Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The climate science phonies predicted that by 2017, Glacier National Park would be glacier free.........of course, from the signage in the park, "according to computer models".
fAiL
Global warming and Glacier National Park | Behind The Black
Really, is there any need to elaborate here? Of course, the climate alarmists get suckered all the time with the lobbing of the prediction bombs which will never change............snowflakes for life = ghey.
Getting sick isn't a 100 percent proposition, there are people who never catch anything until they die of old age. And since the predicted consequences of global warming are severe the doubt you feel about it shouldn't matter. And can I ask why you think the measuring methods being crude makes the data they provided suspect. For instance the thermometer we have used to measure temperature has been around since the Greeks, and they have been standardized since the 19th century. Why is the data they provided 100 years ago more inaccurate? The CO2 levels in the atmosphere didn't get measured back then, that's been done by getting ice cores and examining the air composition trapped in there. So what is suspect about the data?Basing decisions on the possibility of something is the whole bases of insurance. You don't get medical insurance because you are sick, you get it because you suspect you'll get sick somewhere in the future. To draw that analogy further, what you guys are claiming is that its unnecessary to get health insurance because you only have a mild cough atm. That in the end is the premise of the question. Why is the mere chance of me being wrong a valid excuse to not want to act?So you have no solutions to offer, only hysteria.Fact is I've spent about 12 posts now defending my standpoint when you guys have yet to spent one single post defending your standpoints that global warming is either a hoax or we can't do anything about it as you are here trying to defend. I will spent this post to defend my standpoint and answer your questions but if the very next post of you guys isn't an answer to my question I will stop it. A debate where only one person is obliged to explain his views gets boring. What we as a human raise can do is eat more vegetables since meat drains way more resources. Get serious about getting energy from renewable resources. And become aware that consuming more resources then the earth can provide is not a sustainable way of doing business. As to your impact question. A few we see now. The Extinction Crisis Global warming and its loss of habitats accompanying it is 1 of the causes. The treat to coastal cities as water levels rise and storms get more severe. Not to mention increased wildfires and droughts. Now my question.
Typical leftist.
And they are always wrong. Always.
The left love hysteria.
Global starvation from overpopulation
Hetro HIV epidemic
Silicone breast implants
Freezing from global cooling
Drowning from global warming
Hundreds of thousands of women dying from anorexia nervosa
Smog will kill all trees
Patriot Act will kill liberty
Eating animals is like the holocaust.I did answer. Whats more some countries are on their way to do what you say can't be done.What we as a human raise can do is eat more vegetables since meat drains way more resources. Get serious about getting energy from renewable resources. And become aware that consuming more resources then the earth can provide is not a sustainable way of doing business.
Sweden's carbon-tax solution to climate change puts it top of the green list
Sweden just committed to having zero carbon emissions, and perfectly trolled Trump at the same time
Having said that since you seem to be incapable of answering my one question I will stop this conversation for the reason I stated the previous post.
I will spent this post to defend my standpoint and answer your questions but if the very next post of you guys isn't an answer to my question I will stop it. A debate where only one person is obliged to explain his views gets boring.
The premis of the question is that there is such a thing as manmade global warming in the first place.
To answer it is to agree with the premis. So no, skeptics like me would not answer.
Got if Junior?
Oh shit, I asked a question.
The mere chance? Your evidence that doing anything will stop anything from occurring is mere speculation.
I can statistically validate the need for health insurance. WE ALL GET SICK AND DIE.
what I cannot do is statistically validate what you claim. THERE IS NOT THE HISTORICAL LENGTH OF NON SUSPECT DATA!
Geez, really?
. Asshats......and clearly a reality disconnect. They get angst about the theoretical but factual shit that is daunting with an imminent nut sack kick? An afterthought.
Getting sick isn't a 100 percent proposition, there are people who never catch anything until they die of old age. And since the predicted consequences of global warming are severe the doubt you feel about it shouldn't matter. And can I ask why you think the measuring methods being crude makes the data they provided suspect. For instance the thermometer we have used to measure temperature has been around since the Greeks, and they have been standardized since the 19th century. Why is the data they provided 100 years ago more inaccurate? The CO2 levels in the atmosphere didn't get measured back then, that's been done by getting ice cores and examining the air composition trapped in there. So what is suspect about the data?Basing decisions on the possibility of something is the whole bases of insurance. You don't get medical insurance because you are sick, you get it because you suspect you'll get sick somewhere in the future. To draw that analogy further, what you guys are claiming is that its unnecessary to get health insurance because you only have a mild cough atm. That in the end is the premise of the question. Why is the mere chance of me being wrong a valid excuse to not want to act?So you have no solutions to offer, only hysteria.
Typical leftist.
And they are always wrong. Always.
The left love hysteria.
Global starvation from overpopulation
Hetro HIV epidemic
Silicone breast implants
Freezing from global cooling
Drowning from global warming
Hundreds of thousands of women dying from anorexia nervosa
Smog will kill all trees
Patriot Act will kill liberty
Eating animals is like the holocaust.I did answer. Whats more some countries are on their way to do what you say can't be done.What we as a human raise can do is eat more vegetables since meat drains way more resources. Get serious about getting energy from renewable resources. And become aware that consuming more resources then the earth can provide is not a sustainable way of doing business.
