How can climate policy prevent wars.?

keepit wrote:
itn,
I don't see any answers in you responses. Just a lot of evasion.

keepit wrote: itn, I don't see any answers in you responses. Just a lot of evasion.

Jakob wrote:
­


I sense you guys don't want to learn anything from me, and maybe you actually know more about war weapon balance than I do, so I have a specific question for you about that:

To what degree can the existing defensive weapons help to prevent wars.?



­

keepit wrote:
itn,
I don't see any answers in you responses. Just a lot of evasion.

James_ wrote:

keepit wrote:
itn,
I don't see any answers in you responses. Just a lot of evasion.

Sir, I tried PM'ing you but I wasn't able to. I've been reading your posts and you sound quite interesting. Could you Telegram me please?

What ITN missed is that when animal fat is used for fuel, that is after it is processed. And when animal tissue is processed then it will become different long chain hydrocarbons which create different fuels or source(s) for fuels. This shows that biology and chemistry have a relationship.

Into the Night wrote:

Animal fat is not a hydrocarbon and is not processed into a hydrocarbon.
A hydrocarbon is not biology.

James_ wrote:


With the $2 Trillion the U.S. has spent on wars, improving infrastructure would've cost much less than that.

This in a sense shows that adapting to climate change is not a priority.

With emissions, NOx and SOx could help to speed up this current warm period. The ozone hole over Antarctica is an example.

believe_science wrote:
climate change causes people severely affected by adverse climate to move elsewhere. This obviously causes conflict with people already in the desired location. Conflict between large groups of people leads to war. Simple! (but very disruptive)

believe_science wrote:
climate change causes people severely affected by adverse climate to move elsewhere. This obviously causes conflict with people already in the desired location. Conflict between large groups of people leads to war. Simple! (but very disruptive)

RenaissanceMan wrote:

believe_science wrote:
climate change causes people severely affected by adverse climate to move elsewhere. This obviously causes conflict with people already in the desired location. Conflict between large groups of people leads to war. Simple! (but very disruptive)

"Adverse climate" does nothing of the sort. Studies show that conflicts are unrelated to the global warming/climate change scam. Moreover hurricanes and other disasters are also unrelated to the scam, as verified in Bjorn Lomborg's book, "False Alarm."

IBdaMann wrote:

The concept of a "global climate" is a religious term pertaining to the Climate Change religion.

believe_science wrote:
climate change causes people severely affected by adverse climate to move elsewhere. This obviously causes conflict with people already in the desired location. Conflict between large groups of people leads to war. Simple! (but very disruptive)

James_ wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Animal fat is not a hydrocarbon and is not processed into a hydrocarbon.
A hydrocarbon is not biology.

And yet even bears know which grasses have the most carbohydrates.
I'd say people can literally burn fat when exercising, even walking. Could
be why fat makes good insulation for most marine mammals. Otters don't
have much fat so they have to eat more to keep warm.
Some restaurants are now willing to save grease for people who use it as
a biofuel. Biodiesel might be the most common use with grease from food.

RenaissanceMan wrote:

James_ wrote:


With the $2 Trillion the U.S. has spent on wars, improving infrastructure would've cost much less than that.

Yes, we should have allowed Hitler to conquer the world. Then we would all be speaking German today instead of English. Brilliant idea.

This in a sense shows that adapting to climate change is not a priority.

Trillions of dollars already spent and trillions more to be spent. "Not a priority." California Leftists have banned gasoline powered cars after, what, 2030.
"Not a priority."
My city has banned gas stoves in new homes.
"Not a priority."

With emissions, NOx and SOx could help to speed up this current warm period. The ozone hole over Antarctica is an example.

Sulfur dioxide is ~15 parts per BILLION in the atmosphere. The dominant greenhoue gas is water vapor at ~15,000 parts per million. So water vapor is a million times the concentration in our atmosphere that sulfur dioxide is. The decomposition of flora and fauna is hastened by higher temperatures which takes many years to reach ocean depths that cover 70% of earth where there is considerable carbon dioxide in solution at exceedingly high pressures, meaning many more molecules. The average ocean depth of 4,000 feet with a pressure of 120 atmospheres x 14.7 pounds per square inch per atmosphere.

believe_science wrote:
climate change causes people severely affected by adverse climate to move elsewhere. This obviously causes conflict with people already in the desired location. Conflict between large groups of people leads to war. Simple! (but very disruptive)

sealover wrote:
Welcome to the forum.

I believe in science.

sealover wrote:
I am a published scientist with multiple advanced degrees.

sealover wrote:
I am very intrigued to see what you might bring to the discussion.

James_ wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

The concept of a "global climate" is a religious term pertaining to the Climate Change religion.

And I was just thinking if Odin had a sphincter Thor would be here on Earth.
There is a "global climate". It is what people live in, kind of why it's "global".
Have you been hanging out with that Swan again getting "Spawn'd"?

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

The concept of a "global climate" is a religious term pertaining to the Climate Change religion.

And I was just thinking if Odin had a sphincter Thor would be here on Earth.
There is a "global climate". It is what people live in, kind of why it's "global".
Have you been hanging out with that Swan again getting "Spawn'd"?

No such thing as a 'global climate' except as a religious artifact.
Earth has many climates. Climate cannot change.

keepit wrote: itn, No one is saying that a gas can create energy out of nothing.

James_ wrote:

I'm asking for a friend, can you define global? When you say "Earth has many climates" are you saying the Earth has many people because of its diversified landscape and climate?

keepit wrote:
Reagan and the "Star Wars" defense was nothing. I had a close friend who was a computer engineer on that project and he gave the straight ( but limited) scoop on it. Unfortunately he's gone now.

ibd,
I'm not implying it at all. You are mistakingly inferring it.

RenaissanceMan wrote:

James_ wrote:

I'm asking for a friend, can you define global? When you say "Earth has many climates" are you saying the Earth has many people because of its diversified landscape and climate?

"Global" = "earth".

He said "climate". You said "many people."

Stop conflating unconflatables.
There are many people in deserts, in snowy tundras, and in rainforests.

keepit wrote:
itn,
No one is saying that a gas can create energy out of nothing.

keepit wrote:
You're having "filaments" again.

keepit wrote:
And try not to get tangled up in semantics and definitions of climate change.

keepit wrote:
If a definition is an issue to you, give your own.

keepit wrote:
RQAA is never an acceptable answer.

keepit wrote:
Reagan and the "Star Wars" defense was nothing. I had a close friend who was a computer engineer on that project and he gave the straight ( but limited) scoop on it. Unfortunately he's gone now.

keepit wrote:
ibd,
I'm not implying it at all. You are mistakingly inferring it.

James_ wrote:


Does someone have a match? C'mon, someone has to have a match. We have
the Mother Of All Methane bombs (it's called MOAM to strike fear in the enemy) here just waiting to be lit.