Human Caused Global Warming

[cultsmasher]

hahahahahahahaahahhahahhahahhhahaha oh dude, you got hit by multiple stupid sticks. Holy crap.

I'm struggling to find something simple enough for you...I'm trying Donald Duck cartoons now but I'm not sure I can do it.

so it's actually quite simple, let me dumb it down for ya, Do you.......you idb, have an experiment that shows what 120 PPM of CO2 does to temperatures? Do you? a controlled experiment that starts with benchmark values and then in a controlled manner and incremental 10 PPM amounts of CO2 are added and the temperature recorded for each increment? Not some guy filling up a jar with all CO2 and saying seee it's a gas!!!! wow such stupid.

Ya know what?
I've just done a scan back on this thread to see what you're putting up as counter-evidence.
I found some of these
some of these
and a heap of other rubbish.

One thing I couldn't find is you actually using any facts to support your position...in fact, to be truthful, you haven't actually stated your position that I can see although I can infer that Global Warming is probably Liberal so must be wrong...or bad...or something...I'm not really sure.

son, I am not claiming anything. You are, therefore the burden is on your stupid ass to present your evidence to support your claim. See you state that 120 PPM of CO2 added in the atmosphere increases temperatures, I say prove it. there is my position. Now can you prove it? Do you have an experiment that defines the climb in temperature as CO2 is added up to 120 PPM in a controlled lab? Got that one do you? Until you do, your position is in quicksand and has no ground to stand on.

jc456,
How long can you state stupidity. Instead of an experiment, how about you look at some results again.

.

 

[cultsmasher]

Awe... Poor little libtard is using John Cooks FALSE STATEMENTS (which are quoted in both papers) as fact when they have been show a lie...

Your entire position is a lie. 90% say so. Once your side decides it is no longer effective to lie/deny they will argue their second talking point then 3rd. Eventually we will be arguing with you on who should be the ones to pay for the solution. We as a society should decide that the corporate pollutors that contribute the most to GW should but you guys will fight that until ultimately you will make us the people pay.

And I don't blame you. Why not sock it to the people? They don't even show up to vote so keep fucking them until they have had enough. Clearly they haven't had enough. The America people are so dumb.

By the way, this is the same thing happening in Michigan with our roads. Michigan allows corporations to put more weight on trucks than any of the other 50 states. That alone is a reason why corporations do business in Michigan. No need to give them more tax breaks although Snyder did give them more. Anyways, the point is that corporate trucks tear up our roads more than our cars do. So corporations should pay for the roads. But Snyder says no. He gave them tax breaks and says we don't have any $ to fix the roads, so he's going to raise our taxes. Basically proving me right. Republicans are only anti tax for the rich. They actually shift the tax burden from the rich onto us. Essentially they are for raising our taxes so they can lower the taxes for the rich. If you are for that, either you are dumb or rich.

Remember for how many years Republicans said NO NEW TAXES? Suddenly they win a 2nd term and sock it to the middle class? Where are all my middle class buddies who vote Republican? Suddenly they are defending tax increases? Interesting. Just like when they win back the white house they will stop being deficit hawks bet me. THey'll double the debt and you won't hear a sound out of their defenders. In fact remember Chaney said debt was good? I do.

Eventually we will be arguing with you on who should be the ones to pay for the solution. We as a society should decide that the corporate pollutors that contribute the most to GW should

That sounds like a great idea! How do you do it without making "the people pay"?

that dude's been hit with a stupid stick a long time ago. he doesn't understand climate and so I know he doesn't understand economics..

Aren't you the same free market fools who gave the rich tax breaks while starting two wars you didn't win, hired illegals who were only doing jobs Americans wouldn't do, and sent all our good paying manufacturing jobs overseas and caused the Great Recession of 2007?

This is the same thing you'll do with Global Warming. You'll deny deny deny until you can't any longer then you'll blame Carter, Obama, Clinton, Freddy Mack and Fanny Mae, Pelosi, Reed.

Aren't you the same free market fools who gave the rich tax breaks

Everyone got tax breaks.

hired illegals who were only doing jobs Americans wouldn't do

I'm in favor of sealing the border and sending those illegals back, unlike Obama.

todsterpatriot,
Nice to see you spread your stupidity around. I have some tax break information for you. Also, there are no jobs that Americans won't do. Desperate wetbacks are just willing to do them for a cheaper price than Americans will stand for.

 

[cultsmasher]

LOL... THE GUARDIAN.... LOL.....

And they Cite the GISS data set which has been adjusted upward 1.2 deg C.. And if you track the UNADJUSTED data set it is the 24th warmest out of 31 years...

