Burning coal cools the planet.

[Defiant1]

So let me see if I have this straight; before it gets warm it will get cool and before that it was warm after it was cool, and .....

It sounds like there is some kind of cycle going on here.

 

[konradv]

So let me see if I have this straight; before it gets warm it will get cool and before that it was warm after it was cool, and .....

It sounds like there is some kind of cycle going on here.

A man-made cycle! There isn't much coal burning going on in the natural world. That straight enough for you? We're talking AGW, NOT natural cycles.

 

[daveman]

So let me see if I have this straight; before it gets warm it will get cool and before that it was warm after it was cool, and .....

It sounds like there is some kind of cycle going on here.

A man-made cycle! There isn't much coal burning going on in the natural world. That straight enough for you? We're talking AGW, NOT natural cycles.

So climate was static before man starting burning stuff?

 

[chikenwing]

Jan 2012 -10 degrees somewhere,you ahve to heat your home,buy fuel oil at 4.00 bucks a gallon,set your thermostat at 65 so you can just afford the oil,or you spend 2/3 less,house is 70 easily,you just have to shovel some coal and ash everyday.

Coal= most likly union mined and transported money stays in USA

Oil= no explanation needed

 

[chikenwing]

-20 degrees is a reality that people have to deal with RIGHT NOW

 

[konradv]

So let me see if I have this straight; before it gets warm it will get cool and before that it was warm after it was cool, and .....

It sounds like there is some kind of cycle going on here.

A man-made cycle! There isn't much coal burning going on in the natural world. That straight enough for you? We're talking AGW, NOT natural cycles.

So climate was static before man starting burning stuff?

NO, changes weren't as rapid. Why do we have to keep telling you that over and over again? You don't seem to understand that you're talking about wide swings over 100s of thousands to millions of years vs. the ~200 since the advent of the IR that I'm talking about. Just because CO2 is the culprit now, doesn't mean it was the culprit then. You keep telling us that "warmers" are taking a simplistic tack in talking about CO2, then why do you pretend in your responses that it's the ONLY thing that matters? Rather than the "warmers" having tunnel vision, it's the skeptics. They only see things through the prism of their political biases and ignore everything else.

 

[daveman]

A man-made cycle! There isn't much coal burning going on in the natural world. That straight enough for you? We're talking AGW, NOT natural cycles.

So climate was static before man starting burning stuff?

NO, changes weren't as rapid. Why do we have to keep telling you that over and over again? You don't seem to understand that you're talking about wide swings over 100s of thousands to millions of years vs. the ~200 since the advent of the IR that I'm talking about. Just because CO2 is the culprit now, doesn't mean it was the culprit then. You keep telling us that "warmers" are taking a simplistic tack in talking about CO2, then why do you pretend in your responses that it's the ONLY thing that matters? Rather than the "warmers" having tunnel vision, it's the skeptics. They only see things through the prism of their political biases and ignore everything else.

Considering every single "solution" proposed to combat AGW is political in nature, I'd say it's not the skeptics seeing things through the prism of their political biases.

The climate has always changed. It will continue to change, always. Destroying the economies of the entire Western world while giving third world nations a free pass to continue polluting will change nothing, except make an awful lot of people starve and freeze to death.

Of course, that's the ultimate goal of the rabid Greenies. They thank you for being their useful idiot.

 

[RollingThunder]

So the environuts kinda shot themselves in the foot when they insisted on scrubbers, huh?

No, obviously not...........but if you're extremely stupid and completely clueless you might say that, as you so aptly demonstrate.

If I was extremely stupid and completely clueless I would believe in your cult.

But you are completely clueless and extremely stupid, Davedolt. You do believe in a cult. The cult of AGW denial that the fossil fuel industry propagandists ginned up to get you clueless rightwingnut retards to be their 'useful idiots' in their campaign to preserve the profit stream from oil and coal by delaying any effective restrictions on carbon emissions. You're a duped tool, serving the interests of ultra-rich greed-heads (like the Koch brothers and Richard Mellon Scaife) and the oil and coal corps, who pull your puppet strings and make you dance to their tune. You parrot braindead pseudo-science and lies about a subject you're incapable of actually understanding because you're such a ignorant retard. You're a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect in action.

 

[daveman]

No, obviously not...........but if you're extremely stupid and completely clueless you might say that, as you so aptly demonstrate.

If I was extremely stupid and completely clueless I would believe in your cult.

But you are completely clueless and extremely stupid, Davedolt. You do believe in a cult. The cult of AGW denial that the fossil fuel industry propagandists ginned up to get you clueless rightwingnut retards to be their 'useful idiots' in their campaign to preserve the profit stream from oil and coal by delaying any effective restrictions on carbon emissions. You're a duped tool, serving the interests of ultra-rich greed-heads (like the Koch brothers and Richard Mellon Scaife) and the oil and coal corps, who pull your puppet strings and make you dance to their tune. You parrot braindead pseudo-science and lies about a subject you're incapable of actually understanding because you're such a ignorant retard. You're a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect in action.

