You waxing ignorant doesn't mean I'm wrong :wavey:

That fat guy can jump. Must be me.

I think that your rejection of basic, well-established science took care of that.

Yes, the United States Air Force LITERALLY publishes a manual saying that they are trying to control the weather, but I'm a nut job for saying that they are trying to control the weather . . . which they confirmed . . . for over 20 years now . . .

Good job Sherlock and Dr. Watson. Hope you two didn't hurt yourself on that one.

Oh so you believe the OFFICIAL REPORT?

Simply closeted climate change denial, this conspiracy.

Man-made climate change and weather manipulation by governments and militaries are both real things. No one said that you can only have one or the other.

Definitely true! However, equating well-established science with unsubstantiated delusions is a little too...open minded for me.

Cool. I'm glad that you can differentiate which parts of the weather are caused by government / military manipulation [i.e. mankind] from the parts that are caused by people polluting the planet [i.e. mankind].

*wild accusations that save the planet*

https://media.giphy.com/media/ui1hpJSyBDWlG/giphy.gif

How do you tell the difference between an earth made by god and an earth that formed naturally over billions of years?

You'd have to ask froundland. He's the expert on everything.

Im asking you. How do you make that determination? Whats your thought process and justification? Your criteria for believing things to be true seems to be arbitrary a lot of times. There is a difference between finding something possible/reasonable and believing it to be true. I feel like sometimes you get those two things mixed up.

Well, whose to say that the two can't be one and the same? There can be a God that set in motion the formation of Earth.

It also depends on your definition of "God," I suppose.

Unless you have seen both the work of God and the work of billions of years of evolution by themselves, then how can you say which one was responsible for the creation of the Earth? Of course, this is just logical acrobats. It's hard to deny science, like half-lives of atoms, which say that the Earth is billions of years old, rather than thousands, like some religions posit.

We are also making the assumption that there is a God, no matter how you define the term.

Not sure what you were shooting for, but I hope this answer helps.

Nope. Not at all.

I mean I get it, but that doesnt make any sense.

Fire Captain: California Fires Caused By Directed Energy Weapons
 

A Fire Captain with 28 years of experience believes that California's fires were caused by directed energy weapons.

"It's not natural phenomena. I've never seen anything like it."



Well, fuck. How would you answer that question?

Does he have 28 years of experience with directed energy weapons?

Oh ****, I never knew that Wyatt Earp was a fire captain

Dry bushes + heat burn easily.

Nah. Must be DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS!!1!

Guys, I tracked down the source of the caustic energy

It was just Kurt Russell

https://media.giphy.com/media/wC9MBgJn44mha/200.gif

That's about what I expected LOL.

Aw, I made you laugh

^ Yeah, that does sound horrible OH. I live in an area very similar to Florida in terms of physical geography and have to tolerate mold, mosquitoes and humidity too. Luckily though, I am out of the typical hurricane path, so it's only about once a decade we get the kind of probs you describe. Still remember, though, what it's like trying to clean up after even the lightest flooding (= one inch of filthy water across the floor). Two days later, desperate to dry out furniture, I put some outside in the humid breeze, only to discover 5 mins later that it was getting rained on. Not the most dramatic of cases, but you def have my sympathy tolerating that literally moldy climate.



^ Sorry [MERIT], but I found this too long to watch, esp as he spends about 10 mins giving us a CV on his past experience, I suppose to try and give weight to his opinion, bolded above. But in a period of drastic climate change, that declaration is now becoming par for the course: in fact OH says the same, though to his credit he doesn't attribute the change to directed energy weapons.
__________________________________________________ ___________________

^ :laughing: Yes, I considered DnWthVwl's question for about a minute before realising that it was way too difficult for me and belonged more properly in a philosophy thread rather than here.

https://media.giphy.com/media/3rgXBx...b7VK/giphy.gif

Since we know what’s causing it with absolute certainty I decided to run with it.

I asked a firefighter with 29 years of experience and he said that extremely dry conditions creating more dead vegetation than usual, PG&E's unethical practices, poor forest management, and Santa Ana winds contributed to the explosiveness of the recent wildfires.

It also doesn't take a firefighter's knowledge of wildfires to know that they're not predictable.

Forest fires are notoriously hard to keep under control. But why go with the obvious when you can find a much more obtuse explanation for everything.

Maybe DEW insurance pays out more than brush fire insurance?

Which one? I asked a couple and your response had one.

I dunno. I'm too old for this shit.

In case you haven't been following it, The International Climate Change Conference in Poland has just concluded with almost 200 countries agreeing to advance the promise of good intent laid out in the Paris agreement. They now have a rulebook about how to measure and implement controls, but any optimism is tinged with a lot of caution: Is it gonna be too little too late?



Most ringing soundbite comes from sixteen-year-old Greta Thunberg, in her reprimand to world leaders:-

A desire and a willingness to work together is the only hope. Not just for curbing climate change and other disasters but surviving it all. Hopefully, soon it’ll be too costly from an isolationist standpoint not to be a part of the solution.

Australians are suffering a brutal post-Christmas heatwave, with temperatures in most parts of the country's southeast up to 14 degrees Celsius (24 degrees Fahrenheit) higher than the average for this time of year

damn...

Dude, Australian Christmas is in the summer. Gotta suck.

https://www.axios.com/polar-vortex-i...ffbe205b9.html

The polar vortex is about to split into 3 pieces

This is the type of **** that causes mega-blizzards to hurricane through densely populated areas and ****

Exciting!

Well that's just great.

"But then why do they call it global warming then lol"

How serious this is depends a lot on if it's weather or climate. One thing we can say for sure though: it's a clear sign of either a cold weekend in Canada or the end of civilization as we know it.

It’s caused by warm air. Scientists have to be careful not to draw premature conclusions but my redneck horse sense says this is obviously another frightening chapter in the global warming **** storm.

^ Yes, joking aside, it sounds pretty ominous. The destabilisation of these climatic systems is v alarming because any one of them could become a point of no return. After all, who amongst us can put a polar vortex back together again?

^ Another downside to this likely to be the optics: more people will notice the unusually cold weather than will understand that the cause of it is global warming. I can imagine Trump and other anti-science politicians once again tweeting about a global warming hoax when the first snow flurry hits Boston.

Yep

People believe what they want to believe.

I feel like we jumped out of an airplane and in order for the parachutes to open we all have pull the ripcords. Half of us are saying pull the ****ing cords and the other half are saying well I don’t think we’re going to hit the ground. You people are always talking about hitting the ground. We haven’t hit the ground yet.

You know how the joke goes. Once we’re ten feet from the ground they’ll say **** man I can jump from here.