The Guardian is only reporting the story.
Would you believe Fox?
NOAA Globe sets 5th hottest-month record of 2014 FOX 11 Online WLUK-TV

They are reporting the lies from our government. Both are wrong.. Having FOX jump on the lie bandwagon is a bit concerning but they will get the message soon enough.

Billy_Bob,
Excuse me for butting in. But years ago, Calvin Coolidge said that the business of government IS business. Seeing how doing something about human caused global warming is to business what showing a crucifix to a vampire is, why would the government be saying anything that supported HCGW.

SO your ok with binding the media and having them spout a lie if it advances your political agenda... The government has no buisness in buisness.. They are to have very limited scope and intrusion into personal lives and buisness in general. The problem is the government thinks they should control you lock, stock and barrel. Only a communist or a dictator thinks this way... No thanks! This is exactly why the founding fathers got out of Europe... Individuals free will ALWAYS out perform those under bondage.

Government in business is the socialist way...

SSDD,
As long as corruption exists, government in business is everybody's way. Do you have any idea how many places in the U.S. alone are polluted? Do you know why they're polluted? Because the government corruption that allowed businesses to pollute. It's the American freaken way!

 

[cultsmasher]

In my thread "Will You Vote Republican," somebody who goes by Vigilante sent me a reply that seems to refute the whole human caused global warming thing. But I thought my reply is something that you would all like to weigh in on.

Each year, all the volcanoes on earth put out an estimated 200 MILLION tons of CO2. Though some of this of course goes directly into the oceans. Humans on the other hand are responsible for an estimated 26.8 BILLION tons per year. Also, anybody who wishes to can look up a graph of the ammount of CO2 humans have put out since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Lately, human generated CO2 appears to be going up at a rate that is beyond exponential. There is a good chance that temperatures will follow suit.

This past summer, temperatures were fairly cool around where I live. But from what I have seen, if there are cooler temperatures in one area, it means that temperatures are hotter in another area of the earth.

I have a sister who is a human caused global warming denier. She points that in the far distant past, atmospheric CO2 levels were much higher than they are now. Which is true. Around one hundred million years ago or so, they were much higher. Apparently because of the breakup of the continents, things have been cooling down over a long time. Causing many ice ages. But as far as I have seen, this isn't something that happened a very long time ago. When global CO2 levels were much higher. We are in uncharted territory. No doubt there is much more methane in places like frozen tundra or shallow seas than there was in the far past. And methane is 20 times better at causing global warming than CO2. Just how much warming will it take for that to start getting released in ever greater quantity. It's hard to say. But there is one thing I know for sure. Most people don't really care what happens. As long as it happens to someone else.

So is there a mass conspiracy to pull the wool over the world’s eyes? It seems highly unlikely, considering the numerous studies that show overwhelming consensus among respected scientists that anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming is indisputable.

at least 97 percent believe in anthropogenic climate change

The study says that the few "contrarian" scientists are a vocal, but small, minority. They also found that those scientists denying human-caused climate change tend to have less expertise in the subject than those who believe in it.
Another survey out of the University of Illinois found that 82 percent of earth scientists (out of more than 3,000 respondents) believe that global temperature shifts are human-caused. Among climate-specific earth scientists who responded, 97.4 percent said they believe in human-caused climate change.
"It seems that the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes,"

Awe... Poor little libtard is using John Cooks FALSE STATEMENTS (which are quoted in both papers) as fact when they have been show a lie...

Your entire position is a lie. 90% say so. Once your side decides it is no longer effective to lie/deny they will argue their second talking point then 3rd. Eventually we will be arguing with you on who should be the ones to pay for the solution. We as a society should decide that the corporate pollutors that contribute the most to GW should but you guys will fight that until ultimately you will make us the people pay.

And I don't blame you. Why not sock it to the people? They don't even show up to vote so keep fucking them until they have had enough. Clearly they haven't had enough. The America people are so dumb.

By the way, this is the same thing happening in Michigan with our roads. Michigan allows corporations to put more weight on trucks than any of the other 50 states. That alone is a reason why corporations do business in Michigan. No need to give them more tax breaks although Snyder did give them more. Anyways, the point is that corporate trucks tear up our roads more than our cars do. So corporations should pay for the roads. But Snyder says no. He gave them tax breaks and says we don't have any $ to fix the roads, so he's going to raise our taxes. Basically proving me right. Republicans are only anti tax for the rich. They actually shift the tax burden from the rich onto us. Essentially they are for raising our taxes so they can lower the taxes for the rich. If you are for that, either you are dumb or rich.