You've almost convinced me. I'm THIS close to registering Democrat and buying a Prius.

 

[RollingThunder]

If I was extremely stupid and completely clueless I would believe in your cult.

But you are completely clueless and extremely stupid, Davedolt. You do believe in a cult. The cult of AGW denial that the fossil fuel industry propagandists ginned up to get you clueless rightwingnut retards to be their 'useful idiots' in their campaign to preserve the profit stream from oil and coal by delaying any effective restrictions on carbon emissions. You're a duped tool, serving the interests of ultra-rich greed-heads (like the Koch brothers and Richard Mellon Scaife) and the oil and coal corps, who pull your puppet strings and make you dance to their tune. You parrot braindead pseudo-science and lies about a subject you're incapable of actually understanding because you're such a ignorant retard. You're a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect in action.

You've almost convinced me. I'm THIS close to registering Democrat and buying a Prius.

I'm afraid that in your case, Davedolt, those won't help. About the only thing that would help you would be for you to get a pre-frontal lobotomy. You wouldn't get any smarter, that's impossible, but it would shut you up and relieve the rest of us from the burden of your whining moronic rants.

 

[westwall]

But you are completely clueless and extremely stupid, Davedolt. You do believe in a cult. The cult of AGW denial that the fossil fuel industry propagandists ginned up to get you clueless rightwingnut retards to be their 'useful idiots' in their campaign to preserve the profit stream from oil and coal by delaying any effective restrictions on carbon emissions. You're a duped tool, serving the interests of ultra-rich greed-heads (like the Koch brothers and Richard Mellon Scaife) and the oil and coal corps, who pull your puppet strings and make you dance to their tune. You parrot braindead pseudo-science and lies about a subject you're incapable of actually understanding because you're such a ignorant retard. You're a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect in action.

You've almost convinced me. I'm THIS close to registering Democrat and buying a Prius.

I'm afraid that in your case, Davedolt, those won't help. About the only thing that would help you would be for you to get a pre-frontal lobotomy. You wouldn't get any smarter, that's impossible, but it would shut you up and relieve the rest of us from the burden of your whining moronic rants.

 

[RollingThunder]

You've almost convinced me. I'm THIS close to registering Democrat and buying a Prius.

I'm afraid that in your case, Davedolt, those won't help. About the only thing that would help you would be for you to get a pre-frontal lobotomy. You wouldn't get any smarter, that's impossible, but it would shut you up and relieve the rest of us from the burden of your whining moronic rants.

Ahhh....another of the walleyedretard's posts where he demonstrates his verbal 'brilliance'.

 

[percysunshine]

Now for a commercial break:

Polar bears eat baby seals.....what to do...

Back to our regular programming:

 

[code1211]

A man-made cycle! There isn't much coal burning going on in the natural world. That straight enough for you? We're talking AGW, NOT natural cycles.

So climate was static before man starting burning stuff?

NO, changes weren't as rapid. Why do we have to keep telling you that over and over again? You don't seem to understand that you're talking about wide swings over 100s of thousands to millions of years vs. the ~200 since the advent of the IR that I'm talking about. Just because CO2 is the culprit now, doesn't mean it was the culprit then. You keep telling us that "warmers" are taking a simplistic tack in talking about CO2, then why do you pretend in your responses that it's the ONLY thing that matters? Rather than the "warmers" having tunnel vision, it's the skeptics. They only see things through the prism of their political biases and ignore everything else.

And yet it has been warmer in the past when the CO2 was lower.

The warming rate of 0.4 degrees established between the year 0 and the year 1000 slowed to 0.3 degrees between the year 1000 and the year 2000.

Warming has happened pretty quickly on numerous occasions in the recent geological past. It has done so with no Anthropogenic aid.

In terms of the last 500 or so million years, this planet is currently comparitively cool.

Our current ability to measure temperature with instruments gives the illlusion that this has always been so. It has not. The Historic proxy record shaves off the peaks and valleys. Assuming there were no peaks or valleys is simply wrong.

Historically, temperature changes that are quick and short lived might be the norm. There is no real accurate way to tell.

The warming trend that we are currently enjoying ended the Little Ice Age and predates the Industrial Revolution. Arguing that the current warming is caused by Anthropogenic CO2 is arguing that the future can cause the past.

File:2000 Year Temperature Comparison.png - Global Warming Art

File:Ice Age Temperature Rev.png - Global Warming Art

File:Five Myr Climate Change Rev.png - Global Warming Art

File:Holocene Temperature Variations Rev.png - Global Warming Art

Filehanerozoic Climate Change Rev.png - Global Warming Art

 

[code1211]

If I was extremely stupid and completely clueless I would believe in your cult.

