Comments by "" (@louistournas120) on "2023 was hottest year on record, new data confirms" video.

@boxsterbenz4059 "the AC load is greater because of the 70,000 people that attend the COP meetings, flying in to desert countries and staying in luxury hotels for a week." ==Ok but how long did that last for? A day, A week, A year? If you are going to prioritize issues, whether it is about reparing roads, reparing bridges, handling the triage at a hospital, there is always a rational, a way to organize and prioritize issues.
3
@aetherfox4404 "To be fair the propaganda did say "on record" which is technically correct for the sheep. The dinosaurs though would have something else to say...." ==You beleive that they are sheep but everyone knows the difference between anthropogenetically caused global warming and natural global warming.
2
@Brickwinds "You can't prove your fact without reasonable doubt about the last 4000 years because record keeping only began in 1880. See how that works?" ==So, how do scientists know what the temperature was previous to 1880 without record keeping? Are scientists just making numbers up without any data at all?
2
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.
2
0.23 seems tiny but it represents a large amount of heat. The other problem is that the trend is to go upwards.
2
Who is emitting more CO2? Private jets from rich people or the non stop airbus planes flying all over the world, each one transporting 200 people plus baggage?
2
The solution is being applied by Quebec. Another hydro plant is being built by Hydro-Quebec. I think it is near completion. It is called the Romaine-5. The other provinces can do it as well.
2
@boxsterbenz4059 I don’t doubt it. We can see that not much has been done since we can see how the CO2 levels goes up yearly. The population goes up. I know that for India, it goes up by 17 million per year. That includes deaths. So I guess some people are having 10 to 20 kids. Most of the other countries where the population is going up are african and arab countries: Again, it is a case of having 10 to 20 kids. The goal of everyone is to leave farming, join the city life and drive a car, live comfortable. Nobody is dreaming of going backwards. I only know of Hydro-Quebec that is building more power plants. They signed a 2.4 G$ contact with New York for 5 y. Hydro-Quebec has built Romaine-1, Romaine-2, Romaine-3, Romaine-4. These are all along the Romaine river. I think Romaine-4 is near completion. Quebec is getting ready for an all EV province.
1
@couch4330 That’s not about global warming. That is about plate tectonic theory. If you go back to the Middle Silurian period, 425 million y ago, there was basically no north america and no europe. Most of it was underwater and the parts outside the water is called Laurentia and it was in the southern hemisphere, near the equator. In the early Devonian period, 390 million y ago, north america + europe begin surfacing more. This is called Laurentia. Again, it is slightly in the southern hemisphere, but it is moving north. In the late Carboniferous period, 306 million y ago, north america + europe look larger and half of it is in the southern hemisphere and half is in the northern hemisphere. In the early Triassic period, 230 million y ago, north america + europe now has almost the same area as today. Now, most of this land mass is in the northern hemisphere. In the late Jurassic period, 150 million y ago, europe is separate from north america. Both keep heading north. South America and Africa are still joined. I don’t know what the temperate of that period was. It was a very different time period. “I think the planet will be fine. Plant a tree if you're worried, natural carbon capture.” ==I think the planet will be fine as well. There will be radical changes and it is already happening. About a species goes extinct per day and eventually, new species will spread and diversify. Life for humans will not be the same either as easy resources like petrol and coal run dry. Planting a tree would not help. The amount of CO2 being emitted is too fast. Also, I cut down trees and I burn them for heat during winter. The only reason why all the forests have not been eliminated is that people are using petrol, coal, CH4 to heat their homes and industry and some use other sources, such as hydro (such as myself).
1
@couch4330 I understand that yu want to pretend that millions of years ago, north america was in the same position as now and that all conditions were the same. "What evidence do you have the petrol will "dry up"" ==Petrol comes from ancient animal or plant sources. It isn't something that is being produced continuously. "The copy and paste is noted. Peace out, Homie." ==Of course I am going to copy and paste. I am not going to make up ifo out of thin air.
