Massachusetts braces for 'most extreme cold on earth' and whopping 12 inches of snow. DAMN you global warming!!

[edjr 6,952]

https://www.irishstar.com/news/us-news/massachusetts-braces-most-extreme-cold-36329203.amp

Colder-than-usual temperatures are set to sweep much of the United States over the next couple of weeks, bringing the first snowstorms of the year to some regions.

 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,945]

Supposed to get 7 on Tuesday.  So is your mom. 

[seafoam1 3,476]

52 minutes ago, edjr said:

https://www.irishstar.com/news/us-news/massachusetts-braces-most-extreme-cold-36329203.amp

Colder-than-usual temperatures are set to sweep much of the United States over the next couple of weeks, bringing the first snowstorms of the year to some regions.

 

Maybe you can find a job shoveling snow. I know it's been rough for you over the past 15 years trying to find work. 

[jerryskids 7,144]

72 and sunny here.   

[Maximum Overkill 2,553]

8 hours ago, jerryskids said:

72 and sunny here.   

Unusually cold here today, 60 degrees 

[edjr 6,952]

9 hours ago, jerryskids said:

72 and sunny here.   

great. let us know when its 120

[jerryskids 7,144]

2 hours ago, edjr said:

great. let us know when its 120

I'll post it from my pool.   

[Fnord 2,603]

It was actually kinda cool to have a bunch of snow over the weekend. First time in a very long time I can remember having snow on the ground over Thanksgiving weekend. Last time I remember that happening for sure was late 90s/early 00's. 

God willing, it means spring will be early and weather nice by early/mid April.

[edjr 6,952]

2 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I'll post it from my pool.   

I sure you are in it 24/7

[MDC 7,979]

2025 set to be 2nd or 3rd warmest year on record.

[Frozenbeernuts 2,410]

56 minutes ago, MDC said:

2025 set to be 2nd or 3rd warmest year on record.

So do the world a favor and stop using any energy. Imagine if every liberal put their money where their mouth was and stopped contributing to the issue.

[Frozenbeernuts 2,410]

Here is how the liberal baby brain thinks

Liberal: We are contributing to climate change with energy use. We need to cut down.

Common sense folk: OK then stop using energy.

Liberal: Not until you do. You go first. If you don't cut down then it's not fair, and my perception of fair matters most.

Common sense person: Why does it matter what I do? Why don't you do your best to help if it means that much to you?

Liberal: My feelings just got hurt. If we were in the UK I would have you arrested.

[MDC 7,979]

9 minutes ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

So do the world a favor and stop using any energy. Imagine if every liberal put their money where their mouth was and stopped contributing to the issue.

I didn’t ask anyone to stop using energy, Einstein. 

[Frozenbeernuts 2,410]

3 minutes ago, MDC said:

I didn’t ask anyone to stop using energy, Einstein. 

You are a liberal. You think we are contributing massively to the climate getting warmer. Same thing.

[MDC 7,979]

Just now, Frozenbeernuts said:

You are a liberal. You think we are contributing massively to the climate getting warmer. Same thing.

I am not sure I’d say “massively.” We are undoubtedly contributing to the climate getting warmer. 

Climate change stuff isn’t big on my list of issues because I know we’re not going to do anything about it.

I was commenting on the stupidity of suggesting climate change isn’t happening because it’s cold in December during one of the hottest years on record.

Understand now? 

[Frozenbeernuts 2,410]

Just now, MDC said:

I am not sure I’d say “massively.” We are undoubtedly contributing to the climate getting warmer. 

Climate change stuff isn’t big on my list of issues because I know we’re not going to do anything about it.

I was commenting on the stupidity of suggesting climate change isn’t happening because it’s cold in December during one of the hottest years on record.

Understand now? 

I know how your kind operates.

[MDC 7,979]

Just now, Frozenbeernuts said:

I know how your kind operates.

You think you know lots of stuff. 

