Great point

love this, good one

😂

I feel for you. I had a similar experience with Dr. John Campbell and the jab.

🤣 make sure we never think for ourselves

3x if we are being conservative

He is one of the people who presumed that his ability to speak means that he is capable of thinking.

He can remember talking points better than other leftists. That's it

Bro just doodling what is probably stick figures on his notepad makes this 10x funnier

I'll say he thinks he is smart. He is not.

Yeah, Peterson flailed and hollered against literal science.

It's like I feel like totally like literal😂

​@@jenniek8391what science? You mean the computer models which leave out the sun and the clouds? Did you even go to grade school?

@@jenniek8391 Yeah, that literal science that involves running climate simulations on a flat earth. That science that needs a CO2 "control knob" to get the results they want.

@@HomeCinemaJunkie which models would that be? lmao. there have been dozens of models and predictions over the years. they have come either true or things turned out even worse than predicted because the models were very conservative. maybe it's time you stop denying globally established science.

Yea, but leftists see energy use as sin.

oh buddy, it's for sure a sin tax. The government is punishing people for using energy because they believe it is "bad".

​@@Kyle-sr6jmit's related to the story of Genesis. Earth was a garden of Eden with a perfect climate always. Then you know who(str8 white male patriarchy).....

@@Kyle-sr6jmsource I made it up in my head

@@HouseParty13 the father of all man?

I'm on mobile and I can't see anything, is it on desktop?

@@yassinsuleiman655 Yes. It is the generic wikipedia note quoting UN about how climate change is real. They automatically slap these notes on any topic that the left politically disagrees with.

​@@yassinsuleiman655, I'm on mobile also. For me there is a context bubble telling me what climate change is and an external link.

I see it on my Samsung. A very progressive take offered by Google on climate change. Thanks Google

Similar to Covid "info"

Maybe you shouldn't base your opinion on corrupt elites but on.the scientific conseneus

@@samvandervelden8243 whoosh?

​@samvandervelden8243 like the scientific consensus paid for and feeding their families from the elites? When it gets a couple degrees warmer I'll take a shirt off. When it gets colder I'll put a jacket on. There is no model or algorithm accurate enough to predict the future climate. More CO2 will result in more plant life at the worst. There have always been natural disasters and always will be.

@@samvandervelden8243I will rely on the scientific consensus as they demonstrate by their behaviour.

@@samvandervelden8243his point is like it won’t make a difference if you pick up one leaf off of your lawn everyday if a big dump truck comes by and unloads a whole truck full of leaves on your lawn everyday. Your attempts will be futile. Another thing is the US only contributes 15% to CO2 emissions and China is almost double that. You need to start with the biggest monster before fixing the little monsters will make any bit of a difference. But besides, none of it really matters, there will always be pollution. The best thing for people is to develop economically, not try to solve “climate change”.

This guy literally is a walking Wikipedia..ask him to recite something that's his go to everytime😂😂

He’s too good looking.

@@cleanup8984 can you name a single thing he’s ever taken from Wikipedia? 🤣 people love to say this, but it isn’t true. You hear of something, type it in a search engine, look through the wiki to get an overview, and then go find sources and further information elsewhere on what’s summarized on. He has hundreds of hours of streams of him just reading sources. He’s reading a book out loud, reading a UN report, reading investigations, peer reviewed papers, interviews, so on and so forth… I’m curious as to whether the right wingers have anything other than memes. Trump brain rot at its finest, just make funny quips and destroy the world in the process.

he's bad but he's not THAT bad.

Not a bright young man, you should look into him. You will be very disappointed.

@@SkitzoBenjaminobjectively, regardless of your personal thoughts of him or ideology, he’s a bright guy. He’s better to be the front for the “left” vs the people debating until now. He’s no Michael Erik Dyson, who isn’t stupid either, but what communists called useful idiots.

😂😂😂😂

Needed that. Didn't deserve it, but needed it.

Hahahaha!!!

That meme will be be passed around more times than his wife...

You can always tell who not to trust if they think using black women as the butt of a joke is funny. Ugh.

Truly a productive and decent debate. Proud of both of these dudes!

Ya shame she is a little lost hey ( he is a female in spirit)

Destiny in trouble with the truth and completely over matched yet still impossible to listen too.

@@chuch541how can you be proud of someone who says Fed up things like “saving the poor isn’t worth it” and “abortion up until birth is okay”?

​​@@LowkeyHundo Talk about being dishonest and in bad faith. Destiny's point are: Not every poor is a good person who deserves help. Poverty itself is not a virtue, there is a lot of bad poor people. He is fine with abortion in the first 2 weeks. Very different from "until birth"

Not being ready for 100% renewable is not the same as "climate is not affected by humans"

You have been mislead. Sorry. All the east coast states are part of the grid. All states buy and sell based on how much they are currently producing and need. Blackouts would have been for another reason. Probably underfunding of transmission maintenance.