Sweden's carbon-tax solution to climate change puts it top of the green list
Sweden just committed to having zero carbon emissions, and perfectly trolled Trump at the same time
Having said that since you seem to be incapable of answering my one question I will stop this conversation for the reason I stated the previous post.
I will spent this post to defend my standpoint and answer your questions but if the very next post of you guys isn't an answer to my question I will stop it. A debate where only one person is obliged to explain his views gets boring.
The premis of the question is that there is such a thing as manmade global warming in the first place.
To answer it is to agree with the premis. So no, skeptics like me would not answer.
Got if Junior?
Oh shit, I asked a question.
The mere chance? Your evidence that doing anything will stop anything from occurring is mere speculation.
I can statistically validate the need for health insurance. WE ALL GET SICK AND DIE.
what I cannot do is statistically validate what you claim. THERE IS NOT THE HISTORICAL LENGTH OF NON SUSPECT DATA!
Geez, really?
Getting sick isn't a 100 percent proposition, there are people who never catch anything until they die of old age. And since the predicted consequences of global warming are severe the doubt you feel about it shouldn't matter. And can I ask why you think the measuring methods being crude makes the data they provided suspect. For instance the thermometer we have used to measure temperature has been around since the Greeks, and they have been standardized since the 19th century. Why is the data they provided 100 years ago more inaccurate? The CO2 levels in the atmosphere didn't get measured back then, that's been done by getting ice cores and examining the air composition trapped in there. So what is suspect about the data?Basing decisions on the possibility of something is the whole bases of insurance. You don't get medical insurance because you are sick, you get it because you suspect you'll get sick somewhere in the future. To draw that analogy further, what you guys are claiming is that its unnecessary to get health insurance because you only have a mild cough atm. That in the end is the premise of the question. Why is the mere chance of me being wrong a valid excuse to not want to act?So you have no solutions to offer, only hysteria.
Typical leftist.
And they are always wrong. Always.
The left love hysteria.
Global starvation from overpopulation
Hetro HIV epidemic
Silicone breast implants
Freezing from global cooling
Drowning from global warming
Hundreds of thousands of women dying from anorexia nervosa
Smog will kill all trees
Patriot Act will kill liberty
Eating animals is like the holocaust.I did answer. Whats more some countries are on their way to do what you say can't be done.What we as a human raise can do is eat more vegetables since meat drains way more resources. Get serious about getting energy from renewable resources. And become aware that consuming more resources then the earth can provide is not a sustainable way of doing business.
Sweden's carbon-tax solution to climate change puts it top of the green list
Sweden just committed to having zero carbon emissions, and perfectly trolled Trump at the same time
Having said that since you seem to be incapable of answering my one question I will stop this conversation for the reason I stated the previous post.
I will spent this post to defend my standpoint and answer your questions but if the very next post of you guys isn't an answer to my question I will stop it. A debate where only one person is obliged to explain his views gets boring.
The premis of the question is that there is such a thing as manmade global warming in the first place.
To answer it is to agree with the premis. So no, skeptics like me would not answer.
Got if Junior?
Oh shit, I asked a question.
The mere chance? Your evidence that doing anything will stop anything from occurring is mere speculation.
I can statistically validate the need for health insurance. WE ALL GET SICK AND DIE.
what I cannot do is statistically validate what you claim. THERE IS NOT THE HISTORICAL LENGTH OF NON SUSPECT DATA!
Geez, really?
Sure I'll give you evidenceThe counter argument is LOGIC. You have ZERO evidence man is causing it. ZERO.So you feel there's enough doubt to risk millions of lives? You are willing to bet on it with my and possibly your children? And btw if you find me funny then come out with actual counterarguments. In the end it comes down to respect. I'm willing even eager to talk to people I don't agree with. What I hate is when people don't have anything to offer on merit they feel trying to demean the person is an acceptable second.I rate you funny because your retarded posts make me laugh. Want to tax me for that too?Humans MUST be responsible considering the Earth doesnt do this by itself. Not to mention, we have a whole 150 or so years of recordings!
You and your ilk are a GENIUSES!
You can rate me funny all you want. To me its an admission that you don't have an answer to this.Does the little room for doubt there is warrant you and people like you actively fight against the scientific consensus when we are talking millions if not billions of people dying and trillions in economic damage, when the worst of the effects hit?
There is PLENTY of room for doubt. Thats why your posts are so damn funny!
AGW is like religion. They dont have answers so they fill it in with whatever they understand. Most humans are fucking idiots. Regressive idiots.
There is nothing BUT doubt. All AGW does is fill in holes with "man"
Give me some evidence to counter, why dont ya?
There is a sharp increase in CO2 levels.
View attachment 148822
CO2 is a greenhouse gas that traps heat
View attachment 148823
The planet is heating up
View attachment 148824
Cause and effect clear as day.