But you are completely clueless and extremely stupid, Davedolt. You do believe in a cult. The cult of AGW denial that the fossil fuel industry propagandists ginned up to get you clueless rightwingnut retards to be their 'useful idiots' in their campaign to preserve the profit stream from oil and coal by delaying any effective restrictions on carbon emissions. You're a duped tool, serving the interests of ultra-rich greed-heads (like the Koch brothers and Richard Mellon Scaife) and the oil and coal corps, who pull your puppet strings and make you dance to their tune. You parrot braindead pseudo-science and lies about a subject you're incapable of actually understanding because you're such a ignorant retard. You're a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect in action.

You've almost convinced me. I'm THIS close to registering Democrat and buying a Prius.

Why are you conversing with this bomb thrower?

 

[daveman]

But you are completely clueless and extremely stupid, Davedolt. You do believe in a cult. The cult of AGW denial that the fossil fuel industry propagandists ginned up to get you clueless rightwingnut retards to be their 'useful idiots' in their campaign to preserve the profit stream from oil and coal by delaying any effective restrictions on carbon emissions. You're a duped tool, serving the interests of ultra-rich greed-heads (like the Koch brothers and Richard Mellon Scaife) and the oil and coal corps, who pull your puppet strings and make you dance to their tune. You parrot braindead pseudo-science and lies about a subject you're incapable of actually understanding because you're such a ignorant retard. You're a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect in action.

You've almost convinced me. I'm THIS close to registering Democrat and buying a Prius.

I'm afraid that in your case, Davedolt, those won't help. About the only thing that would help you would be for you to get a pre-frontal lobotomy. You wouldn't get any smarter, that's impossible, but it would shut you up and relieve the rest of us from the burden of your whining moronic rants.

You're right. A lobotomy WOULD get me to agree with your opinions. Thanks!

 

[daveman]

But you are completely clueless and extremely stupid, Davedolt. You do believe in a cult. The cult of AGW denial that the fossil fuel industry propagandists ginned up to get you clueless rightwingnut retards to be their 'useful idiots' in their campaign to preserve the profit stream from oil and coal by delaying any effective restrictions on carbon emissions. You're a duped tool, serving the interests of ultra-rich greed-heads (like the Koch brothers and Richard Mellon Scaife) and the oil and coal corps, who pull your puppet strings and make you dance to their tune. You parrot braindead pseudo-science and lies about a subject you're incapable of actually understanding because you're such a ignorant retard. You're a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect in action.

You've almost convinced me. I'm THIS close to registering Democrat and buying a Prius.

Why are you conversing with this bomb thrower?

I'm not conversing with him. I'm making fun of him. He cooperates so beautifully.

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[RollingThunder]

So climate was static before man starting burning stuff?

NO, changes weren't as rapid. Why do we have to keep telling you that over and over again? You don't seem to understand that you're talking about wide swings over 100s of thousands to millions of years vs. the ~200 since the advent of the IR that I'm talking about. Just because CO2 is the culprit now, doesn't mean it was the culprit then. You keep telling us that "warmers" are taking a simplistic tack in talking about CO2, then why do you pretend in your responses that it's the ONLY thing that matters? Rather than the "warmers" having tunnel vision, it's the skeptics. They only see things through the prism of their political biases and ignore everything else.

And yet it has been warmer in the past when the CO2 was lower.
Warming has happened pretty quickly on numerous occasions in the recent geological past. It has done so with no Anthropogenic aid.
In terms of the last 500 or so million years, this planet is currently comparitively(sic) cool.

So what? Those factoids only seems significant to you, code4stupid, because you're so ignorant and don't understand the science. Climate scientists are well aware that there are a number of factors besides just CO2 that influence the Earth's climate. The thing is, scientists are clear that those other factors are not causing the current abrupt warming whereas there is some very strong evidence that it is the 40% increase in atmospheric CO2 levels that humans have caused that is driving the current abrupt warming and climate changes.

The warming rate of 0.4 degrees established between the year 0 and the year 1000 slowed to 0.3 degrees between the year 1000 and the year 2000.

That's a bunch of unsubstantiated crapola. Where's you pull that bit of nonsensical misinformation from, code4stupid? Your ass or some denier cult blog? I guess there's not much difference, anyway. It's pure shit either way.

Our current ability to measure temperature with instruments gives the illlusion(sic) that this has always been so.