[Frozenbeernuts 2,410]

18 minutes ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

Here is how the liberal baby brain thinks

Liberal: We are contributing to climate change with energy use. We need to cut down.

Common sense folk: OK then stop using energy.

Liberal: Not until you do. You go first. If you don't cut down then it's not fair, and my perception of fair matters most.

Common sense person: Why does it matter what I do? Why don't you do your best to help if it means that much to you?

Liberal: My feelings just got hurt. If we were in the UK I would have you arrested.

Liberals won't touch this one btw. They know this conversation flow chart is accurate.

[Frozenbeernuts 2,410]

Just now, MDC said:

You think you know lots of stuff. 

Because I do

[supermike80 2,107]

7 minutes ago, MDC said:

I am not sure I’d say “massively.” We are undoubtedly contributing to the climate getting warmer. 

Climate change stuff isn’t big on my list of issues because I know we’re not going to do anything about it.

I was commenting on the stupidity of suggesting climate change isn’t happening because it’s cold in December during one of the hottest years on record.

Understand now? 

I still struggle with this thinking-- That there is no other source for the warming of the Earth than us.  The earth that has gone through multiple climate changes in it's history.  We literally just emerged from an ice age 15,000 years ago.  Which means zip to humans who only live 80, but in the history of the Earth, 15K means jack squat.

I'm sure you will next show me how much the earth has warmed in the last 100 years or whatever, and correlate that directly to fossil fuel use.  Yeah, that certainly has merit, but is that the only possible reason?   I am just not convinced.

And to your point, there is no real need to get worked up about climate change.  We will never ever stop it, no matter what we do, so it is better to adapt to it and learn how to protect ourselves from it.

But I'm still not 100% in on it being only humans fault.

 

[Fnord 2,603]

7 minutes ago, MDC said:

You think you know lots of stuff. 

Perfect specimen for the Dunning-Kruger effect.

[MDC 7,979]

1 minute ago, supermike80 said:

I still struggle with this thinking-- That there is no other source for the warming of the Earth than us.  The earth that has gone through multiple climate changes in it's history.  We literally just emerged from an ice age 15,000 years ago.  Which means zip to humans who only live 80, but in the history of the Earth, 15K means jack squat.

I'm sure you will next show me how much the earth has warmed in the last 100 years or whatever, and correlate that directly to fossil fuel use.  Yeah, that certainly has merit, but is that the only possible reason?   I am just not convinced.

And to your point, there is no real need to get worked up about climate change.  We will never ever stop it, no matter what we do, so it is better to adapt to it and learn how to protect ourselves from it.

But I'm still not 100% in on it being only humans fault.

 

Reread my post. I said we are “contributing” to the climate getting warmer. That’s the total opposite of saying it’s only humans’ fault.

FFS  

[supermike80 2,107]

1 minute ago, MDC said:

Reread my post. I said we are “contributing” to the climate getting warmer. That’s the total opposite of saying it’s only humans’ fault.

FFS  

Ok.  I will edit.  It's possible we are not CONTRIBUTING to it at all.   Kind of the same point, but if you wanna wordsmith it, fine

[MDC 7,979]

Just now, supermike80 said:

Ok.  I will edit.  It's possible we are not CONTRIBUTING to it at all.   Kind of the same point, but if you wanna wordsmith it, fine

Sure I guess it’s possible that dumping CO2 into the atmosphere has no affect on climate at all and the entire scientific community is in cahoots because of research grants or something? But that seems pretty unlikely. 

[supermike80 2,107]

9 minutes ago, MDC said:

Sure I guess it’s possible that dumping CO2 into the atmosphere has no affect on climate at all and the entire scientific community is in cahoots because of research grants or something? But that seems pretty unlikely. 

Well, the problem with the scientific community you blindly follow is they are wrong..a lot.  They only know what they know and guess at a lot of the rest.   I'm not saying they are absolutely wrong, but just cause they are from the "scientific community" doesn't immediately make them 100% right about everything. 

