Even if emissions stop, carbon dioxide could warm Earth for centuries

[flacaltenn]

You all missed the major point there. Cattle are primarily fed grass, not corn. The ethanol program has not driven cattle production to Brazil. McDonald's might have, but McDonald's is not the responsibility of American environmentalists, is it.

You didn't look up the search I gave you didya? Too many dots for you to connect. Too many gaps in what you think you know..

Corn has ALWAYS been a staple foodstock for US livestock. Ethanol mandates drove the prices of cattle feed sky high, making American beef much more expensive domestically and non-competitive as an export. Those 2 dots seem to be more than you can handle. Can't waste time on giving you the dots that connect THAT to rainforest beef and the rise of cattle futures in Brazil.. Too complicated for you evidently..

Just understand that MOST Americans DO get the dot picture. And the US govt mandates on ethanol as biofuel is DIRECTLY responsible for rainforest destruction in Brazil..

 

[Kosh]

Once again CO2 does not drive climate and it never has.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Once again CO2 does not drive climate and it never has.

Can you point me to a single scientist that believes this?

 

[westwall]

Once again CO2 does not drive climate and it never has.

Can you point me to a single scientist that believes this?

Yes, a whole host of geologists and atmospheric physicists. Burt Rutan is one, astronaut Walt Cunningham is another. Ask yourself why have the AGW fraudsters resorted to trying to reverse the way the null hypothesis is applied?

 

[orogenicman]

Once again CO2 does not drive climate and it never has.

Can you point me to a single scientist that believes this?

Yes, a whole host of geologists and atmospheric physicists. Burt Rutan is one, astronaut Walt Cunningham is another. Ask yourself why have the AGW fraudsters resorted to trying to reverse the way the null hypothesis is applied?

Neither of which are scientists, much less climate scientists. Next. Your "whole host" seems rather sparse, and well, not actually a host.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Even if emissions stop, carbon dioxide could warm Earth for centuries



Posted November 24, 2013; 01:00 p.m.

Even if carbon dioxide emissions came to a sudden halt, the carbon dioxide already in Earth's atmosphere could continue to warm our planet for hundreds of years, according to Princeton University-led research published in the journal Nature Climate Change. The study suggests that it might take a lot less carbon than previously thought to reach the global temperature scientists deem unsafe.

The researchers simulated an Earth on which, after 1,800 billion tons of carbon entered the atmosphere, all carbon dioxide emissions suddenly stopped. Scientists commonly use the scenario of emissions screeching to a stop to gauge the heat-trapping staying power of carbon dioxide. Within a millennium of this simulated shutoff, the carbon itself faded steadily with 40 percent absorbed by Earth's oceans and landmasses within 20 years and 80 percent soaked up at the end of the 1,000 years.

Princeton University - Even if emissions stop, carbon dioxide could warm Earth for centuries

There are people that ask me why I speak out against the politicization of climate change. My guess is they don't see stupid shit like this often enough to realize just how bad it is.

 

[westwall]

Can you point me to a single scientist that believes this?

Yes, a whole host of geologists and atmospheric physicists. Burt Rutan is one, astronaut Walt Cunningham is another. Ask yourself why have the AGW fraudsters resorted to trying to reverse the way the null hypothesis is applied?

Neither of which are scientists, much less climate scientists. Next. Your "whole host" seems rather sparse, and well, not actually a host.

You might want to check that assertion there olfraud. As far as climate scientists go, science doesn't do high priests interpreting the Word of God. Any competent scientist can interpret what they present and in the case of anyone who isn't affiliated with the fraud, demolish it. Rutan has done more work, that is far more impressive than any of the clowns who's cock you suck.

 

[orogenicman]

Yes, a whole host of geologists and atmospheric physicists. Burt Rutan is one, astronaut Walt Cunningham is another. Ask yourself why have the AGW fraudsters resorted to trying to reverse the way the null hypothesis is applied?

Neither of which are scientists, much less climate scientists. Next. Your "whole host" seems rather sparse, and well, not actually a host.

You might want to check that assertion there olfraud. As far as climate scientists go, science doesn't do high priests interpreting the Word of God. Any competent scientist can interpret what they present and in the case of anyone who isn't affiliated with the fraud, demolish it. Rutan has done more work, that is far more impressive than any of the clowns who's cock you suck.

According to that theory, any scientist can perform brain surgery without the requisite training and experience. Good luck with that.

