Was Global Warming responsible for the many deaths in freezing-snow packed Buffalo?

Libhater said:
Where the Left seems to blame global warming on everything having to do with the deteriorating of America's landscape, our water supply and even the deaths of people caught up in extreme heat conditions (which are few in number), I'm curious as to whether this current deep freeze and deep snow conditions of late up and around the Buffalo N.Y. area that has caused dozens of deaths makes these lefties rethink their assertion that climate change or that global warming is and should be of major concern to we taxpayers going forward by allocating billions of dollars to their Green New Deal and any other illiterate claim that our world is going to end in less than ten years unless we immediately destroy all fossil fuels and wait around decades for some sort of windmill or electric means to save us from this travesty?

You might take note that more people across the world die from cold conditions then they die from warm or hot conditions. Just a fact Jack!


https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2015/05/20/cold-weather-deaths/27657269/
Click to expand...

I tend to appreciate curiosity, but yours is a spectacularly stupid question asked out of astounding ignorance.
 
Libhater said:
What's there to understand? It's either warm-hot or cool-cold. End of story. See how easy that was to understand climate change. Are you one that believes this horrific change in climate will lead to the end of life on earth within some 10 years or so? Or perhaps you think that we still have a chance of life if we get John Kerry to stop flying those polluting jets around the world.
Click to expand...

If you haven't noticed global climate change (not warming), then it's because you're in denial. Science is not political. You need to put more value in education than owning the libs.
 
anonymoose said:
And this is the reason you want to eliminate petroleum based energy ?
Click to expand...

Petroleum based energy needs to be eliminated because 1.) it pollutes the environment and 2.) it's non-renewable. How long are stupid humans going to continue racing us all toward a brick wall at 700 miles an hour?
 
Climate Change Brings an Explosion of Bomb Cyclones
The Process of Bombogenesis
https://medium.com/earthsphere/climate-change-brings-an-explosion-of-bomb-cyclones-5c7fcf1eff42


The Buffalo storm exploded into a meteorological bomb. Here’s why.
A convergence of unusual conditions caused the bomb cyclone to wallop Buffalo with deadly force

imrs.php


https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2022/12/28/buffalo-blizzard-bomb-cyclone/
 
Diesel said:
If you haven't noticed global climate change (not warming), then it's because you're in denial. Science is not political. You need to put more value in education than owning the libs.
Click to expand...

So you're admitting or just suggesting that the leftist narrative that the world will end in some 10 years or so isn't or won't necessarily be from global warming per say, rather, it will be reallocated to firmly believing that it will end due to climate change instead. Its as if the lefties never used the term global warming when spouting their belief that that was the single cause of our planet's ultimate demise. So now you or they are saying or suggesting that perhaps global cooling could also be a major factor in our total demise? I hear from the Left the term global warming, much more than I hear the term climate change when listening to leftists fear monger over the demise of our planet.
 
anonymoose said:
I have. No study exists that Freak Abnormal extreme cold weather conditions t a direct result of Global Warming much less AGW.
Click to expand...

Weak Excuse.

While a small but vocal minority of people might use the faulty logic of, "it's cold where I am, therefore global warming isn't real," even schoolchildren know that weather isn't climate. But these extreme cold snaps have gotten more severe in recent years, due to a combination of global warming and a phenomenon you've likely heard of: the polar vortex. Here's the science of how it works, and why global warming is paradoxically playing a major role in today's record-low temperatures.

GRAPHIC-Polar-Vortex-infographic-NOAA-800x575.jpg


Read the whole report here...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...-temperatures-across-the-usa/?sh=7640d5aed8cf

No reason you should go through life being ignorant!
 
Last edited:
Diesel said:
Petroleum based energy needs to be eliminated because 1.) it pollutes the environment and 2.) it's non-renewable. How long are stupid humans going to continue racing us all toward a brick wall at 700 miles an hour?
Click to expand...

The lube you use to take it up your ass faggot is petroleum based. How about we start with thing like that first?
 
Geeko Sportivo said:
Weak Excuse.