2006-2010 10,649 Americans died from weather related events. Of those, 63% or 6,660 Americans died from cold weather while 31% died from heat.Getting sick isn't a 100 percent proposition, there are people who never catch anything until they die of old age. And since the predicted consequences of global warming are severe the doubt you feel about it shouldn't matter. And can I ask why you think the measuring methods being crude makes the data they provided suspect. For instance the thermometer we have used to measure temperature has been around since the Greeks, and they have been standardized since the 19th century. Why is the data they provided 100 years ago more inaccurate? The CO2 levels in the atmosphere didn't get measured back then, that's been done by getting ice cores and examining the air composition trapped in there. So what is suspect about the data?Basing decisions on the possibility of something is the whole bases of insurance. You don't get medical insurance because you are sick, you get it because you suspect you'll get sick somewhere in the future. To draw that analogy further, what you guys are claiming is that its unnecessary to get health insurance because you only have a mild cough atm. That in the end is the premise of the question. Why is the mere chance of me being wrong a valid excuse to not want to act?So you have no solutions to offer, only hysteria.
Typical leftist.
And they are always wrong. Always.
The left love hysteria.
Global starvation from overpopulation
Hetro HIV epidemic
Silicone breast implants
Freezing from global cooling
Drowning from global warming
Hundreds of thousands of women dying from anorexia nervosa
Smog will kill all trees
Patriot Act will kill liberty
Eating animals is like the holocaust.I did answer. Whats more some countries are on their way to do what you say can't be done.What we as a human raise can do is eat more vegetables since meat drains way more resources. Get serious about getting energy from renewable resources. And become aware that consuming more resources then the earth can provide is not a sustainable way of doing business.
Sweden's carbon-tax solution to climate change puts it top of the green list
Sweden just committed to having zero carbon emissions, and perfectly trolled Trump at the same time
Having said that since you seem to be incapable of answering my one question I will stop this conversation for the reason I stated the previous post.
I will spent this post to defend my standpoint and answer your questions but if the very next post of you guys isn't an answer to my question I will stop it. A debate where only one person is obliged to explain his views gets boring.
The premis of the question is that there is such a thing as manmade global warming in the first place.
To answer it is to agree with the premis. So no, skeptics like me would not answer.
Got if Junior?
Oh shit, I asked a question.
The mere chance? Your evidence that doing anything will stop anything from occurring is mere speculation.
I can statistically validate the need for health insurance. WE ALL GET SICK AND DIE.
what I cannot do is statistically validate what you claim. THERE IS NOT THE HISTORICAL LENGTH OF NON SUSPECT DATA!
Geez, really?
So why the lies? No, many proposals on how to cut the GHG emissions.Weird how the "solutions" make it to where only the rich can afford meat, transportation and children.Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Scientific ConsensusHow is it safe to say humans are responsible for climate change? How is it safe to say humans are responsible FOR NATURAL EARTH EVOLUTION?This OP seems to ignore one basic fact of science. Science is always open to change. When making predictions on something as complicated as climate it's not abnormal that there are variations. US Glacier national park losing its glaciers with just 26 of 150 left
This is irrefutable. If it takes 3 or 13 or 20 years to disappear completely the fact remains that the glaciers are disappearing. The fact that they can't put an exact time on when they will be completely gone and you using it as some kind of proof that global warming is a hoax, seems not a little bit dishonest.Science is never completely settled. It's not how it works. If science is settled it stagnates. It's the process of questioning that propagates progress. Let's take the example of global warming. It's safe to say that the earth is warming. It's also safe to say that human are a major cause of that warming. It doesn't mean everything is set in stone. For instance the gulf stream might slow or disappear because of the increases in temperature increases the amount of freshwater in the oceans, causing a cooling in Europe. There might be an sudden jump in temperature because of greenhouse gasses being released from the ocean bottom. Like might have happened during the Permian extinction.Permian extinction | Overview & Facts Science has a hard time predicting what the consequences of a sudden rise in temperature would have on the global system that is earth. The question is, does the fact that the science doesn't know how severe ,or even what the ultimate consequences of global warming will be, excuse us from trying to prevent it. Because non of the possible scenarios are good?Science is always open to change.
The science isn't settled?
This is why "climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities."
My question to you is this. Does the little room for doubt there is warrant you and people like you actively fight against the scientific consensus when we are talking millions if not billions of people dying and trillions in economic damage, when the worst of the effects hit?
IOW, the establishment says we need a global world wide communist police state, and you swallow it, hook line and sinker.
Nice.
They dont have any solutions to NATURAL earth evolution.
What a bunch of hucksters..
Wow, have you ever heard of Google? Is your IQ in single digits? Or do you just prefer to go on lying to support a really stupid political position?Sure I'll give you evidenceThe counter argument is LOGIC. You have ZERO evidence man is causing it. ZERO.So you feel there's enough doubt to risk millions of lives? You are willing to bet on it with my and possibly your children? And btw if you find me funny then come out with actual counterarguments. In the end it comes down to respect. I'm willing even eager to talk to people I don't agree with. What I hate is when people don't have anything to offer on merit they feel trying to demean the person is an acceptable second.I rate you funny because your retarded posts make me laugh. Want to tax me for that too?You can rate me funny all you want. To me its an admission that you don't have an answer to this.
There is PLENTY of room for doubt. Thats why your posts are so damn funny!
AGW is like religion. They dont have answers so they fill it in with whatever they understand. Most humans are fucking idiots. Regressive idiots.
There is nothing BUT doubt. All AGW does is fill in holes with "man"
Give me some evidence to counter, why dont ya?
There is a sharp increase in CO2 levels.