You might want to check your bullshite statement.

 

[westwall]

Neither of which are scientists, much less climate scientists. Next. Your "whole host" seems rather sparse, and well, not actually a host.

You might want to check that assertion there olfraud. As far as climate scientists go, science doesn't do high priests interpreting the Word of God. Any competent scientist can interpret what they present and in the case of anyone who isn't affiliated with the fraud, demolish it. Rutan has done more work, that is far more impressive than any of the clowns who's cock you suck.

According to that theory, any scientist can perform brain surgery without the requisite training and experience. Good luck with that.

You might want to check your bullshite statement.

No, but let's look at reality. A PhD geologist for example can teach any climatology class, both under grad and graduate level. There are third year geology classes that are beyond a PhD in climatology. It's as simple as that.

Climatology is a soft science. Geology is a hard science, or it's an EXACT science if you prefer, while climatology is an INEXACT science. Look up the differences....I dare you.

 

[Abraham3]

I would not have used the term liar.

 

[Old Rocks]

We are putting it into the atmosphere faster than its coming out (and most that comes out only goes into solution in the ocean). It WILL be a great long while before that is not the case. My statement is correct. Silly person.

According to whom?

How have they parsed out, beyond any reasonable doubt, the CO2 released via natural processes vs. anthropogenic sources?

*ahem*

Yes, they have. Isotopic ratios. Look it up, I don't have time at present to explain that to those who won't do the research themselves.

 

[Old Rocks]

Yes, a whole host of geologists and atmospheric physicists. Burt Rutan is one, astronaut Walt Cunningham is another. Ask yourself why have the AGW fraudsters resorted to trying to reverse the way the null hypothesis is applied?

Neither of which are scientists, much less climate scientists. Next. Your "whole host" seems rather sparse, and well, not actually a host.

You might want to check that assertion there olfraud. As far as climate scientists go, science doesn't do high priests interpreting the Word of God. Any competent scientist can interpret what they present and in the case of anyone who isn't affiliated with the fraud, demolish it. Rutan has done more work, that is far more impressive than any of the clowns who's cock you suck.

My, my. So why are you not up on the podium at the American Geophysical Union convention explaining how all the presentations in the last decade are wrong? Maybe because they would laugh your lying ass right off of the stage.

That is where you will find the real scientists, and not silly frauds like Walleyes.

 

[Old Rocks]

You might want to check that assertion there olfraud. As far as climate scientists go, science doesn't do high priests interpreting the Word of God. Any competent scientist can interpret what they present and in the case of anyone who isn't affiliated with the fraud, demolish it. Rutan has done more work, that is far more impressive than any of the clowns who's cock you suck.

According to that theory, any scientist can perform brain surgery without the requisite training and experience. Good luck with that.

You might want to check your bullshite statement.

No, but let's look at reality. A PhD geologist for example can teach any climatology class, both under grad and graduate level. There are third year geology classes that are beyond a PhD in climatology. It's as simple as that.

Climatology is a soft science. Geology is a hard science, or it's an EXACT science if you prefer, while climatology is an INEXACT science. Look up the differences....I dare you.

Yes. Let us look at reality. First fact is that you are full of shit. Very few geologists have the requisite background in atmospheric physics to teach such classes. And geology is hardly an exact science. Many areas not yet well understood concerning tectonics and plumes.

Since you claim to be a Phd Geologist, why are you not on the podium at the AGU convention explaining why all the people making presentations there in the last decade are wrong? I have been asking that question for about five years now. So, are you going to be there?

 

[Impenitent]

Guess the trees will stop eating CO2.

BTW, what actually warms the Earth?


That big yellow ball in the sky. Temperatures on Earth are directly related to Sun spot activity.

You could boil water on the moon in the day, then deep-freeze it at night.

Same sun. Different atmosphere.

Gee, we would be so ****ed if somebody screwed with our atmosphere...wait!

 

[mamooth]

The main thing we learn from this thread is how every denialist is a member of the lunatic extreme-right-wing-fringe cult. AGW science crosses all political boundaries, being that it's, you know, science. But denialism is restricted to a small number of right-wing ultra-partisans, because it's purely a political movement.

On some level, even denialists all know that they've been worshipping fraudsters, just to get brownie points in their political cult. That's why they should be looking for an exit strategy now. Denialists, don't wait until they're walking you to the Koolaid vat before you decide joining the cult wasn't such a hot idea. Start planning now to quietly slip off into the jungle.

