Installation of a gas heating system in new construction 2023/2024

Nice that you can measure that it’s getting warmer. But that still doesn’t tell you why. Recently there was a report about the fall of the Romans. In a side note it said that it was 2 degrees warmer back then.

But that’s exactly the point: We know exactly why. Because first of all it is directly measurable itself. The energy retention caused by greenhouse gases can be measured with IR spectrometers. Since the 1970s also "from above" i.e. by satellite. Secondly there are such things as the laws of thermodynamics: If I accumulate additional energy in a system like the Earth, that cannot lead to no warming. And this additional accumulation is measured. Thirdly we know for sure that CO2 is radiatively active at certain frequencies (measured) and furthermore was introduced by humans into the atmosphere since 280 ppm (measured and logically inevitable, after all we definitely burned hydrocarbons). What does this have to do with the Roman Warm Period in Europe? Nothing. (I make "measured" bold because for some reason many believe the effect of CO2 is the result of some models. No!)

Nice that you can measure that it is getting warmer. Still, you don't know why.

Recently there was a report about the downfall of the Romans. In a side note, it said that it was 2 degrees warmer back then.

There is so much discussion about that, that it was once warmer and that the temperature has always been changing.
The cartoonist xkcd once made a comic about this that is very insightful and puts everything into perspective. There you can look at the trend – and we know surprisingly much about it – over thousands of years.
The image grounds you and speaks volumes about the effect of industrialization on global warming.
It can be found under "Earth Temperature Timeline" by xkcd.

Ultimately, it is always difficult when laypeople discuss very complex relationships. Because sometimes physics does not follow "common" sense.

The best example of this is water, which expands again below 4°C instead of properly losing volume. If someone does not acknowledge this fact because their "common" sense tells them that water continues to lose volume, like most other substances do. What is there really left to discuss?

One hopefully learns about water in school. Climate is understood only after many years of study. That's just how it is.

You again with your water... We now understand that you know the anomaly of water. Do you actually read the posts you "respond to," or is it just about hearing from you again?

Regarding your post, the following should be said:

a) There were no federal states with and without. The controlled environments with mask mandates, schools, hospitals, nursing homes, existed nationwide. Quite real and simultaneously.

b) You don’t know what a “fact” is. The studies clearly state that the question to be investigated cannot be answered due to various factors. How do I know this? By reading studies instead of simply believing the pre-digested (social) media version.

c) There are studies that clearly show that masks under controlled conditions slow down the infection process. Controlled conditions were accordingly attempted to be established in the facilities mentioned in a). Is the success here methodically proven? No, because the test group is missing; it was done everywhere.

-> From a) - c) it logically follows that your statement “fact is…” is factually wrong. This fact is simply not known. That it could be so is not impossible but completely implausible. You claim nothing other than that it does not matter whether to wear a mask or not in a room with 30 people who are talking, laughing, etc., and about 0.5 m apart, regarding droplet infections.

If one hints at that and at the same time calls others “cranks”… in my opinion, one has already strongly fenced in one’s own thinking so that it leads nowhere at all.

A bit pompous, your post. I can go along with it to the extent that masks can dampen infections in the short term when used correctly. But the issue of the "benefit of the mask mandate" has definitely been disproven; the measure was useless like almost all others as well. It only swallowed hundreds of millions of euros when considering lockdowns, etc. All of this was sold as science, but it never was. It was autocracy and a test of how far one can go.

That now has a “distinctively bad taste” with climate change. I think politicians rather shot themselves in the foot with that, because trust is gone—both in the media, science, and politics.

Regarding scientific evidence for human-caused climate change and how we want to stop it in Germany through CO² neutrality. Even if we wanted to and emitted no CO² from human processes at all. It would not even remotely succeed but is completely pointless.

Even plants need CO² to survive on the one hand and also emit it. Do we now want to destroy all plants as well?

But let's take a closer look at the actual facts.

78% of our air consists of nitrogen
21% consists of oxygen
1% are noble gases like argon
The actual CO² content of our air is 0.04 percent!

So we are talking about 0.04 percent CO². Of this amount, 4 percent is human-made. So we are now talking about a share of human-made CO² emissions of 0.0016 percent. Germany's share of that is 1.76 percent.
Germany's share of the influence on global human-made CO² emissions is therefore 0.000028 percent. So I seriously wonder if that is still measurable at all.

Germany's CO² share can influence the climate by one thousandth of a degree. So if we abolish all heaters, all cars, all animals, all plants and all other CO² emissions, then at best we could prevent global warming by one thousandth of a degree.

What are they trying to tell us with that? However, what contributes to global warming are, for example, so-called chemtrails or also wind turbines. But this is being kept silent. There is already enough research on the effects of air traffic or also wind turbines.



That is not so woke and discussions about it are not desired. For me personally, however, it is more understandable. I live 5 km away from a large wind farm. 70 wind turbines have already caused my very own personal climate change here.