Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
Climate Change is discussed very controverse recently - especially in USA.
Now a most interesting confidential document from 1988 (no typo!) from Shell reveals that they had at that time a very clear view on how the oil industry is destroying the world. Even the global warming is described in detail.
But the company held it back for 30 years. And went on with business as usual.
This problem isn't really a concern for the president of U.S.A, however without going into politics, it's real and it's affecting all of us, but more importantly the environment and the animals.
Major contributions would be the pollution from cars, industrial manufacturing and so forth. Just changes in weather patterns in the last decade or so is enough to show that climate change is real. Business over non-direct long term side effects of conducting business. It's wrong, but I try to do my part by being as environmentally friendly, however 1 person trying to have a less carbon footprint is less than the impact these companies make on the environment.
However there are many who care now than before which is a step in the right direction, but we are far from reversing the effects we've created.
P.s. it shouldn't even be controversial at this point. It exists, but UFO's /ghosts are controversial and heresy. I don't believe in the latter but there are those who swear by it. (Photoshop, illusions ftw)
Scientists have found much more micro plastic than previously measured in arctic ice.
In one liter of ice they found more than 12000 parts. All this plastic is brought by the water stream into the arctic area where it is frozen and kept in ice until the ice is melting again going south. Cycle normally 11 years.
The world only has data on what? the past maybe 200 years of temperatures and ice mass in the south poll etc.? we know so little about the planets cycle of weather really but there are a bunch of people who say they know how today compares to the past billions of years and that now, more so than ever, even before recorded history, they know that earth is headed for green gas ruin. IDK, i'm not an expert but this question always bothers me.
That is not true. Using tree rings they have more data.
But anyway, the obvious answer to the title question is yes. When the last 5 years are the 5 warmest in the last few hundred years, then that is sufficient evidence.
The real question is though: Is climate change man made?
You see Republicans denying the first question they put themselves into the corner. They could acknowledge climate change without agreeing to its man made nature...
To prove that it is man made is much harder than proving the obvious change.,.,.
I think it is real! Of course, there are some sources that state the opposite and they have some convincing evidence to back that up, but it is a well-known fact that we need to stop polluting the environment, and think twice of the really important things- not only how to make money. No sources needed to back up that!
I think it's real but all we need are for two big volcanoes to go off at the same time to get a big dose of cooling due to the sun's rays being blocked from the ashes in the atmosphere.
Does the climate change constantly? The science and the history are clear, of course they do. What causes the change? Ah, that is the key to controversy.
The real problem right now is certain elements in the scientific community with certain political forces are denying an open debate and additional experiments. Very reminiscent of the Catholic's and Galileo. But this too will pass in the fullness of time.
The reason this is slowly fading away is if you are confident it is a single gas CO2 and that man made reasons are the reason for that gas to change then the complexity, time, money and effort to make a meaningful reduction is overwhelming.