@@paulg6274theres no 100% renewables energy.

Just bc it didn’t work for you doesn’t mean that with funding and development it can’t be improved to work as intended right?

This couldn’t be further from the truth. Solar energy is SO productive that it creates a duck curve. This is a real problem as over generation causes severe strain on the grid.

Clear as day. If they wanted to really reduce CO2 they would plant forests, but instead they’re making us sniff our farts.

they know like everyone else the planet is over populated and they have no problem getting rid of a few million of the poorest people as long as the rich have their way

Control of Humanity.

The devil

Word!

Correct.

cry about it

@@yonaoismewhat will that accomplish?

Oh how exciting, that's exactly when we get our new hate crime bill here in Scotland, also not a joke 😑

​@@zororat heeey, twinsies! we also just got another one here in canada.

HEY!... it's actually 23%. And on the same day, the 338 MPs are getting a 4% pay raise. $8000-$12,000 a year for their $200,000 annual paycheques, and a hefty $16,000 increase for the prime minister.

Exactly and even then it’s a very small amount. The funniest thing is our climate has been relatively stable over the last century. It would be mega funny if we ran into another mini ice age

so you deny nasa's climate data?

@@MikeAIrightwell yeah. When nasa stop launching rockets and politicians and elites all over the world stop travelling in private jets and lower there carbon emissions then il start to believe

​@@MikeAIright what is the predictive power of this data?

@MikeAIright Appeal to authority. Wtf are you listening to nasa about climate? They build rockets, they are not the authority on climate..

@@MikeAIrightyes…the numbers are cooked…I’d like to point out, that we can’t tax our way to carbon zero.. people have to die before that’s a reality

For Show He is cocky as fuck to

You reveal their techniques and expose who they are.

Because UKposts is full of people that will merely repackage ideas that they have heard/read and present them to their audience, without spending any time whatsoever scrutinizing these ideas in the first place before presenting them. There's a difference between taking apart an idea and trying to understand it, versus regurgitating it and acting as if you understand it. The person that does the latter will typically be exposed when they are asked to defend the idea against someone who has actually spent time analyzing it.

you as a consumer may better decide wich opinion is more likely to you

Who are you talking about here?

Lol the last sentence of your comment really made me giggle.

You think your fellow scientist who work in climate research just pulled the conclusions about CO2 out of their ass looking at select few studies and missed the complete picture? Do you think they must take lectures from your on how the studies need to be repeatable and verifiable? Please help us with your experience 😂.

@@bratwurstmitbiryani You clearly are NOT a scientist by profession. The climate "debate" has been championed by politics just as the Covid response was. Unfortunately, most post-docs and university professors need grants in order to fund their studies. The winds of politics were clearly blowing one way, no decent. There were many scientists on the IPCC who had sound disagreement with the IPCC's statement yet were ignored. If you want a grant these days, lets say on the affect of stress on IL-2 in the immune response of children in a one parent household you MUST include the words "climate change", ie. the affect of stressAND climate change Il-2 in the immune response of children in a one parent household. Use the key words and you get funded! Finally and MOST importantly the conclusion that the 1995 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is widely believed to “prove” that climate change induced by humans has occurred. The original draft document did not say this. What happened was that the policymakers’ summary (which became the “take home message” for politicians) altered the conclusions of the scientists. This led Dr Frederick Seitz, former head of the United States National Academy of Sciences, to write, “In more than sixty years as a member of the American scientific community ... I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report.” Policymaking should be guided by proved fact, not speculation. Most members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change believe that current climate models do not accurately portray the atmosphere-ocean system. Measurements made by means of satellites show no global warming but a cooling of 0.13°C between 1979 and 1994. Furthermore, since the theory of global warming assumes maximum warming at the poles, why have average temperatures in the Arctic dropped by 0.88°C over the past 50 years?

The Little Ice Age(1300-1850) began ending around the time the Industrial Revolution began….which is ironically when we started graphing the climate in the modern era and pretending we aren’t in a natural warming cycle where we have zero idea how much is due to the Earth’s exiting the coldest 500+ years in AD history….and how much is due to farting cows.

“The Little Ice Age was a period of wide-spread cooling from around 1300 to around 1850 CE when average GLOBAL temperatures dropped by as much as 2°C (3.6°F), particularly in Europe and North America.”

I merely see a definition of The expression Climate change. Which is good because many people get confused about what separates environmental issues and Climate issues for example.

It’s just a link to Wikipedia chill out

You mean F the CIA

​@@Chris-ro7mnoh so mind control through propaganda

@@bobmyself8819 there is plenty of that but this aint it.

except they are going to charge us for the air we exhale!