We as a society have followed scientists through human history, only to find out later they were wrong.  

I'm more careful and somewhat skeptical of the scientists out there.   

[Fnord 2,603]

3 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Well, the problem with the scientific community you blindly follow is they are wrong..a lot.  They only know what they know and guess at a lot of the rest.   I'm not saying they are absolutely wrong, but just cause they are from the "scientific community" doesn't immediately make them 100% right about everything. 

We as a society have followed scientists through human history, only to find out later they were wrong.  

I'm more careful and somewhat skeptical of the scientists out there.   

While I agree with this, the alarming thing about MAGA in my observation is that many of them take this rationale and sprint to the opposite end of the spectrum with it. It quickly goes from "scientists aren't always right" to "scientists don't know anymore than any of us, they're FOS and can't be trusted!"

Then, of course, those prone to this line of thought turn to folks that cannot be trusted AT ALL, with ANYTHING, and declare their trust in them. People just believe what they wanna believe in many cases, facts and evidence be damned.

[supermike80 2,107]

3 minutes ago, Fnord said:

While I agree with this, the alarming thing about MAGA in my observation is that many of them take this rationale and sprint to the opposite end of the spectrum with it. It quickly goes from "scientists aren't always right" to "scientists don't know anymore than any of us, they're FOS and can't be trusted!"

Then, of course, those prone to this line of thought turn to folks that cannot be trusted AT ALL, with ANYTHING, and declare their trust in them. People just believe what they wanna believe in many cases, facts and evidence be damned.

Unfortunately we do live in a society where scientists have increased in their level of "can't be trusted."  Why? I don't know.  Is it politics? Money? Something else?  I can't be sure.   But there seems to be an increase in scientists with an agenda rather than being 100% factual.  And that sucks because it's hard to tell who is who anymore

[MDC 7,979]

15 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Well, the problem with the scientific community you blindly follow is they are wrong..a lot.  They only know what they know and guess at a lot of the rest.   I'm not saying they are absolutely wrong, but just cause they are from the "scientific community" doesn't immediately make them 100% right about everything. 

We as a society have followed scientists through human history, only to find out later they were wrong.  

I'm more careful and somewhat skeptical of the scientists out there.   

Well, we know that burning fossil fuels creates CO2, and we know that CO2 traps heat in the atmosphere. So, unless one of those two things is wrong, we are contributing to global warming. 

 

[supermike80 2,107]

2 minutes ago, MDC said:

Well, we know that burning fossil fuels creates CO2, and we know that CO2 traps heat in the atmosphere. So, unless one of those two things is wrong, we are contributing to global warming. 

 

See?  That's such a simplistic answer it's hard to even reply but I will.  What is the level of CO2 the Earth can safely absorb before climate change happens?  Are we there yet?  How do we know what it is?

What is the actual temperature of the Earth supposed to be?   We keep hearing about the rise in temps...and?  What's the temp supposed to be at?  Are we to assume it should stay the same FOREVER?  Even with evidence the Earth has gone through climate changes through history?

Big problem with the climate change alarmists are simple completely un thought out answers like you just gave me.  

 

[supermike80 2,107]

In my opinion, there hasn't been a single climate change--change--that actually would work.  With the exception of nuclear power...and we all know the argument about that one.

Electric Vehicles?  Stupid.   Especially with no nuclear power

Wind/Solar?  OK..But ineffective at providing the energy needed.

Paper straws?  No plastic bags....Well....

There is no chance--whatsoever....that humans will reduce their energy consumption--none.  Humans are selfish.  A functioning, growing society absolutely positively MUST have energy.  Cheap, efficient, and in abundance.  There is no other way possible.  Now, some climate "scientists" say that this is the point, "we" need to reduce our energy consumption.  But as mentioned earlier, they ain't doing it themselves.  They are still driving, eating meat, heating their homes....because they want the good things society offers.  This is who we are.