View attachment 148822
CO2 is a greenhouse gas that traps heat
View attachment 148823
The planet is heating up
View attachment 148824
Cause and effect clear as day.
Wow! The oceans are really warming up!!
What was the old ocean temperature and what is the new ocean temperature?
Goddamn, are you ever a stupid ass. Do I understand Earth's history? One hell of a lot better than you do. Here, learn something. LOL Not that you would even watch five minutes because you treasure your willful ignorance above all else.So, CO2 increases, along with temp, are a new thing?Sure I'll give you evidenceThe counter argument is LOGIC. You have ZERO evidence man is causing it. ZERO.So you feel there's enough doubt to risk millions of lives? You are willing to bet on it with my and possibly your children? And btw if you find me funny then come out with actual counterarguments. In the end it comes down to respect. I'm willing even eager to talk to people I don't agree with. What I hate is when people don't have anything to offer on merit they feel trying to demean the person is an acceptable second.I rate you funny because your retarded posts make me laugh. Want to tax me for that too?You can rate me funny all you want. To me its an admission that you don't have an answer to this.
There is PLENTY of room for doubt. Thats why your posts are so damn funny!
AGW is like religion. They dont have answers so they fill it in with whatever they understand. Most humans are fucking idiots. Regressive idiots.
There is nothing BUT doubt. All AGW does is fill in holes with "man"
Give me some evidence to counter, why dont ya?
There is a sharp increase in CO2 levels.
View attachment 148822
CO2 is a greenhouse gas that traps heat
View attachment 148823
The planet is heating up
View attachment 148824
Cause and effect clear as day.
What about our ice age? Does that not have anything to do with it?
Do you understand how long Earths history is? Of course not. We cant fathom that shit. But we can certainly fill in holes with assumption, cant we?
You know damn well that paper was shown fraud.. LOL you will try anything to get your lie out here.. But your ok with bastardizing the good temps found in many buoy systems by making them as invalid as the ones using metal buckets rather than bags to collect the water...Wow, have you ever heard of Google? Is your IQ in single digits? Or do you just prefer to go on lying to support a really stupid political position?Sure I'll give you evidenceThe counter argument is LOGIC. You have ZERO evidence man is causing it. ZERO.So you feel there's enough doubt to risk millions of lives? You are willing to bet on it with my and possibly your children? And btw if you find me funny then come out with actual counterarguments. In the end it comes down to respect. I'm willing even eager to talk to people I don't agree with. What I hate is when people don't have anything to offer on merit they feel trying to demean the person is an acceptable second.I rate you funny because your retarded posts make me laugh. Want to tax me for that too?
There is PLENTY of room for doubt. Thats why your posts are so damn funny!
AGW is like religion. They dont have answers so they fill it in with whatever they understand. Most humans are fucking idiots. Regressive idiots.
There is nothing BUT doubt. All AGW does is fill in holes with "man"
Give me some evidence to counter, why dont ya?
There is a sharp increase in CO2 levels.
View attachment 148822
CO2 is a greenhouse gas that traps heat
View attachment 148823
The planet is heating up
View attachment 148824
Cause and effect clear as day.
Wow! The oceans are really warming up!!
What was the old ocean temperature and what is the new ocean temperature?
Distinct Rise in Global Ocean Temperatures Detected | Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego
Distinct Rise in Global Ocean Temperatures Detected
Comprehensive view of world oceans afforded by sensor network reveals the ongoing and steady rise of global climate system heat content
A global network of profiling floats that provides scientists the most accurate means of observing energy accumulation in the climate system has detected an increase in the temperature of the world’s oceans over a recent eight-year period.
Researchers led by Dean Roemmich, a physical oceanographer at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego, found that the top 2,000 meters (6,500 feet) of the world’s oceans warmed at a rate of 0.4 to 0.6 watts per square meter (W/m 2) between 2006 and 2013. The rate translates to a warming of roughly 0.005° C (0.009° F) per year in the top 500 meters of ocean and 0.002° C (0.0036° F) per year at depths between 500 and 2,000 meters.
For perspective, Roemmich noted that the heat gain was the equivalent of adding the heat of two trillion continuously burning 100-watt light bulbs to the world’s oceans.
“The rate of ocean heat gain during the past eight years is not unusual – indeed many studies of ocean data over the past 50 years and longer have produced similar rates. What is new is that the rate and patterns of ocean heat gain are revealed over a period as short as eight years, thanks to the Argo array, that the warming signal is shown to extend to 2,000 meters and deeper, and that it is occurring predominantly in the Southern Hemisphere ocean south of 20° S,” said Roemmich.
Goddamn, are you ever a stupid ass. Do I understand Earth's history? One hell of a lot better than you do. Here, learn something. LOL Not that you would even watch five minutes because you treasure your willful ignorance above all else.So, CO2 increases, along with temp, are a new thing?Sure I'll give you evidenceThe counter argument is LOGIC. You have ZERO evidence man is causing it. ZERO.So you feel there's enough doubt to risk millions of lives? You are willing to bet on it with my and possibly your children? And btw if you find me funny then come out with actual counterarguments. In the end it comes down to respect. I'm willing even eager to talk to people I don't agree with. What I hate is when people don't have anything to offer on merit they feel trying to demean the person is an acceptable second.I rate you funny because your retarded posts make me laugh. Want to tax me for that too?