​@@More_DreadThat's part of breathing.

@@ty194 probably extension of a family joke, hold our breath so you don't cause climate change. The typical mockery to the psychopaths forcing this down our throat.

What?? You are grossly exaggerating reality to fit your conspiratorial narrative. 🤦🏻‍♂️

@@Bonzeaux_Bleuxgrene its called: a joke!

Yes, over hundreds of thousands of years, not over 100 years! The effects of C02 on a system are verifyable through simple experiments

The climate scientists warning about climate change are the same that discovered the past warming and cooling. The fact that climate has changed in the past doesn't change the fact that we have changed the climate with our emission. People who has never smoked a cigarette can get lung cancer, that doesn't prove cigarettes are safe.

Suuuuuuuure

He's just a regurgitating tool of Leftist and MSM talking points. Just a dopey "replay" device.

Why do you believe that? Was there any argument where he was giving time to respond but didn't?

@@Wate watch his face and body language. He seems annoyed that Dr. Peterson is providing logical reasons to question his perspective.

@@Wate Just count the number of interruptions.

@@Wate Destiny's key contention about JBP's criticism of climate model validity was based on time-span, when he brought up the cancer argument, COMPLETELY missing the entire point that JBP was making that the lack of overview in time scale, since the life and heat cycles of a planet vastly outmeasures a person's. Destiny's analogy was EXACTLY demonstrating a lack of understanding about JBP's comparisons over the vast time of the planet's life.

Perfect.

😂😂 love this

He is at least sitting down. That is big

Why are you putting down the man? Atleast he's brave enough and respected enough to have a proper debate with Jordan, whom even pointed out he had very high verbal comprehension. Be more respectful.

Facts haha

dr "we have no idea where the carbon is from" peterson is not doing that, unfortunately. we know precisely where the carbon is from.

@@ShakeITyEAwho says carbon is the sole issue?

@@demun6065 not me, so what are you on about? carbon dioxide is not the sole issue, but it is the MOST PROMINENT greenhouse gas and the MAIN contributor to warming due to greenhouse effect.

​@@ShakeITyEA the earth is now 20% greener than in the 70s. The us attacked the nord stream pipeline releasing the most amount of methane ever recorded. All of it is lies.

Man argues that secret elites want to kill poor because like Hitler they have lost the plot. JP is deeply unserious man. Like lets compare: Hitler wanted to make Germany most powerfull contry in the world, but ended with Germany in ruins because his army was not strong enough. ????? wanted to ??????, but is about to fail because ??????, and now poor are dying. Truly masterfull analyss of the world.

This guy would destroy you in a debate. He’s extremely smart and a good debater. He may be supporting arguments that are not correct, but don’t dismiss his integrity or intelligence. He’s not an ideologue. He will end up on the right side one day and we will be glad he is

the old man screaming over vaccines doesn’t seem that equipped either, idk what happened to him I swear he was smart before that huge break

@@jebalitabb8228exactly. I agree with his positions but man, all he did here was cut off the other guy every 2 seconds like wtf it’s not even a debate at that point. I have a really hard time with Peterson even though I agree with most of his views

@@jakeh2049 because the guy speaks too fast and jumps from one point to the next before anyone is able to hold him responsable for what he just said.

@@Elias2293 okay but he doesn’t hold him responsible for anything so what’s the point in cutting him off? Just let him ramble surely he will look like a fool right

That's my favorite when it's unseasonably warm for a few weeks you hear people make those comments. I'm just thinking to my self I've heard that same comment every other year for my whole life. Maybe the seasons are always just different 🤔which is the absolute truth.

Why are arctic ice cover and glaciers in decline?

​@@emalek8290 the decline started 10,000-13,000 years ago. Must have been the oil industry

@@HouseParty13 Go look at the precipitous decline of arctic ice that has co-occured with carbon dioxide concentrations. It's not that hard to understand 🤣

Because it's all a scam. This climate hysteria is just that, hysteria.

Always trying to win instead of searching for the truth..

Because he can talk faster than 99% of people.

​@glennjohn3919 same argument tactic as Ben shapiro. Very annoying.

because he is considered a moderate liberal compared to the liberal whack-jobs out there

Thank you; someone who acknowledges the elephant in the room.

So 2025 gonna be a hot year then 🤔

Exactly! I wish I could thumbs up twice

Whatever happened to that ice bridge connecting Russia & Alaska? I guess the ancient inuits were driving too many sports cars and flying too many planes in 10 000 BCE.

Hhmmm, can you post some evidence for this as everywhere i look it does not show this at all?