1
@couch4330 “I did not say it was in the same place, I said the opposite - from 70 million years ago, Canada crashed together at the Rockies and moved west as I said.” ==I already listed what the position was of north america and europe and that is something that effects the ecology. So, when you ask “How hot was it when the Albertosaurus, found in Alberta, which moved laterally west and not north, lived in a tropical climate?” I wouldn’t know but I think your point is to not care about the environment. The question I have is why don’t you care? “Plants or animals? Genius. Crude is hypothesized to come from marine zooplankton and plants produce coal, but it is a hypothesis, and not tested as we cannot produce millions of years of collected organisms under high pressure. It is arguable.” ==Petrol clearly comes from an animal or plant source. It is called a scientific educated guess. There is no need to produce the same conditions and wait millions of years. For coal, it is clear that it comes from ancient plants since their pattern is visible in the coal. “You copy any paste without knowing what you're pasting. Meaning, it's useless.” ==How do you know I don’t know the meaning? Maybe you are just frustrated by the facts that scientists provide and you aren’t getting it your way.
1
@couch4330 “I did not say it was in the same place, I said the opposite - from 70 million years ago, Canada crashed together at the Rockies and moved west as I said.” ==I already listed what the position was of north america and europe and that is something that effects the ecology. So, when you ask “How hot was it when the Albertosaurus, found in Alberta, which moved laterally west and not north, lived in a tropical climate?” I wouldn’t know but I think your point is to not care about the environment. The question I have is why don’t you care? “Plants or animals? Genius. Crude is hypothesized to come from marine zooplankton and plants produce coal, but it is a hypothesis, and not tested as we cannot produce millions of years of collected organisms under high pressure. It is arguable.” ==Petrol clearly comes from an animal or plant source. It is called a scientific educated guess. There is no need to produce the same conditions and wait millions of years. For coal, it is clear that it comes from ancient plants since their pattern is visible in the coal. “You copy any paste without knowing what you're pasting. Meaning, it's useless.” ==How do you know I don’t know the meaning? Maybe you are just frustrated by the facts that scientists provide and you aren’t getting it your way.
1
@couch4330 “I did not say it was in the same place, I said the opposite - from 70 million years ago, Canada crashed together at the Rockies and moved west as I said.” ==I already listed what the position was of north america and europe and that is something that effects the ecology. So, when you ask “How hot was it when the Albertosaurus, found in Alberta, which moved laterally west and not north, lived in a tropical climate?” //Edit: splitting the comment.
1
@couch4330 I wouldn’t know but I think your point is to not care about the environment. The question I have is why don’t you care? “Plants or animals? Genius. Crude is hypothesized to come from marine zooplankton and plants produce coal, but it is a hypothesis, and not tested as we cannot produce millions of years of collected organisms under high pressure. It is arguable.” ==Petrol clearly comes from an animal or plant source. It is called a scientific educated guess. There is no need to produce the same conditions and wait millions of years. For coal, it is clear that it comes from ancient plants since their pattern is visible in the coal. “You copy any paste without knowing what you're pasting. Meaning, it's useless.” ==How do you know I don’t know the meaning? Maybe you are just frustrated by the facts that scientists provide and you aren’t getting it your way.
1
@couch4330 LOL. And somehow, you ended up ignoring data and you don't know about plate tectonic theory. Hello!
1
@couch4330 Are you afraid of discussing the facts given by the experts?
1
@couch4330 “This isn't a discussion, you are talking over me. I literally explained how North America crashed together by eastern NA moving west since 70 million years ago and was tropical at that time period, but you gave "going north" 150 million years ago when the dinosaur I have an example of was 70-65 million years ago.” ==I was giving a history as to how things have changed: the position of the plates have changed drastically over time, along with that weather patterns changed, the ecology changes. You mentioned the canadian rockies and that is fine. I think the point that you are making, which is a point that I have heard before is that changes in nature happen, therefore, it is ok to cause change by continuing to burn fossil fuel, it is ok to increase the level of CO2, it is ok to cut down forest, etc. Pointing to past changes and claiming it is ok to ignore the changes that humans are doing to nature is irresponsible. I’m sure your parents and your scientific teams is proud of you as well. Luckily, the majority of the people don’t listen to the stories you have about don’t worry, just protect the economy.
1
@lcg5790 What's a online shopping box?
1
@lcg5790 What is an online shopping box?
1
Why do you think that the information is false?
1