There is PLENTY of room for doubt. Thats why your posts are so damn funny!
AGW is like religion. They dont have answers so they fill it in with whatever they understand. Most humans are fucking idiots. Regressive idiots.
There is nothing BUT doubt. All AGW does is fill in holes with "man"
Give me some evidence to counter, why dont ya?
There is a sharp increase in CO2 levels.
View attachment 148822
CO2 is a greenhouse gas that traps heat
View attachment 148823
The planet is heating up
View attachment 148824
Cause and effect clear as day.
What about our ice age? Does that not have anything to do with it?
Do you understand how long Earths history is? Of course not. We cant fathom that shit. But we can certainly fill in holes with assumption, cant we?
Wow, have you ever heard of Google? Is your IQ in single digits? Or do you just prefer to go on lying to support a really stupid political position?Sure I'll give you evidenceThe counter argument is LOGIC. You have ZERO evidence man is causing it. ZERO.So you feel there's enough doubt to risk millions of lives? You are willing to bet on it with my and possibly your children? And btw if you find me funny then come out with actual counterarguments. In the end it comes down to respect. I'm willing even eager to talk to people I don't agree with. What I hate is when people don't have anything to offer on merit they feel trying to demean the person is an acceptable second.I rate you funny because your retarded posts make me laugh. Want to tax me for that too?
There is PLENTY of room for doubt. Thats why your posts are so damn funny!
AGW is like religion. They dont have answers so they fill it in with whatever they understand. Most humans are fucking idiots. Regressive idiots.
There is nothing BUT doubt. All AGW does is fill in holes with "man"
Give me some evidence to counter, why dont ya?
There is a sharp increase in CO2 levels.
View attachment 148822
CO2 is a greenhouse gas that traps heat
View attachment 148823
The planet is heating up
View attachment 148824
Cause and effect clear as day.
Wow! The oceans are really warming up!!
What was the old ocean temperature and what is the new ocean temperature?
Distinct Rise in Global Ocean Temperatures Detected | Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego
Distinct Rise in Global Ocean Temperatures Detected
Comprehensive view of world oceans afforded by sensor network reveals the ongoing and steady rise of global climate system heat content
A global network of profiling floats that provides scientists the most accurate means of observing energy accumulation in the climate system has detected an increase in the temperature of the world’s oceans over a recent eight-year period.
Researchers led by Dean Roemmich, a physical oceanographer at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego, found that the top 2,000 meters (6,500 feet) of the world’s oceans warmed at a rate of 0.4 to 0.6 watts per square meter (W/m 2) between 2006 and 2013. The rate translates to a warming of roughly 0.005° C (0.009° F) per year in the top 500 meters of ocean and 0.002° C (0.0036° F) per year at depths between 500 and 2,000 meters.
For perspective, Roemmich noted that the heat gain was the equivalent of adding the heat of two trillion continuously burning 100-watt light bulbs to the world’s oceans.
“The rate of ocean heat gain during the past eight years is not unusual – indeed many studies of ocean data over the past 50 years and longer have produced similar rates. What is new is that the rate and patterns of ocean heat gain are revealed over a period as short as eight years, thanks to the Argo array, that the warming signal is shown to extend to 2,000 meters and deeper, and that it is occurring predominantly in the Southern Hemisphere ocean south of 20° S,” said Roemmich.
OK, dumb fuck, here is that answer. Not that you will ever bother to read any of it. After all, it is written for the intelligent layman, definitely beyond your qualifications.So you have no solutions to offer, only hysteria.Fact is I've spent about 12 posts now defending my standpoint when you guys have yet to spent one single post defending your standpoints that global warming is either a hoax or we can't do anything about it as you are here trying to defend. I will spent this post to defend my standpoint and answer your questions but if the very next post of you guys isn't an answer to my question I will stop it. A debate where only one person is obliged to explain his views gets boring. What we as a human raise can do is eat more vegetables since meat drains way more resources. Get serious about getting energy from renewable resources. And become aware that consuming more resources then the earth can provide is not a sustainable way of doing business. As to your impact question. A few we see now. The Extinction Crisis Global warming and its loss of habitats accompanying it is 1 of the causes. The treat to coastal cities as water levels rise and storms get more severe. Not to mention increased wildfires and droughts. Now my question.Why do you refuse to list the steps required to stop this manmade global warming threat? I thought it was important to you.Of course interglacial periods warm the planet. The difference is the time it takes for those changes to occur. Where talking a difference of 5 degrees over a period of about 5 thousand years for the natural warming. Not a difference of about 2 to 6 degrees over 2 centuries as we are experiencing now.Global Warming : Feature Articles
Fact is you refuse to answer because you know its BS.
The question is, does the fact that the science doesn't know how severe ,or even what the ultimate consequences of global warming will be, excuse us from trying to prevent it. Because non of the possible scenarios are good?
Typical leftist.
And they are always wrong. Always.
The left love hysteria.