This is a master class on Gell-Mann

You think Jordan saying that we can’t prove the carbon dioxide is from the Industrial Revolution is somehow winning then I doubt your ability to follow

Jordan did a terrible job, just interrupting and failing to grasp the points being made. Happens when you get too emotional to use reason 😂

@@emalek8290 Hey, commie. gotta try harder to not get detected.

Peterson can't even define what climate change is without producing a word salad.

Source for this?

​@@matthewdoran3448Burdern of proof dwells with the accuser.

@@chuckliquor3663that’s how burden of proof works, true, smart.

Yes, it will be much cheaper to relocate all our coastal cities and build large green houses for all of our farming, and to desalinate water instead of just getting it from rivers. Smart, genius.

​@@chrisdistant9040 Name one city that is underwater in the world that 40 years ago said the ice caps were melting and ocean rising.

God damn good fucking joke brother

😂😂😂

Yeah. Destiny’s notepad has the genius level thoughts on it and Peterson’s has the doodles on it. The reason is that Peterson is smart enough to remember everything destiny says without needing to take notes. And destiny needs to take notes of what Peterson says because he’s not used to hearing arguments that are way better than the greatest thought he’s ever had.

@@Philibuster92 I was gonna put something like that to, but never mind.

​@@Philibuster92😂😂😂😂

Agreed.

More views … More moolah 💰 JP is an unapologetic capitalist - his partnership with The Daily Wire speaks volumes on that 😂

@@angelozachos8777.. you may dislike capitalism, but it’s better than any other economic model, Poindexter

@@angelozachos8777Ya , so what .

​@@angelozachos8777 what should people be motivated by? Especially if he believes in what he is doing at the same time?

Externalities might seem like a big word but a lot of people know what that means and I can assure you destiny definitely does….did you?

Externalities are outside phenomena like CO2 that have an effect on a process, like climate. Other externalities that affect climate are the sun, the clouds, the ocean currents, El Nino/La Nina, even other planets and their graviational pulls can affect us. This is why a focus on CO2 is not just w false diversion, it is ignorant and profoundly unscientific.

@@bonnieberesford9800 says who? You know that everyone can see that you are just repeating Peterson verbatim as if it were your own opinion right?

you clearly didn't listen to the full debate

Climate change denial = Flat Earth, same IQ required to believe both

idk if he writes notes or just draws to calm down, i think i saw him draw shapes during the lex and shapiro podcast

@@CHIM3RA. maybe true but more a comment on his general disposition.. even arguing vehemently against left-wing liberal principles after purporting to be guided by compassion for the oppressed.

@ipredictariot6371 forgot to add that I agree 100% cause Destiny solely debates to "WIN" even though discussions like this aren't as simple a topic where one sides arguments claims victory. I'm with JP.

@@CHIM3RA. I didn’t answer your comment very well. Very good observations… yes, I recall JP saying something towards the end about the pitfalls of getting caught up in falsehoods. I think a sort of qualified reference to the conceded acknowledgment that he’s “sharp”.

Destiny bolsters his arguments after a debate, he does not generally change his mind or analyze his philosophy/principles for inconsistencies. When he debated Sean Fitzgerald, he didn't know the academic origins, development cycle, and current practice of Critical Race Theory, and still tried to debate about it with him, so he got his ass destroyed. In later videos, he specifically mentions these things when talking about Critical Race Theory, and tried to argue that they were at WORST a moral nullification because they could supply good things like perspective, etc. Completely invalidating that they are not critical thinking processes and focusing on their producing results that he agrees with.

You can tell who leads their life in the spirit of Truth. It is abundantly clear

@@1stdebunker absolutely, you can tell who has their feet on the ground and who doesn’t. Cool icon pfp btw.

@@legendman97 Thank You, it's Saint Ambrose of Milan. I pray to never bring disgrace to his image with my speech. Hope you're well, much Love ❤️

@@1stdebunker based St. Ambrose!

At least Destiny had the nads to show up. Plenty would instead just write some passive aggressive article making hollow digs at Peterson instead.

And the "context" is totally false, humanity is NOT the reason why the climate has changed (if it even has, it's very debatable). The climate has been very cold and also very warm throughout human history way way before the evil burning of fossil fuels/gas/whatever. People don't seem to realize just how little CO2 we actually have in our atmosphere.

Peterson is also a youtuber 😂😂

Very few people have (fully) original thoughts. Out of curiosity, have you ever seen Peterson produce an original thought? 🤔

Yeah, I was like, how about lets not assume that!😂😂

@@timliu6870 there is not some threshold at which a model is deemed accurate enough to make predictions off of. Just because you don't know or understand the model does not make it useful.