Remember for how many years Republicans said NO NEW TAXES? Suddenly they win a 2nd term and sock it to the middle class? Where are all my middle class buddies who vote Republican? Suddenly they are defending tax increases? Interesting. Just like when they win back the white house they will stop being deficit hawks bet me. THey'll double the debt and you won't hear a sound out of their defenders. In fact remember Chaney said debt was good? I do.

Eventually we will be arguing with you on who should be the ones to pay for the solution. We as a society should decide that the corporate pollutors that contribute the most to GW should

That sounds like a great idea! How do you do it without making "the people pay"?

Oh we are all going to pay. I have no idea how we are going to move from gas cars to hydrogen cars but it has to and will happen.

If you want humans to continue to exist then we'll have to pay. I actually think it would be better if we don't pay and if we kill off humans and leave this planet to all the other species, I think all the other species will be better off. Humans are the plague of this planet. As smart as we are, we are doomed because of our warring and overpopulating.

Think about it. Without humans earth would be a garden of edin. Maybe one day if the deer evolve enough to be smart enough to make up god in their minds then they'll think every time a wolf or bear eats one of them they'll call that "evil". But don't worry because mommy Bambi just went to deer heaven.

God humans are dumb. If it weren't for 1% of the people who figured out electricity and medicines and how to make an engine, where would fools like you be? I'll tell you where you would be. Instead of spewing your bullshit on the net you'd be writing it on a cave wall somewhere.

Sealybobo,
Excuse me for butting in. Have you ever seen the documentary, "Who killed the electric car?" Hydrogen powered cars are a joke. Electric cars are all that are needed. Or as I suggested in another thread, electric cars with a small one cylinder home generator to extend the range a little if necessary or run air conditioning. Everything else is just bullshit to keep electric cars from being mass produced.

I agree with most of what you say about humanity. But humans need to survive. They just need to do so with fewer and superior (White) versions of them. But it can't happen through democracy.

 

[SSDD]

SSDD,
As long as corruption exists, government in business is everybody's way. Do you have any idea how many places in the U.S. alone are polluted? Do you know why they're polluted? Because the government corruption that allowed businesses to pollute. It's the American freaken way!

You think for one minute that government is less corrupt than business? How naive are you exactly?

 

[jc456]

hahahahahahahaahahhahahhahahhhahaha oh dude, you got hit by multiple stupid sticks. Holy crap.

I'm struggling to find something simple enough for you...I'm trying Donald Duck cartoons now but I'm not sure I can do it.

so it's actually quite simple, let me dumb it down for ya, Do you.......you idb, have an experiment that shows what 120 PPM of CO2 does to temperatures? Do you? a controlled experiment that starts with benchmark values and then in a controlled manner and incremental 10 PPM amounts of CO2 are added and the temperature recorded for each increment? Not some guy filling up a jar with all CO2 and saying seee it's a gas!!!! wow such stupid.

Ya know what?
I've just done a scan back on this thread to see what you're putting up as counter-evidence.
I found some of these
some of these
and a heap of other rubbish.

One thing I couldn't find is you actually using any facts to support your position...in fact, to be truthful, you haven't actually stated your position that I can see although I can infer that Global Warming is probably Liberal so must be wrong...or bad...or something...I'm not really sure.

son, I am not claiming anything. You are, therefore the burden is on your stupid ass to present your evidence to support your claim. See you state that 120 PPM of CO2 added in the atmosphere increases temperatures, I say prove it. there is my position. Now can you prove it? Do you have an experiment that defines the climb in temperature as CO2 is added up to 120 PPM in a controlled lab? Got that one do you? Until you do, your position is in quicksand and has no ground to stand on.

jc456,
How long can you state stupidity. Instead of an experiment, how about you look at some results again.View attachment 34729 View attachment 34731 .

whew...stop with the stupid!!!

 

[jc456]

Your entire position is a lie. 90% say so. Once your side decides it is no longer effective to lie/deny they will argue their second talking point then 3rd. Eventually we will be arguing with you on who should be the ones to pay for the solution. We as a society should decide that the corporate pollutors that contribute the most to GW should but you guys will fight that until ultimately you will make us the people pay.

And I don't blame you. Why not sock it to the people? They don't even show up to vote so keep fucking them until they have had enough. Clearly they haven't had enough. The America people are so dumb.

By the way, this is the same thing happening in Michigan with our roads. Michigan allows corporations to put more weight on trucks than any of the other 50 states. That alone is a reason why corporations do business in Michigan. No need to give them more tax breaks although Snyder did give them more. Anyways, the point is that corporate trucks tear up our roads more than our cars do. So corporations should pay for the roads. But Snyder says no. He gave them tax breaks and says we don't have any $ to fix the roads, so he's going to raise our taxes. Basically proving me right. Republicans are only anti tax for the rich. They actually shift the tax burden from the rich onto us. Essentially they are for raising our taxes so they can lower the taxes for the rich. If you are for that, either you are dumb or rich.