Global starvation from overpopulation
Hetro HIV epidemic
Silicone breast implants
Freezing from global cooling
Drowning from global warming
Hundreds of thousands of women dying from anorexia nervosa
Smog will kill all trees
Patriot Act will kill liberty
Eating animals is like the holocaust.I did answer. Whats more some countries are on their way to do what you say can't be done.What we as a human raise can do is eat more vegetables since meat drains way more resources. Get serious about getting energy from renewable resources. And become aware that consuming more resources then the earth can provide is not a sustainable way of doing business.
Sweden's carbon-tax solution to climate change puts it top of the green list
Sweden just committed to having zero carbon emissions, and perfectly trolled Trump at the same time
Having said that since you seem to be incapable of answering my one question I will stop this conversation for the reason I stated the previous post.
I will spent this post to defend my standpoint and answer your questions but if the very next post of you guys isn't an answer to my question I will stop it. A debate where only one person is obliged to explain his views gets boring.
The premis of the question is that there is such a thing as manmade global warming in the first place.
To answer it is to agree with the premis. So no, skeptics like me would not answer.
Got if Junior?
Oh shit, I asked a question.
Thank you for establishing your room temperature IQ. LOL Gotta love how you deniers love to flaunt your abysmal ignorance. Now if you start at about the third grade, you might be up to speed on science in about 20 years.Wow, have you ever heard of Google? Is your IQ in single digits? Or do you just prefer to go on lying to support a really stupid political position?Sure I'll give you evidenceThe counter argument is LOGIC. You have ZERO evidence man is causing it. ZERO.So you feel there's enough doubt to risk millions of lives? You are willing to bet on it with my and possibly your children? And btw if you find me funny then come out with actual counterarguments. In the end it comes down to respect. I'm willing even eager to talk to people I don't agree with. What I hate is when people don't have anything to offer on merit they feel trying to demean the person is an acceptable second.
There is nothing BUT doubt. All AGW does is fill in holes with "man"
Give me some evidence to counter, why dont ya?
There is a sharp increase in CO2 levels.
View attachment 148822
CO2 is a greenhouse gas that traps heat
View attachment 148823
The planet is heating up
View attachment 148824
Cause and effect clear as day.
Wow! The oceans are really warming up!!
What was the old ocean temperature and what is the new ocean temperature?
Distinct Rise in Global Ocean Temperatures Detected | Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego
Distinct Rise in Global Ocean Temperatures Detected
Comprehensive view of world oceans afforded by sensor network reveals the ongoing and steady rise of global climate system heat content
A global network of profiling floats that provides scientists the most accurate means of observing energy accumulation in the climate system has detected an increase in the temperature of the world’s oceans over a recent eight-year period.
Researchers led by Dean Roemmich, a physical oceanographer at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego, found that the top 2,000 meters (6,500 feet) of the world’s oceans warmed at a rate of 0.4 to 0.6 watts per square meter (W/m 2) between 2006 and 2013. The rate translates to a warming of roughly 0.005° C (0.009° F) per year in the top 500 meters of ocean and 0.002° C (0.0036° F) per year at depths between 500 and 2,000 meters.
For perspective, Roemmich noted that the heat gain was the equivalent of adding the heat of two trillion continuously burning 100-watt light bulbs to the world’s oceans.
“The rate of ocean heat gain during the past eight years is not unusual – indeed many studies of ocean data over the past 50 years and longer have produced similar rates. What is new is that the rate and patterns of ocean heat gain are revealed over a period as short as eight years, thanks to the Argo array, that the warming signal is shown to extend to 2,000 meters and deeper, and that it is occurring predominantly in the Southern Hemisphere ocean south of 20° S,” said Roemmich.
Wow, have you ever heard of Google?
Yes.
the top 2,000 meters (6,500 feet) of the world’s oceans warmed at a rate of 0.4 to 0.6 watts per square meter (W/m 2) between 2006 and 2013. The rate translates to a warming of roughly 0.005° C (0.009° F) per year in the top 500 meters of ocean and 0.002° C (0.0036° F) per year at depths between 500 and 2,000 meters.
Wow, that's some impressive accuracy for those temperature readings.
Except those aren't temperature readings.
Thanks!
Thank you for establishing your room temperature IQ. LOL Gotta love how you deniers love to flaunt your abysmal ignorance. Now if you start at about the third grade, you might be up to speed on science in about 20 years.Wow, have you ever heard of Google? Is your IQ in single digits? Or do you just prefer to go on lying to support a really stupid political position?Sure I'll give you evidenceThe counter argument is LOGIC. You have ZERO evidence man is causing it. ZERO.
There is nothing BUT doubt. All AGW does is fill in holes with "man"
Give me some evidence to counter, why dont ya?
There is a sharp increase in CO2 levels.
View attachment 148822
CO2 is a greenhouse gas that traps heat
View attachment 148823
The planet is heating up
View attachment 148824
Cause and effect clear as day.
Wow! The oceans are really warming up!!
What was the old ocean temperature and what is the new ocean temperature?
Distinct Rise in Global Ocean Temperatures Detected | Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego
Distinct Rise in Global Ocean Temperatures Detected
Comprehensive view of world oceans afforded by sensor network reveals the ongoing and steady rise of global climate system heat content
A global network of profiling floats that provides scientists the most accurate means of observing energy accumulation in the climate system has detected an increase in the temperature of the world’s oceans over a recent eight-year period.