I mean, I agree it's impossible to model, but still worth noting binary scenarios for discussion purposes. But only for discussion. That's how we ended up with TARP... IF WE DONT BAIL OUT THE BANKS THE COUNTRY WILL DIEEEEEE

@@rolandheinze7182 Business was on the same side in the climate change debate and TARP. this time you're siding with big business.

@@william14able I agree. I'm saying that's a bullshit causal reason to make a decision like that, that if we don't it would be catastrophic without ever really knowing the counterfactual outcome, like destiny is claiming to

Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, it is plant food and in turn food for everything else too. It is naturally in the air and even now only in a trace amount of 400ppm or 0.04% It's worth noting that below 0.02% all plants die and all of us with them. The real issue is that now with carbon dioxide being labeled a pollutant then every single person on Earth is a small pollution factory. Well if your mandate is to reduce pollution the road to justifying, shall we say..."direct" population reduction become very much shorter than anyone wants to think.

@@WoWisdeadtome I never said CO2 was a pollutant.

The real danger is how much bisphenol A (BPA) there is. BPA has a direct relationship with lower male sperm count in all species, and complete infertility in some species (some sharks). There are no humans on planet earth that do not have a measurable quantity of BPA in their blood (even remote populations). We are more likely to go extinct from lack of kids then we are heat death.

@@WoWisdeadtome You can go way further than that, We can calculate how much forcing it is causing. It is not relevant even if we go to 800ppm.

publish a paper and let it be peer reviewed. apperantly you found the very obvious crux within the "climate narrative". if only more people had as clear an insight on the topic as you have damn we would already be living in a utopia.

So hilariously true.

Simply because he doesn't know about it, because he never bothered to learn anything beyond what the climate activists told him to believe, Destiny certainly cited their points like a well-trained parrot.

Can you disprove the greenhouse effect on Earth's atmosphere that industrialization had though?

@@theartfuldodger8609that’s not his burden. It’s now the climate change chasers who are burdened with proving their causative framework. His point is the seemingly common sense choice as the industrial age as a lower bound is naive and has a low confidence.

@@theartfuldodger8609 . . .that's a fallacy, as you can't prove any of the effects.

Climate change is science. Jordan Peterson hates science (and poor people)

thank you for that reminder - i knew there was something familiar with that knucklehead's behavior - i had 7 kids and now you know, how i know, that you know what you are talking about ( i just looked at your yewspewed tag -> ) and now i know that you were referring to my commentary style, when you gave yourself that tag name - i can give you an example ( this was a real life event - it is not fabrication ) : parent -> have you ever heard of blank blank or blah blah ? child -> i don't know - i just don' t know - i might have heard it while i was doing something else and i didn't know i heard it - so the answer is i don't know if i heard it before ... sounds like a case of GA DA FW syndrome - think of state name - judicial system official - first and last initials

Only morons think this, based on pre-existing prejudice and preconceived notions of someone.

Why is having cupcakes for dinner not reasonable?

destiny is to young. give him till he 40 then he will have some interesting takes.

It's data. Peterson is just a deranged, hysterical fool.

Depends what you mean by the mainstream. The current "mainstream" is western governments backed by the best universities in the world. Do you honestly think JP or anyone else is more intelligent than all of those educational and government systems? These guys do it day in, day out. Unlike JP who has an interest and 7 different business ventures ongoing as well as tour. Im inclined to trust 99% of western universities and the consensus of western governments over Jordan and yourself. Jordans talking points and arguments pick holes, which are accurate and need to be considered. But right now this is the best we have. And we have to do something otherwise as a race we're going to experience the mass starvation of billions of people.

@@chrisdrakes2332 do i think he's more intelligent? no. I think he brings up really obvious points that are completely overlooked by a person who was sold a narrative and will not sway from it. A strong narrative that seems to be defended, even though it makes no sense.

@@Michaelno You're basically saying that the mainstreams narrative makes no sense. So you do disagree with western governments and universities consensus? Brave.

@@chrisdrakes2332 are you being sarcastic? i cannot tell. but i'll say this. i dont care about being brave. only pointing out the obvious. if you want to buy what this man is selling, that's fine. I disagree, i also think he's a hypocrite, and his opinion is pretty garbage.

​@@chrisdrakes2332First off, appealing to authority is a terrible argument because authorities disagree and have infighting all the time. We wittnessed this not long ago with the pandemic. They literally silenced and shut down experts who stated things that were not part of the mainstream consensus...and then changed their position not to long after. JP has made more coherent arguments than any mainstream climate scientist or climate activist has ever said. That is why I believe him over others in this subject.

Averaged out, your day to day weather forecast is slightly better than flipping a coin. Besides, it's been declared by the 'experts' that meteorologists aren't 'experts'. Only theoretical physicists are experts on weather and climactic trends!

