Confess your Climate Sins

Whenever it is necessary and submarines can traverse it with ease.

What percentage of the world’s population are submariners? What percentage of the world’s population have sailed in the roaring forties?

Completely irrelevant. Just as Samm said, we can thrive in any environment we choose to occupy from the roaring 40’s to the poles to everywhere in between on land or sea.

People actually live and thrive in the Roaring 40’s constantly in Argentina, Chile, Tasmania, and New Zealand.

The claim was not that we could; the claim is that we have. The claim is demonstrably untrue.

Humans can and do live and thrive in the roaring forties just as I’ve demonstrated.

You claim fails completely in the face of fact.

Quite simply you have shown that you do not know what the original claim was. That is clearly demonstrated when you cited Tassie, New Zealand and other countries to support the claim.

Need I post the definition of the “roaring 40’s” for you? It is the region of the southern hemisphere between 40-50 degrees latitude and the strong west to east wind currents that keep it “roaring”.

Millions of people live on boats that never leave the seas and oceans and millions more live and work in them every day.

If you headed due west from the most southerly tip of Tasmania what land mass will you reach?

As often as they choose.

It is truly remarkable the lengths, or should that be depths, that some poster have gone to attempt to rationalise the original claim. It was demonstrably wrong then and it continues to be demonstrably wrong now.

You haven’t demonstrated anything. Humans are everywhere on this planet.

To continue to make the nonsense claim “Humans are everywhere on this planet.” is bizarre to say the least.

It’s true. Just because there are places where no humans live, does not mean they cannot or do not go there whenever they choose to. Just because there is nobody living in your backyard does not mean it’s not part of man’s customary domain.

What point are you trying to make by disagreeing with this fundamental truism?

Get back to me when you realise what is the correct tense in the context of the original claim.

That’s your obsession, not mine. What I said was correct and I’m good with leaving it at that.

It is not an obsession to speak to the original claim. That you would want to resile from the original claim is perfectly understandable given how ridiculous the original claim was (see below - I have highlighted the claim):

SammFlyover Country
Oct 5


Exactly. And we are so enamored with our own success. Due to our big brains. How do you define biological success. By biomass, or the ability to extinct ourselves.

Well, considering that we humans now occupy and thrive on the vast majority of the planet and continue do defy all dire predictions of procreating ourselves out of a place at the dinner table, I’d say that qualifies for biological success and the fact that despite having developed the ability to extinct ourselves, we have not shows intellectual success as well.

Why do you hate people? Would you rather be a ■■■■■■■■■■

Argentina or Chile.

If you continue west long enough you’d eventually hit the Southern Island of New Zealand.

If it was a geometric proof one could add QED to the bottom. Suffice for me to say that the original claim is patent nonsense and demonstrably untrue.

Nope. You haven’t disproved anything. It is100% true. Humans are everywhere and anywhere they choose to be on this planet.