Researchers led by Dean Roemmich, a physical oceanographer at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego, found that the top 2,000 meters (6,500 feet) of the world’s oceans warmed at a rate of 0.4 to 0.6 watts per square meter (W/m 2) between 2006 and 2013. The rate translates to a warming of roughly 0.005° C (0.009° F) per year in the top 500 meters of ocean and 0.002° C (0.0036° F) per year at depths between 500 and 2,000 meters.
For perspective, Roemmich noted that the heat gain was the equivalent of adding the heat of two trillion continuously burning 100-watt light bulbs to the world’s oceans.
“The rate of ocean heat gain during the past eight years is not unusual – indeed many studies of ocean data over the past 50 years and longer have produced similar rates. What is new is that the rate and patterns of ocean heat gain are revealed over a period as short as eight years, thanks to the Argo array, that the warming signal is shown to extend to 2,000 meters and deeper, and that it is occurring predominantly in the Southern Hemisphere ocean south of 20° S,” said Roemmich.
Wow, have you ever heard of Google?
Yes.
the top 2,000 meters (6,500 feet) of the world’s oceans warmed at a rate of 0.4 to 0.6 watts per square meter (W/m 2) between 2006 and 2013. The rate translates to a warming of roughly 0.005° C (0.009° F) per year in the top 500 meters of ocean and 0.002° C (0.0036° F) per year at depths between 500 and 2,000 meters.
Wow, that's some impressive accuracy for those temperature readings.
Except those aren't temperature readings.
Thanks!
No, dumb cocksuck, the fact that the nuclear industry sold nuclear on the idea it would be too cheap to meter, and it was fail safe. Neither proved to be true, and the cost of the failures have been incredible. And those costs continue to mount. Nuclear killed nuclear.Exactly. The most green reliable energy is nuclear, and the left killed it.Being flip isn't an answer either.If we're doing this, and billions could die, why are warmers against large scale nuclear power?
Are you anti-nuclear?Not ardently. I think at the moment it is the most cost effective, non immediatly polluting source of energy. Having said that I see no reason to not try to go full blast for renewable energy and phase it out as quickly as is practical.Being flip isn't an answer either.If we're doing this, and billions could die, why are warmers against large scale nuclear power?
Are you anti-nuclear?
Not ardently. I think at the moment it is the most cost effective, non immediatly polluting source of energy.
Tell the rest of your watermelon friends. We'd take them more seriously if they pushed for reliable energy, instead of more expensive, less reliable wind and solar.
Can't run a high tech society if the power craps out when the wind calms or a cloud floats over.
Answered easily in a 200 level physics class, or on Google. Quit being such a lazy shit and try to learn more than talking points from obese junkies on the AM radio.Thank you for establishing your room temperature IQ. LOL Gotta love how you deniers love to flaunt your abysmal ignorance. Now if you start at about the third grade, you might be up to speed on science in about 20 years.Wow, have you ever heard of Google? Is your IQ in single digits? Or do you just prefer to go on lying to support a really stupid political position?Sure I'll give you evidence
There is a sharp increase in CO2 levels.
View attachment 148822
CO2 is a greenhouse gas that traps heat
View attachment 148823
The planet is heating up
View attachment 148824
Cause and effect clear as day.
Wow! The oceans are really warming up!!
What was the old ocean temperature and what is the new ocean temperature?
Distinct Rise in Global Ocean Temperatures Detected | Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego
Distinct Rise in Global Ocean Temperatures Detected
Comprehensive view of world oceans afforded by sensor network reveals the ongoing and steady rise of global climate system heat content
A global network of profiling floats that provides scientists the most accurate means of observing energy accumulation in the climate system has detected an increase in the temperature of the world’s oceans over a recent eight-year period.
Researchers led by Dean Roemmich, a physical oceanographer at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego, found that the top 2,000 meters (6,500 feet) of the world’s oceans warmed at a rate of 0.4 to 0.6 watts per square meter (W/m 2) between 2006 and 2013. The rate translates to a warming of roughly 0.005° C (0.009° F) per year in the top 500 meters of ocean and 0.002° C (0.0036° F) per year at depths between 500 and 2,000 meters.
For perspective, Roemmich noted that the heat gain was the equivalent of adding the heat of two trillion continuously burning 100-watt light bulbs to the world’s oceans.
“The rate of ocean heat gain during the past eight years is not unusual – indeed many studies of ocean data over the past 50 years and longer have produced similar rates. What is new is that the rate and patterns of ocean heat gain are revealed over a period as short as eight years, thanks to the Argo array, that the warming signal is shown to extend to 2,000 meters and deeper, and that it is occurring predominantly in the Southern Hemisphere ocean south of 20° S,” said Roemmich.
Wow, have you ever heard of Google?
Yes.
the top 2,000 meters (6,500 feet) of the world’s oceans warmed at a rate of 0.4 to 0.6 watts per square meter (W/m 2) between 2006 and 2013. The rate translates to a warming of roughly 0.005° C (0.009° F) per year in the top 500 meters of ocean and 0.002° C (0.0036° F) per year at depths between 500 and 2,000 meters.
Wow, that's some impressive accuracy for those temperature readings.
Except those aren't temperature readings.
Thanks!
Pointing out that my question about temperature readings was answered with W/m^2 makes me the dummy?