⁠ climatologist are no better at predicting future models. They said that the glaciers would be gone by the year 2000. But they are not. In 2013 Lake superior froze for the first time in decades. Just a few average days warmer doesn’t mean the world is coming to an end. I do not wish to debate nor to put anyone down. It’s just simple fact.

Excellent response. I totally agree with what you’re saying. To do those measurements there must be set parameters. And the accuracy of the outcome would depend on the set parameters. Weather is not like that. Weather is continually changing its parameters. One of the major shifts and weather throughout history has been caused by volcanic eruptions. Massive eruptions have actually plunged the temperatures into 18 months of winter like weather. This is happened twice in written history. Just a small release of volcanic ash and gases exceeded the amount of carbon that humans have produced in their entire existence. I totally concur with the fact that we do not have winters like we used to have when I was young. However, the changes that are proposed to be made to reduce carbon emissions are plunging people into poverty and food deprivation. I think certainly in the near future, we will find a fuel source that far exceeds oil in economic value and renewability. I think patience with vigorous research for new technology at this point, is the best option.

To be fair, as any climate "scientist" will tell you, climate is not the same as weather. If you compare it to the stock market, weather is like the daily reports where things go up and down, much more volatile in that scope, where climate would be the 10, 20, 30 year overall trend of the market, so it's not useful to equate the 2. Having said that, they are still wrong about their climate predictions because, unlike the markets where you are either going up or down, climate has many variables that are trending and they all influence each other. It's a FAR more complex problem.

@@ruan614 Absolutely correct. But also, your dice roll has parameters that can be measured. The options are 1-6. Trying to predict the chaotic nature of the climate future in 100 years is like setting the parameters at 1-b. We don't know what we don't know about the climate, we don't even know what we actually know. It's literally like trying to predict what a flowing river will look like 30 seconds from now down to the ripple; fluid dynamics. Cheers!

You don't like his stripper name? 🤣

It’s a horrible name but he is an absolute a hole

Its a girl name

@@lain5858it’s a dumb name.

What are his pronouns?😂😂 😂

good grief, why is that relevant whatsoever? the planet also never had a species that grew to dominate and completely reshape the planet within 100 years of industrialization.

We are the only intelligent life we know to exist that is capable of space travel. Whilst the human race may be insignificant in terms of cosmological timescales, we are still something to be cherished. The universe can exist for billions and billions of years but if there is nothing there to explore and appreciate it then that is a great shame.

@@revorocks123 what is ur point? lol. space travel is completely irrelevant if earth cant solve its political and otherwise problems. it should be absolutely lowest on our agenda.

@@revorocks123 what is ur point? we arent even capable of fixing our own world, let alone find and inhabit another one. space travel should be the absolute lowest priority for a world that is in flames.

Indeed. And many of us hope our children will make that tiny speck into a dot, while others want their hedonistic lifestyles to continue, damned the future generations.

100%

Its not an error. They are doing it on purpose. The weather stations are almost all poorly placed, and they adjust the well placed ones to be more like the poorly placed ones. Its deliberate. They have been caught repeatedly doctoring old data to make it fit their models better.

Brilliant! You should get into climate science and show them how to utterly embarrass yourself because you have no clue what you are talking about and they are experts.

pfft, good one@@chrisdistant9040

How about speaking to the point instead of relying on ad hominem attacks. Can you provide evidence that the statistical base has been sufficiently adjusted to account for urban growth and the the concomitant growth of heat islands that encompass the measurement points? @@chrisdistant9040

Exactly, he’s so annoying

destiny had immensely poor arguments and facts to present to this debate, but that does not mean Peterson is right about climate change (he is not)

@@ShakeITyEA tell us why instead of just saying he's wrong buddy. He made some damn good points and Destiny replied with a bunch of logical fallacies lol

@@semperick really, destiny did a poor job and I dont care about this debate. but as far as climate change goes, Peterson simply ignores a large swathe of evidence. both co2 in the atmosphere and temperatures have been linked and can be traced back millions of years. temperatures reach record highs regularly for the past few years, but prior to industrialization, all temperature records hint that we were in a cooling period. there is also a conflict of interest with an organisation he himself created - its sponsored by fossil fuel investors and saudis. LMAO. if you want to know anything, ask a specific question.

@@semperick to add, Peterson also refused to aknowledge the "hockey stick", because it is getting "sued" or whatever. purely nonsensical take, several different organisations have done nearly identical measurements that look like a hockey stick when graphed.

cool, except it is in direct contradiction with the the continous warming and heat records we see to this day, and the unexpected developments all aroudn the world such as unexpected record glacier melting.