Perhaps it "gives that illusion" to retards like you but scientists know quite well that the Earth's climate has varied enormously in the distant past (mostly that happened very, very slowly). So what if it has? Our human civilization and systems of agriculture have developed in a period of fairly stable climate over the last ten thousand years in which the world average temperatures only varied up and down by about .5 degrees C. The 40% increase (and still rising) in CO2 levels that we've caused is going to drive temperatures up to levels not seen in millions of years. Our agricultural bases, our human populations and our entire planetary ecosytem are going to suffer greatly from this abrupt warming.

Historically, temperature changes that are quick and short lived might be the norm. There is no real accurate way to tell.

Just more clueless bullshit based only on your own ignorance

The warming trend that we are currently enjoying ended the Little Ice Age and predates the Industrial Revolution.

Wrong. The Industrial Revolution started in the 18th century (1700 -1799) and the so-called Little Ice Age didn't end until the 19th century. There was no "warming trend" until after the start of the Industrial Revolution. Scientists think the planet would be in a cooling trend if it wasn't for AGW.

Little Ice Age
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Little Ice Age (LIA) was a period of cooling that occurred after the Medieval Warm Period (Medieval Climate Optimum).[1] While not a true ice age, the term was introduced into scientific literature by François E. Matthes in 1939.[2] It is conventionally defined as a period extending from the 16th to the 19th centuries,[3][4][5] though climatologists and historians working with local records no longer expect to agree on either the start or end dates of this period, which varied according to local conditions. NASA defines the term as a cold period between 1550 AD and 1850 AD and notes three particularly cold intervals: one beginning about 1650, another about 1770, and the last in 1850, each separated by intervals of slight warming.[6] The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) describes areas affected by the LIA:

Evidence from mountain glaciers does suggest increased glaciation in a number of widely spread regions outside Europe prior to the 20th century, including Alaska, New Zealand and Patagonia. However, the timing of maximum glacial advances in these regions differs considerably, suggesting that they may represent largely independent regional climate changes, not a globally-synchronous increased glaciation. Thus current evidence does not support globally synchronous periods of anomalous cold or warmth over this time frame, and the conventional terms of "Little Ice Age" and "Medieval Warm Period" appear to have limited utility in describing trends in hemispheric or global mean temperature changes in past centuries... [Viewed] hemispherically, the "Little Ice Age" can only be considered as a modest cooling of the Northern Hemisphere during this period of less than 1°C relative to late 20th century levels.[7]​

Industrial Revolution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Industrial Revolution was a period from the 18th to the 19th century where major changes in agriculture, manufacturing, mining, transportation, and technology had a profound effect on the socioeconomic and cultural conditions of the times. It began in the United Kingdom, then subsequently spread throughout Europe, North America, and eventually the world.

Arguing that the current warming is caused by Anthropogenic CO2 is arguing that the future can cause the past.

Your reasoning only makes sense to total retards like yourself. The LIA wasn't global and it didn't end until after the start of the Industrial Revolution.

File:2000 Year Temperature Comparison.png - Global Warming Art

File:Ice Age Temperature Rev.png - Global Warming Art

File:Five Myr Climate Change Rev.png - Global Warming Art

File:Holocene Temperature Variations Rev.png - Global Warming Art

Filehanerozoic Climate Change Rev.png - Global Warming Art

It is hilarious that you imagine that those graphs support your delusions.

Let's look at one of them and the text that accompanies the graph.

The main figure shows eight records of local temperature variability on multi-centennial scales throughout the course of the Holocene, and an average of these (thick dark line). The records are plotted with respect to the mid 20th century average temperatures, and the global average temperature in 2004 is indicated. The inset plot compares the most recent two millennium of the average to other high resolution reconstructions of this period.

At the far left of the main plot climate emerges from the last glacial period of the current ice age into the relative stability of the current interglacial. There is general scientific agreement that during the Holocene itself temperatures have been quite stable compared to the fluctuations during the preceding glacial period. The average curve above supports this belief. However, there is a slightly warmer period in the middle which might be identified with the proposed Holocene climatic optimum. The magnitude and nature of this warm event is disputed, and it may have been largely limited to summer months and/or high northern latitudes.


LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.........

 

[wirebender]

We need to stop burning coal, now!!! Make it illegal as hell like it once was. Oh, hell, while we're at it lets ban oil drillers and go back to the good old days when people didn't have all this crap destroying there life and families, and the communities where safe and people raise there children in peace. All this bs would be over.

The t.v is ruled over by idiots anyways feeding our minds with crap and making us think about buying there shit day and day out. We could do better without all this crap. We could rebuild the family structure and end the slide into the crappier.

When you think about it---why the fuck are we fighting this for? Old rocks is right in away.

Back to the good old days when you could die if you got a scratch from a rusty nail and life expectancy was 45 or 50. Thanks, but no thanks. There are places where you can retreat to that sort of life. They are called the third world and the people there can tell you all about what the "good old days" were like before we got "conveniences".