[MDC 7,979]

1 minute ago, supermike80 said:

See?  That's such a simplistic answer it's hard to even reply but I will.  What is the level of CO2 the Earth can safely absorb before climate change happens?  Are we there yet?  How do we know what it is?

What is the actual temperature of the Earth supposed to be?   We keep hearing about the rise in temps...and?  What's the temp supposed to be at?  Are we to assume it should stay the same FOREVER?  Even with evidence the Earth has gone through climate changes through history?

Big problem with the climate change alarmists are simple completely un thought out answers like you just gave me.  

 

No idea what the threshold for CO2 is or if there’s an ideal global temperature. Just saying, manmade emissions cause CO2 and CO2 traps heat in the atmosphere. This isn’t some wild new theory.

You’re welcome to think it’s all a coinkidink.  

At any rate, my point was every time we have a cold snap some moron says “Thanks global warming!” even when we’re in one of the hottest years on record.  

[Hardcore troubadour 15,945]

More Trees would help. 

[supermike80 2,107]

15 minutes ago, MDC said:

No idea what the threshold for CO2 is or if there’s an ideal global temperature. Just saying, manmade emissions cause CO2 and CO2 traps heat in the atmosphere. This isn’t some wild new theory.

You’re welcome to think it’s all a coinkidink.  

At any rate, my point was every time we have a cold snap some moron says “Thanks global warming!” even when we’re in one of the hottest years on record.  

That's akin to saying if you pee in the ocean, you raise the global water level.  It's a simplistic, and frankly, rather dumb thing to use with nothing to back it up.

[MDC 7,979]

1 minute ago, supermike80 said:

That's akin to saying if you pee in the ocean, you raise the global water level.  It's a simplistic, and frankly, rather dumb thing to use with nothing to back it up.

There are decades of research to back it up. We can measure the sharp rise in CO2 in our atmosphere. Satellites measure less heat escaping to space. This isn’t done newfangled concept. 

[Fnord 2,603]

51 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Unfortunately we do live in a society where scientists have increased in their level of "can't be trusted."  Why? I don't know.  Is it politics? Money? Something else?  I can't be sure.   But there seems to be an increase in scientists with an agenda rather than being 100% factual.  And that sucks because it's hard to tell who is who anymore

Maybe. I'm sure money and politics play their part, like in anything else. I think there's just more "noise" generally nowadays, and those with firm opinions running contrary to accepted science have larger bullhorns able to reach those with similar thoughts or questions.

IMO climate change is hastened by human activity, but not exclusively due to it. The main thrust of the "humans have nothing to do with it" opinions probably came from big oil, at least initially. Exxon and similar corporations have known about this longer than most climate scientists, and it's always been in their best interest to squash the idea that their products are even partially to blame.

[Grace Under Pressure 209]

Lotta dumb going on in here, but pretty much falls into two categories.

One, local weather at some Geek's house isn't the global climate.

Two, it's ok to admit you don't know anything about a topic. If you find yourself asking a lot of questions that you don't know the answers to, that's ok. There are actual experts. You don't have to know everything.

Where I think U.S. consumers should push back is that things like household recycling, or an individual's vehicle choice, ain't fixing global climate issues. That's just corporations and governments sticking it to the masses while they themselves fly private jets and own a dozen vehicles for their own families. GTFO with that BS. Al Gore is the example for this. Dude can fock all the way off. 

[frank 2,348]

 

[edjr 6,952]

Who uses more private jets. Liberals or Conservatives?

[Grace Under Pressure 209]

19 minutes ago, edjr said:

Who uses more private jets. Liberals or Conservatives?

Yes 

[Grace Under Pressure 209]

People are “this” close to understanding why Liberalz vs. MAGA! is the con by the wealthy class. 

What do you think the people who fly private jets want to happen, politically?

Another way to put it: How do you get 50% of the electorate to support what the wealthiest 0.1% want to achieve?

Be cognizant of who benefits now. It’s not the rally goers, or the No Kings protesters. We got hoodwinked by the wealthiest class lol. Great job.