Yes, just like after putting on a sweater, putting on more sweaters isn’t going to make you any warmer. 🤡

We measure CO2 in parts per million. But as you intelligently point out, anyone knows that numbers don’t get much higher than 0.0004

No, it hasn't

I am glad you support the trans movement and believe in transitioning.

@@themidgetsman I couldn’t care any less in either direction. It doesn’t affect me, other than the humor it provides.

petersons entire argument is based on a misunderstanding of science

@@MorganLewis-lz1eeI'm sorry, but this assertion is absurdity.

@@darthnocturnis3941 the assertion that a psychologist, who doesn't understand why we should assess climate impacts from the beginning of the industrial revolution and doesn't think carbon is worth measuring as an externality, shouldn't be listened to in regards to climate policy is absurdity?

@@MorganLewis-lz1eeAssuming someone who doesn't hold a title in a particular field is incapable of understanding is not only absurdity, but an arrogant logical fallacy.

@@MorganLewis-lz1ee Psychologists are TRAINED SCIENTISTS. What you learn in school is how to read academic papers, and the scientific methods of measurement and analysis. The use of science is in creating models of predictive capability. The better your model, the more you understand a study. Law of general relativity helps us predict the distances between ourselves and distant objects to such a high degree that we can map the patterns of solar eclipses and the precise path of the moon's shadow over a 5,000 year time-span, which corresponds EXACTLY with past historical events and writings that notated the phenomena. That's an accurate model. Not being able to predict the climate within ONE SINGLE YEAR, is a terrible model. We need stronger models of predictive capability before we can begin making the futures of every life on the planet dependent upon relying on them.

Canada produces, the last time I looked, 1.6% of global carbon emissions. However, with our Boreal forests and immense treed landscapes, we sequester carbon at 10 time the rate we produce it. So by that rate, the rest of the world should be paying us a carbon tax for all our country does....

@@rickdelve also if our government did everything they could it would have no impact.

But, yet Trud-o is increasing the carbon tax by 23% starting April 1 across Canada 🇨🇦. Yah, now! When Canadians are all facing increasing difficulties affording basic food and housing. Over 2,000,000 Canadians are using food banks every month now (our population is less than 40,000,000) and we are facing a major housing crisis. And Trud-o is increasing the tax on food, heating, and fuel... now! All under the guise of saving the planet. He's mind-blowingly stupid, inept and he's destroying Canada 😢

and we are 0.5% of the world's population.

@@zoravursingh5617we are being screwed by our leaders. We have so much resources but we are paying up the ass.

Funny that the temperatures last summer were "record highs" and yet I used my air conditioner less than I had in the last 15 years.

The other thing they do is conflate record high temps with the hot getting hotter rather than the cold getting milder as is really the case. That way they can get away with saying things like “hottest” January on record when it’s nothing of the sort

There is no such thing as an "average global temperature"...

@craighoward7716 I’m genuinely asking because I don’t know - how/in what way are they cherry picking high temps?

@@loringjohnson7797 Last year was one of our coolest on record, and the most moisture on record! Destertification use to be their scare tactic. f'in rubbish.

he didn't

@@william14ablehe did. Turn your brain on. He backed him into a corner at every turn. He tried to dodge questions by changing subjects or the focus and it didn’t work.

@@SammyFuqU referring back to your tautology isn't backing someone into a corner. lol. CO2 retains more heat. "How do you know? have you seen an atom? lol! I win." well. we can measure it. "But you can't measure it down to an acceptable level of precision!!!". Well. I mean, its close enough to make predictions on and model. "NO I don't agree that it's precise enough. We can't act on the models because they're based on imprecise measurements! See even you have to constantly update them when you get more measurements". Um. Okay? That is kind of how the scientific process works. I don't exactly know what you want. It's impossible to satisfy the constantly moving goal posts. "See! you're captured by the scientific cadre! You BELIEVE it to be true, which sounds an awful lot like a religiously held belief" Sounds good, but this isn't the sick burn you think it is.

No, he hysterically interrupted instead of listening calmly and giving thoughtful responses. Peterson is an emotional manchild who is probably experiencing brain damage from his benzo addiction and subsequent coma.

And yet while numbing his brain with benzos, he's still more educated, qualified, intelligent, and successful than you can be. Imagine thinking you know more than someone who not only has a doctorate in their field but also has done specific postdoc research into what you're talking about. LMAO @@jenniek8391

And so does the average temperature. And forest fires. And droughts.

@@zackr.7628 How? Explain.

@@zackr.7628 Forest fires are largely increasing in frequency due to misguided forest conservation efforts of the last 70 years.

