the past 50 y or so, each climate scientist has collected over 2.5 M$. Does that make sense? I asked some important questions but no one answers me: Are you that corrupt? Are you willing to put your own reputation on a lie? Because someone who claims that everyone in this world is corrupt it tells me about the morals about the person making the claim. There is a difference between not wanting to give up our comfy lifestyle and research. So, just be honest and tell us that you don’t want to lose your comfy lifestyle instead of saying that 97% of climate scientists are corrupt and by extension, every scientists in every field is corrupt. And, you do understand that petrol will not last forever, right? In the early 19xx, someone said there is an ocean worth of petrol under Texas. Yes, back then it looked like there is a non ending amount. Now that the population skyrocketed, it doesn’t look like a giant ocean anymore.
1