 

[freedombecki]

The main thing we learn from this thread is how every denialist is a member of the lunatic extreme-right-wing-fringe cult. AGW science crosses all political boundaries, being that it's, you know, science. But denialism is restricted to a small number of right-wing ultra-partisans, because it's purely a political movement.

On some level, even denialists all know that they've been worshipping fraudsters, just to get brownie points in their political cult. That's why they should be looking for an exit strategy now. Denialists, don't wait until they're walking you to the Koolaid vat before you decide joining the cult wasn't such a hot idea. Start planning now to quietly slip off into the jungle.

Project much? Does it make the AGW Fibber Society more truthful?

 

[mamooth]

So how do you explain it? You know, the way that denialism is restricted to the right-wing fringe, while AGW science crosses all political boundaries all across the world.

But let me guess. You're going to invoke that favorite cult conspiracy, "THE WHOLE WORLD IS IN ON A SOCIALIST PLOT!".

 

[westwall]

Neither of which are scientists, much less climate scientists. Next. Your "whole host" seems rather sparse, and well, not actually a host.

You might want to check that assertion there olfraud. As far as climate scientists go, science doesn't do high priests interpreting the Word of God. Any competent scientist can interpret what they present and in the case of anyone who isn't affiliated with the fraud, demolish it. Rutan has done more work, that is far more impressive than any of the clowns who's cock you suck.

My, my. So why are you not up on the podium at the American Geophysical Union convention explaining how all the presentations in the last decade are wrong? Maybe because they would laugh your lying ass right off of the stage.

That is where you will find the real scientists, and not silly frauds like Walleyes.

Because they won't allow anyone on the podium who hasn't drunk the koolaid. I posted the invite I received to submit a paper for the AGU conference a couple of years ago. As usual, because I was going to present a counter view to the hysteria they didn't choose my paper.

Nothing new for a political organization that is no longer interested in science.

 

[westwall]

According to that theory, any scientist can perform brain surgery without the requisite training and experience. Good luck with that.

You might want to check your bullshite statement.

No, but let's look at reality. A PhD geologist for example can teach any climatology class, both under grad and graduate level. There are third year geology classes that are beyond a PhD in climatology. It's as simple as that.

Climatology is a soft science. Geology is a hard science, or it's an EXACT science if you prefer, while climatology is an INEXACT science. Look up the differences....I dare you.

Yes. Let us look at reality. First fact is that you are full of shit. Very few geologists have the requisite background in atmospheric physics to teach such classes. And geology is hardly an exact science. Many areas not yet well understood concerning tectonics and plumes.

Since you claim to be a Phd Geologist, why are you not on the podium at the AGU convention explaining why all the people making presentations there in the last decade are wrong? I have been asking that question for about five years now. So, are you going to be there?

Totally untrue. It's chemistry, math and physics. All of which are necessary for a geology degree.
Optical crystallography is beyond any climatologist I've ever met and is a oftentimes taught in the 2nd year geology classes.

And your ignorant AGU accusations have been dealt with on many occasions. AGU won't allow a non cultist to speak. Look up any AGU meeting going back 10 years and tell us how many non AGW papers were presented.

And unlike you I don't have the need to generate numerous sock puppets unlike yourself so what does that say about you....mr. sock puppet clone. So who's the real person olfraud? oroman?

Laughable.

 

[westwall]

The main thing we learn from this thread is how every denialist is a member of the lunatic extreme-right-wing-fringe cult. AGW science crosses all political boundaries, being that it's, you know, science. But denialism is restricted to a small number of right-wing ultra-partisans, because it's purely a political movement.

On some level, even denialists all know that they've been worshipping fraudsters, just to get brownie points in their political cult. That's why they should be looking for an exit strategy now. Denialists, don't wait until they're walking you to the Koolaid vat before you decide joining the cult wasn't such a hot idea. Start planning now to quietly slip off into the jungle.

Just go away admiral. Your shtick isn't working anymore. AGW fraud is purely political, and as anti science as you can get. No sceptic I know has any problem with any of the so called rightwing anti science subjects like evolution etc.

All of those theories are backed up by solid evidence. AGW hysteria isn't. That's why you have to refer to sceptics as "deniers" and other pejoratives.

The people now realize that your horseshit is built on a hill of sand and the sand is falling apart.