​@@guttydozen Well ig we all studied Algebric mean in high school right, average temperature rise is similar a 1 or 2 degree rise in global average temperature means anomalies in local bio spheres, so some places might be facing crazy hot temperature and some on the other hands might be seeing sudden drop in temperature. Now u might ask why does it even matter, well for that understand if climate changes so rapidly all the existence process around food agriculture and bio diversity would undergo rapid changes that civilisation won't be about to adapt or evolve, hence might undergo complete extinction. Climate change is a common phenomenon for planets to undergo but with this much catalyst it would be hard to adapt accordingly. We can talk about nuances of it but ig Yt comments is not the place lol. Btw I don't understand why Peterson refuses to accept the major changes start happening after the industrialation like that's is so obvious plus backed up

@@gbear34 not true, forest fires dont happen spontainously in most cases. fire needs fuel, oxygen and a spark to ignite. so most forest fires get started by pyromaniacs (humans)

Jordan the hysterical manchild who cries every five minutes?

It’s good to have a debate like this. Make me realize how leftist is full of nonsense snd merely based on their tyrannical ideology, fake compassion for the poor, and decieved by money and power. Science is not on their back!

I find it weird, too. I guess getting enough traffic will get anyone a platform.

It’s mostly teenagers

@@PepsiFuture That just makes it worse.

well he's not a doctor

@@yonaoismehow stupid are you?

Are you calling Peterson's arguments flamboyant?

@@Wate Flamboyant nerd speak

@@bryanutility9609 yeah Peterson is kind of a nerd, but I respect it

In fact why does anyone even pay attention to "destiny" anyway?

Really? Because he didn’t go into anything much. He pretended the hockey stick is the only model ever made. It’s not. He pretended the hockey stick guy was taken to court by the statistician. He was not. The hockey stick guy took the statistician to court for defamation. And the hockey stick guy won. Information on climate is known. Some 140,000 years, in Europe, there was an icecap all the way to the Netherlands. Sea levels were some 120 meters below the current levels. Shortly after temperatures rose, then a new ice age started which lasted some 100,000 years. Then 18,000 a rapid change to the warmer times we live in now started. And now we see a new rise, which (most) scientists researching it, acclaim to human activity. Could be, could not be. However, I wouldn’t be surprised as we impact EVERYTHING else. We see our impact in the oceans, with plastic soup littering the depths we can’t even reach, we can cause earthquakes, increase the effects of hurricanes, soil depletion, hole in ozone layer (now recovered), erosion, soil pollution and we’ve even managed to leave our trash in outer space.

People seem to forget that carbon dioxide is the lifeblood of plants. The more carbon dioxide, the more plants, the more oxygen, rinse and repeat. It makes up less than almost every other element in the atmosphere and water is more of a greenhouse gas than it is.

@@gogeta667 You're 100% correct. Biologists were calling carbon-dioxide the "chemical compound of life" because of its role on the planet's eco-system. Before all of these nonsense began, anyway.

your interpretation is incorrect

@@gogeta667 You are just making a excuse for your conspiracy theory, yes carbion dioxide is good but not when it changes more than though tends of thousands of years within a few decades, this will kill a lot of live and human infrastrucutre that cant adjust

So to make the same argument Peterson did about climate we don’t really know what the sun did 80 or 160 years ago so even if you are correct I have no reason to believe you are or are not the same metrics apply. Just like goebers looking into telescopes at tiny dots try to tell you the temperature of systems suns it don’t care what the math says the variables are to numerous to count.

look around bozo

@@william14able am I supposed to be looking at you the bozo? Or what?

Cigarette use is dropping dramatically, what are you on? Lol

@@BradJohannsen does that mean that not a single person rver pays 27$ for smokes? What the fuck are you on?

@@TheShannaginz If cigarettes were 2 bucks a pack do you think more or less people would smoke? I think we can agree fewer people smoke the higher the price gets and less kids start smoking if it cost more. That does not mean every person will stop or never start but it does mean many will stop. Smoking used to be 32% of the population and it decreased to 11% in recent years. It is a mix of price and marketing changes.

Smart. Keep using your brain and morals and you'll save your spirit from this madness

Tell me you know nothing about renewable energy without telling me you know nothing about renewable energy.

Ha, precisely. And the dmage they do to the environment can be devastating. Lunacy

@@campland2880 please explain the devastating damage they do to the environment? Please be specific.

In South Africa, the government fails to produce enough electricity for the entire country. Thus everyone takes turns using it in a process called "Loadshedding". Obviously people aren't happy with this and thus many people have invested in their own power production, the favoured being solar due to our agreeable weather year round. Over the past few years solar grew to account for about 6.2 gigawatts of power. In summary. Renewable energy now powers the equivalent of several power stations and is pretty much the sole reason our grid hasn't completely collapsed. So in other words, solar CAN and DOES produce enough energy not only to pay for itself but to help keep an entire electrical grid online when only used on the residential level.