LOL!
Thanks for the laugh.
OK, dumb fuck, here is that answer. Not that you will ever bother to read any of it. After all, it is written for the intelligent layman, definitely beyond your qualifications.So you have no solutions to offer, only hysteria.Fact is I've spent about 12 posts now defending my standpoint when you guys have yet to spent one single post defending your standpoints that global warming is either a hoax or we can't do anything about it as you are here trying to defend. I will spent this post to defend my standpoint and answer your questions but if the very next post of you guys isn't an answer to my question I will stop it. A debate where only one person is obliged to explain his views gets boring. What we as a human raise can do is eat more vegetables since meat drains way more resources. Get serious about getting energy from renewable resources. And become aware that consuming more resources then the earth can provide is not a sustainable way of doing business. As to your impact question. A few we see now. The Extinction Crisis Global warming and its loss of habitats accompanying it is 1 of the causes. The treat to coastal cities as water levels rise and storms get more severe. Not to mention increased wildfires and droughts. Now my question.Why do you refuse to list the steps required to stop this manmade global warming threat? I thought it was important to you.
Fact is you refuse to answer because you know its BS.
The question is, does the fact that the science doesn't know how severe ,or even what the ultimate consequences of global warming will be, excuse us from trying to prevent it. Because non of the possible scenarios are good?
Typical leftist.
And they are always wrong. Always.
The left love hysteria.
Global starvation from overpopulation
Hetro HIV epidemic
Silicone breast implants
Freezing from global cooling
Drowning from global warming
Hundreds of thousands of women dying from anorexia nervosa
Smog will kill all trees
Patriot Act will kill liberty
Eating animals is like the holocaust.I did answer. Whats more some countries are on their way to do what you say can't be done.What we as a human raise can do is eat more vegetables since meat drains way more resources. Get serious about getting energy from renewable resources. And become aware that consuming more resources then the earth can provide is not a sustainable way of doing business.
Sweden's carbon-tax solution to climate change puts it top of the green list
Sweden just committed to having zero carbon emissions, and perfectly trolled Trump at the same time
Having said that since you seem to be incapable of answering my one question I will stop this conversation for the reason I stated the previous post.
I will spent this post to defend my standpoint and answer your questions but if the very next post of you guys isn't an answer to my question I will stop it. A debate where only one person is obliged to explain his views gets boring.
The premis of the question is that there is such a thing as manmade global warming in the first place.
To answer it is to agree with the premis. So no, skeptics like me would not answer.
Got if Junior?
Oh shit, I asked a question.
The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect
You have to love how people repeatedly post information from the leading scientists in the world, and all you flap yaps do is answer in idiotic one liners that are totally lacking in logic.
Answered easily in a 200 level physics class, or on Google. Quit being such a lazy shit and try to learn more than talking points from obese junkies on the AM radio.Thank you for establishing your room temperature IQ. LOL Gotta love how you deniers love to flaunt your abysmal ignorance. Now if you start at about the third grade, you might be up to speed on science in about 20 years.Wow, have you ever heard of Google? Is your IQ in single digits? Or do you just prefer to go on lying to support a really stupid political position?Wow! The oceans are really warming up!!
What was the old ocean temperature and what is the new ocean temperature?
Distinct Rise in Global Ocean Temperatures Detected | Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego
Distinct Rise in Global Ocean Temperatures Detected
Comprehensive view of world oceans afforded by sensor network reveals the ongoing and steady rise of global climate system heat content
A global network of profiling floats that provides scientists the most accurate means of observing energy accumulation in the climate system has detected an increase in the temperature of the world’s oceans over a recent eight-year period.
Researchers led by Dean Roemmich, a physical oceanographer at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego, found that the top 2,000 meters (6,500 feet) of the world’s oceans warmed at a rate of 0.4 to 0.6 watts per square meter (W/m 2) between 2006 and 2013. The rate translates to a warming of roughly 0.005° C (0.009° F) per year in the top 500 meters of ocean and 0.002° C (0.0036° F) per year at depths between 500 and 2,000 meters.
For perspective, Roemmich noted that the heat gain was the equivalent of adding the heat of two trillion continuously burning 100-watt light bulbs to the world’s oceans.
“The rate of ocean heat gain during the past eight years is not unusual – indeed many studies of ocean data over the past 50 years and longer have produced similar rates. What is new is that the rate and patterns of ocean heat gain are revealed over a period as short as eight years, thanks to the Argo array, that the warming signal is shown to extend to 2,000 meters and deeper, and that it is occurring predominantly in the Southern Hemisphere ocean south of 20° S,” said Roemmich.
Wow, have you ever heard of Google?
Yes.
the top 2,000 meters (6,500 feet) of the world’s oceans warmed at a rate of 0.4 to 0.6 watts per square meter (W/m 2) between 2006 and 2013. The rate translates to a warming of roughly 0.005° C (0.009° F) per year in the top 500 meters of ocean and 0.002° C (0.0036° F) per year at depths between 500 and 2,000 meters.
Wow, that's some impressive accuracy for those temperature readings.
Except those aren't temperature readings.
Thanks!
Pointing out that my question about temperature readings was answered with W/m^2 makes me the dummy?
LOL!
Thanks for the laugh.