While a small but vocal minority of people might use the faulty logic of, "it's cold where I am, therefore global warming isn't real," even schoolchildren know that weather isn't climate. But these extreme cold snaps have gotten more severe in recent years, due to a combination of global warming and a phenomenon you've likely heard of: the polar vortex. Here's the science of how it works, and why global warming is paradoxically playing a major role in today's record-low temperatures.

GRAPHIC-Polar-Vortex-infographic-NOAA-800x575.jpg


Read the whole report here...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...-temperatures-across-the-usa/?sh=7640d5aed8cf

No reason you should go through life being ignorant!
Click to expand...
You posted the hypothesis from a nonscientific publication. I already stated I understand the hypothesis.
The problem with the hypothesis is that increase in energy cannot be created from a lesser energy source in violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics and Stefan-Boltzman.

Forbes is not a scientific publication.
You did not post a scientific study with the conclusion that AGW has caused any variance of weather patterns, much less climate change (there is none in the last 500 years at least).
 
Diesel said:
Petroleum based energy needs to be eliminated because 1.) it pollutes the environment and 2.) it's non-renewable. How long are stupid humans going to continue racing us all toward a brick wall at 700 miles an hour?
Click to expand...
It does not *need* to be eliminated in the next 12 years or we all die. That's BS and you know it. Eventually, yes.
 
anonymoose said:
You posted the hypothesis from a nonscientific publication. I already stated I understand the hypothesis.
The problem with the hypothesis is that increase in energy cannot be created from a lesser energy source in violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics and Stefan-Boltzman.

Forbes is not a scientific publication.
You did not post a scientific study with the conclusion that AGW has caused any variance of weather patterns, much less climate change (there is none in the last 500 years at least).
Click to expand...

You Said- The problem with the hypothesis is that increase in energy cannot be created from a lesser energy source in violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics and Stefan-Boltzman? BLA! BLA! BLA! WHAT IN THE FUCKING FUCK?

First of all, who in the fuck told you that Global Warming violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics?

No You Sir! You Show us a report from a reputable Scientific publication that says the idea of Global Warming violates the 2nd Law Of Thermodynamics!

Don't ask me to do what you didn't do in the first fucking place

We see what the problem is here- YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCKING FUCK YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!

Go ahead and take a minute, and tell us everything you know about the 2nd law of thermodynamics!

Take two minutes if you need the extra time! :laugh:
 
Last edited:
Geeko Sportivo said:
First of all, who in the fuck told you that Global Warming violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics?
Click to expand...
Nobody. It doesn't. The misnomered Greenhouse Gas Effect most certainly does. That is the entire basis of the unproven, or more correctly disproven hypothesis of AGW.

Geeko Sportivo said:
No You Sir! You Show us a report from a reputable Scientific publication that says the idea of Global Warming violates the 2nd Law Of Thermodynamics!
Click to expand...
https://arxiv.org/abs/0707.1161
Geeko Sportivo said:
Don't ask me to do what you didn't do in the first fucking place
Click to expand...
Just did it. Your turn.
Geeko Sportivo said:
We see what the problem is here- YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCKING FUCK YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!
Click to expand...
PhD's in physical chemistry do.
Geeko Sportivo said:
Go ahead and take a minute, and tell us everything you know about the 2nd law of thermodynamics!

Take two minutes if you need the extra time! :laugh:
Click to expand...
Heat cannot move itself from a cooler body into a warmer one.
A heat transfer from a cooler body into a warmer one cannot happen without compensation.
A fictitious heat engine which works in this way is called a perpetuum mobile of the
second kind.
 
Libhater said:
So you're admitting or just suggesting that the leftist narrative that the world will end in some 10 years or so isn't or won't necessarily be from global warming per say, rather, it will be reallocated to firmly believing that it will end due to climate change instead. Its as if the lefties never used the term global warming when spouting their belief that that was the single cause of our planet's ultimate demise. So now you or they are saying or suggesting that perhaps global cooling could also be a major factor in our total demise? I hear from the Left the term global warming, much more than I hear the term climate change when listening to leftists fear monger over the demise of our planet.
Click to expand...

The problem is global warming, but you idiots don't know the difference between climate and weather and even brought snow into the US Capitol to show that it was cold somewhere. Science doesn't care about your opinions. Your astounding ignorance doesn't make a difference either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top