Arctic Sea Ice

[Chris]

So you cannot deny that CO2 causes the earth to retain heat?

 

[KittenKoder]

Obviously you didn't even read the link.

This is how you stay ignorant, by not reading.

Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hmm ... so wiki is good if the link supports your hoax ... but when someone posted on that shows proof that it's a hoax you said wiki was garbage.

Well, you were more correct the second time, wiki is garbage, wikikrap isn't worth the paper to wipe my ass with. So ... what is the science you are basing this on, the real science and show your work. How do they know exactly how much CO2 we are putting into the atmosphere, easy question, why not just answer it?

 

[Sinatra]

So you cannot deny that CO2 causes the earth to retain heat?

Does it also make the earth retain water?

Or water to retain C02?

Or C02 to retain earth?


Hmmmm....

 

[Chris]

So you cannot deny that CO2 causes the earth to retain heat?

Does it also make the earth retain water?

Or water to retain C02?

Or C02 to retain earth?


Hmmmm....

I will take that as a "Yes."

 

[KittenKoder]

So you cannot deny that CO2 causes the earth to retain heat?

Does it also make the earth retain water?

Or water to retain C02?

Or C02 to retain earth?


Hmmmm....

One thing I am wondering ... what will the next big cause be once enough people wise up to this one?

 

[Sinatra]

So you cannot deny that CO2 causes the earth to retain heat?

Does it also make the earth retain water?

Or water to retain C02?

Or C02 to retain earth?


Hmmmm....

I will take that as a "Yes."

Will you?

Perhaps you should educate yourself before making up your mind?

Just a thought - or two...

CO2 Does Not Drive Glacial Cycles « Watts Up With That?

 

[Chris]

Obviously you didn't even read the link.

This is how you stay ignorant, by not reading.

Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hmm ... so wiki is good if the link supports your hoax ... but when someone posted on that shows proof that it's a hoax you said wiki was garbage.

Well, you were more correct the second time, wiki is garbage, wikikrap isn't worth the paper to wipe my ass with. So ... what is the science you are basing this on, the real science and show your work. How do they know exactly how much CO2 we are putting into the atmosphere, easy question, why not just answer it?

You did not read the link, this is how you stay ignorant.

 

[KittenKoder]

Nm

 

[Chris]

The Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) is an organization within the United States Department of Energy that has the primary responsibility for providing the US government and research community with global warming data and analysis as it pertains to energy issues. The CDIAC, and its subsidiary the World Data Center for Atmospheric Trace Gases, focus on obtaining, evaluating and distributing data related to climate change and greenhouse gas emissions.

The CDIAC was founded in 1982. Its present offices are located within the Environmental Sciences Division of Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_Dioxide_Information_Analysis_Center

 

[Sinatra]

Does it also make the earth retain water?

Or water to retain C02?

Or C02 to retain earth?


Hmmmm....

I will take that as a "Yes."

Will you?

Perhaps you should educate yourself before making up your mind?

Just a thought - or two...

CO2 Does Not Drive Glacial Cycles « Watts Up With That?

...

 

[KittenKoder]

Obviously you didn't even read the link.

This is how you stay ignorant, by not reading.

Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hmm ...

Well, you were more correct the second time, wiki is garbage, wikikrap isn't worth the paper to wipe my ass with. So ... what is the science you are basing this on, the real science and show your work. How do they know exactly how much CO2 we are putting into the atmosphere, easy question, why not just answer it?

You did not read the link, this is how you stay ignorant.

Um no, ignorance is actually believing a bullshit source like that for a second. Address what I stated: so wiki is good if the link supports your hoax ... but when someone posted on that shows proof that it's a hoax you said wiki was garbage.

 

[Sinatra]

Hmm ...

Well, you were more correct the second time, wiki is garbage, wikikrap isn't worth the paper to wipe my ass with. So ... what is the science you are basing this on, the real science and show your work. How do they know exactly how much CO2 we are putting into the atmosphere, easy question, why not just answer it?

You did not read the link, this is how you stay ignorant.

