95% of Great Barrier Reef, norther section, bleached

Are you saying that reducing CO2 levels in our atmosphere won't reduce temperatures?
I'll say that. Yep reducing CO2 levels will not change temperatures but will kill plant life. I have the eighteen years of statistics of a pause proving temperatures are unaffected by an increase of CO2. So a decrease will not do anything either.

At present we are over 400 ppm of CO2 in the air. During the glacial periods we were as low as 180 ppm. During the interglacial, we were at 280 ppm. Now you are saying that were we able to reduce the present 400 ppm back to 280 ppm, that would kill all the plants? jc, you get increasingly stupid every day.

At 180 ppm we had very robust plant growth on this planet. Damn, your stupidity is mind boggling. Don't you ever research before posting?
 
@www.whatthefuck.com


We have 3 or 4 board members in here that are 100% certain that humans can control the environment!!:ack-1::ack-1::2up:

Did I miss a meeting or something? JC.....did you miss a memo? Billy..........wtf?.........where were you for this meeting?
No, that is a lie. We have a lot of board members that are 100% certain that humans are affecting the climate to some extent. That even includes Mr. Flacaltenn.
 
Are you saying that reducing CO2 levels in our atmosphere won't reduce temperatures?
I'll say that. Yep reducing CO2 levels will not change temperatures but will kill plant life. I have the eighteen years of statistics of a pause proving temperatures are unaffected by an increase of CO2. So a decrease will not do anything either.

At present we are over 400 ppm of CO2 in the air. During the glacial periods we were as low as 180 ppm. During the interglacial, we were at 280 ppm. Now you are saying that were we able to reduce the present 400 ppm back to 280 ppm, that would kill all the plants? jc, you get increasingly stupid every day.

At 180 ppm we had very robust plant growth on this planet. Damn, your stupidity is mind boggling. Don't you ever research before posting?

So why is it you still don't have even one repeatable experiment linking a 200ppm incease in CO2 to any discernable warming
 
@www.whatthefuck.com


We have 3 or 4 board members in here that are 100% certain that humans can control the environment!!:ack-1::ack-1::2up:

Did I miss a meeting or something? JC.....did you miss a memo? Billy..........wtf?.........where were you for this meeting?
never got the invite.
 
Are you saying that reducing CO2 levels in our atmosphere won't reduce temperatures?
I'll say that. Yep reducing CO2 levels will not change temperatures but will kill plant life. I have the eighteen years of statistics of a pause proving temperatures are unaffected by an increase of CO2. So a decrease will not do anything either.

At present we are over 400 ppm of CO2 in the air. During the glacial periods we were as low as 180 ppm. During the interglacial, we were at 280 ppm. Now you are saying that were we able to reduce the present 400 ppm back to 280 ppm, that would kill all the plants? jc, you get increasingly stupid every day.

At 180 ppm we had very robust plant growth on this planet. Damn, your stupidity is mind boggling. Don't you ever research before posting?
I wish you'd learn to read gene. Did I write all plant life or did you just exaggerate that cause you felt like it? Well you have to have 120 PPM to let plants start to grow, but the more PPM of CO2 we have, the faster and bigger those plants will grow. It's been TESTED!!!!!!! I am against any program to trim CO2 into the atmosphere until proof is procured to show the evilness that is 20 PPM CO2. Sorry gene. Seems your limitations of evidence will hamper your idea. too, too bad for a you.
 
Hey Jesus is coming soon so the world doesn't matter and whatever struggles the planet or its people face are irrelevant. Earthly matters are not that important and we should be prioritizing our eternity in the afterlife instead. Vote Republican. Fuck the Earth, if we hate the right things and don't care about the planet we'll be rewarded with eternal gifts. :thup:
yep. Flat Earfers think the would is here for their short-term gain
 

Nonlinearities in patterns of long-term ocean warming - Rugenstein - 2016 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library
Abstract

The ocean dominates the planetary heat budget and takes thousands of years to equilibrate to perturbed surface conditions, yet those long time scales are poorly understood. Here we analyze the ocean response over a range of forcing levels and time scales in a climate model of intermediate complexity and in the CMIP5 model suite. We show that on century to millennia time scales the response time scales, regions of anomalous ocean heat storage, and global thermal expansion depend nonlinearly on the forcing level and surface warming. As a consequence, it is problematic to deduce long-term from short-term heat uptake or scale the heat uptake patterns between scenarios. These results also question simple methods to estimate long-term sea level rise from surface temperatures, and the use of deep sea proxies to represent surface temperature changes in past climate.

So, it is a bit more complicated than we would like. Most things are. However, as we warm the oceans and atmosphere with the emissions of GHGs, the ocean will warm, and there will be consequences. We just do not know enough yet to put a time on those consequences. That is hardly good news. It is just as probable that things will happen sooner than we thought as it is that they will happen later.
 
Hey Jesus is coming soon so the world doesn't matter and whatever struggles the planet or its people face are irrelevant. Earthly matters are not that important and we should be prioritizing our eternity in the afterlife instead. Vote Republican. Fuck the Earth, if we hate the right things and don't care about the planet we'll be rewarded with eternal gifts. :thup:
yep. Flat Earfers think the would is here for their short-term gain
huh?

Funny two folks agreed with that. hahahaahahahahahaha, WTF did you mean?
 
Are you saying that reducing CO2 levels in our atmosphere won't reduce temperatures?
I'll say that. Yep reducing CO2 levels will not change temperatures but will kill plant life. I have the eighteen years of statistics of a pause proving temperatures are unaffected by an increase of CO2. So a decrease will not do anything either.

At present we are over 400 ppm of CO2 in the air. During the glacial periods we were as low as 180 ppm. During the interglacial, we were at 280 ppm. Now you are saying that were we able to reduce the present 400 ppm back to 280 ppm, that would kill all the plants? jc, you get increasingly stupid every day.

At 180 ppm we had very robust plant growth on this planet. Damn, your stupidity is mind boggling. Don't you ever research before posting?
I wish you'd learn to read gene. Did I write all plant life or did you just exaggerate that cause you felt like it? Well you have to have 120 PPM to let plants start to grow, but the more PPM of CO2 we have, the faster and bigger those plants will grow. It's been TESTED!!!!!!! I am against any program to trim CO2 into the atmosphere until proof is procured to show the evilness that is 20 PPM CO2. Sorry gene. Seems your limitations of evidence will hamper your idea. too, too bad for a you.

There is no problem with our evidence. The problem is that you've decided to reject it all and to lie about the evidence of which you're aware. You're forced to do that, apparently, because you can't handle the idea that you might be wrong.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top