Um no, ignorance is actually believing a bullshit source like that for a second. Address what I stated: so wiki is good if the link supports your hoax ... but when someone posted on that shows proof that it's a hoax you said wiki was garbage.

They have you here Chris - you cannot pick and choose the viability of a source while deeming it unworthy when others who disagree with you use it - as that proves you unworthy of participating in the very arguement at hand.

 

[Chris]

Hmm ...

Well, you were more correct the second time, wiki is garbage, wikikrap isn't worth the paper to wipe my ass with. So ... what is the science you are basing this on, the real science and show your work. How do they know exactly how much CO2 we are putting into the atmosphere, easy question, why not just answer it?

You did not read the link, this is how you stay ignorant.

Um no, ignorance is actually believing a bullshit source like that for a second. Address what I stated: so wiki is good if the link supports your hoax ... but when someone posted on that shows proof that it's a hoax you said wiki was garbage.

I think you have me confused with someone else. I never said anything about wiki.

 

[Chris]

You did not read the link, this is how you stay ignorant.

Um no, ignorance is actually believing a bullshit source like that for a second. Address what I stated: so wiki is good if the link supports your hoax ... but when someone posted on that shows proof that it's a hoax you said wiki was garbage.

They have you here Chris - you cannot pick and choose the viability of a source while deeming it unworthy when others who disagree with you use it - as that proves you unworthy of participating in the very arguement at hand.

I never said anything about wiki. She is confused.

But again, changing the subject and personal attacks is all you have.

CO2 causes the earth to warm and we are producing billions of tons of it.

 

[KittenKoder]

You did not read the link, this is how you stay ignorant.

Um no, ignorance is actually believing a bullshit source like that for a second. Address what I stated: so wiki is good if the link supports your hoax ... but when someone posted on that shows proof that it's a hoax you said wiki was garbage.

I think you have me confused with someone else. I never said anything about wiki.

Um ... actually you have, won't bother with pointing it out exactly where but here, just as valid proof as wiki that wiki is crap:

GlobalWarmingHoaxBlog.com: Wikipedia Censors Global Warming Skeptics

 

[Chris]

No, I never said anything about wiki.

You have me confused with someone else.

 

[elvis]

Obviously you didn't even read the link.

This is how you stay ignorant, by not reading.

Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hmm ... so wiki is good if the link supports your hoax ... but when someone posted on that shows proof that it's a hoax you said wiki was garbage.

Well, you were more correct the second time, wiki is garbage, wikikrap isn't worth the paper to wipe my ass with. So ... what is the science you are basing this on, the real science and show your work. How do they know exactly how much CO2 we are putting into the atmosphere, easy question, why not just answer it?

You did not read the link, this is how you stay ignorant.

You tell em, Monica.

 

[Sinatra]

Um no, ignorance is actually believing a bullshit source like that for a second. Address what I stated: so wiki is good if the link supports your hoax ... but when someone posted on that shows proof that it's a hoax you said wiki was garbage.

I think you have me confused with someone else. I never said anything about wiki.

Um ... actually you have, won't bother with pointing it out exactly where but here, just as valid proof as wiki that wiki is crap:

GlobalWarmingHoaxBlog.com: Wikipedia Censors Global Warming Skeptics

That is game, set, and match on this one - Chris, you have played the part of fool in here yet again...

 

[raceright]

Listen Billions are no big deal anymore now the goverment deals in Trillions just ask Obama and gang. Noticed rocks in the head has not been posting must be looking thru his old albums.
Some people can't see the forest because the trees are in the way.

 

[Chris]

I think you have me confused with someone else. I never said anything about wiki.

Um ... actually you have, won't bother with pointing it out exactly where but here, just as valid proof as wiki that wiki is crap:

GlobalWarmingHoaxBlog.com: Wikipedia Censors Global Warming Skeptics

That is game, set, and match on this one - Chris, you have played the part of fool in here yet again...

You continue to change the subject.

CO2 causes the earth to retain heat.

You can't deny it.