Remember for how many years Republicans said NO NEW TAXES? Suddenly they win a 2nd term and sock it to the middle class? Where are all my middle class buddies who vote Republican? Suddenly they are defending tax increases? Interesting. Just like when they win back the white house they will stop being deficit hawks bet me. THey'll double the debt and you won't hear a sound out of their defenders. In fact remember Chaney said debt was good? I do.

Eventually we will be arguing with you on who should be the ones to pay for the solution. We as a society should decide that the corporate pollutors that contribute the most to GW should

That sounds like a great idea! How do you do it without making "the people pay"?

that dude's been hit with a stupid stick a long time ago. he doesn't understand climate and so I know he doesn't understand economics..

Aren't you the same free market fools who gave the rich tax breaks while starting two wars you didn't win, hired illegals who were only doing jobs Americans wouldn't do, and sent all our good paying manufacturing jobs overseas and caused the Great Recession of 2007?

This is the same thing you'll do with Global Warming. You'll deny deny deny until you can't any longer then you'll blame Carter, Obama, Clinton, Freddy Mack and Fanny Mae, Pelosi, Reed.

Aren't you the same free market fools who gave the rich tax breaks

Everyone got tax breaks.

hired illegals who were only doing jobs Americans wouldn't do

I'm in favor of sealing the border and sending those illegals back, unlike Obama.

todsterpatriot,
Nice to see you spread your stupidity around. I have some tax break information for you. Also, there are no jobs that Americans won't do. Desperate wetbacks are just willing to do them for a cheaper price than Americans will stand for.
View attachment 34732 View attachment 34734 View attachment 34735 View attachment 34736 View attachment 34737

check out this link

From the report:
2010 taxpayer income (in 2011 dollars) Share of all federal taxes paid


$16,961 and under (Bottom 20%) -0.1%


$16,962 to $33,870 (21%-40%) 2.8%


$33,871 to $59,154 (41%-60%) 9.8%

 $59,155 to $103,428 (61%-80%) 18.7%

$103,428 and over (Top 20%) 68.6%

 

[cultsmasher]

SSDD,
As long as corruption exists, government in business is everybody's way. Do you have any idea how many places in the U.S. alone are polluted? Do you know why they're polluted? Because the government corruption that allowed businesses to pollute. It's the American freaken way!

You think for one minute that government is less corrupt than business? How naive are you exactly?

SSDD,
I don't know where you got the idea that I said government is less corrupt than business. But as it turns out, it is. Because governments are answerable to the voters. But business answers to nobody. Money is the measure of what is right and wrong to them. That is the main reason why I am apposed to all forms of privatization of public functions. Such as national parks or highways. Because though these things are meant for the good of all people, if they were private, those running things would be answerable to nobody.

 

[cultsmasher]

Eventually we will be arguing with you on who should be the ones to pay for the solution. We as a society should decide that the corporate pollutors that contribute the most to GW should

That sounds like a great idea! How do you do it without making "the people pay"?

that dude's been hit with a stupid stick a long time ago. he doesn't understand climate and so I know he doesn't understand economics..

Aren't you the same free market fools who gave the rich tax breaks while starting two wars you didn't win, hired illegals who were only doing jobs Americans wouldn't do, and sent all our good paying manufacturing jobs overseas and caused the Great Recession of 2007?

This is the same thing you'll do with Global Warming. You'll deny deny deny until you can't any longer then you'll blame Carter, Obama, Clinton, Freddy Mack and Fanny Mae, Pelosi, Reed.

Aren't you the same free market fools who gave the rich tax breaks

Everyone got tax breaks.

hired illegals who were only doing jobs Americans wouldn't do

I'm in favor of sealing the border and sending those illegals back, unlike Obama.

todsterpatriot,
Nice to see you spread your stupidity around. I have some tax break information for you. Also, there are no jobs that Americans won't do. Desperate wetbacks are just willing to do them for a cheaper price than Americans will stand for.
View attachment 34732 View attachment 34734 View attachment 34735 View attachment 34736 View attachment 34737

check out this link

From the report:
2010 taxpayer income (in 2011 dollars) Share of all federal taxes paid


$16,961 and under (Bottom 20%) -0.1%


$16,962 to $33,870 (21%-40%) 2.8%


$33,871 to $59,154 (41%-60%) 9.8%

 $59,155 to $103,428 (61%-80%) 18.7%

$103,428 and over (Top 20%) 68.6%

jc456,
My thread "War on the rich: best idea in the history of man" is the best place to be having this discussion. But I will play along. Who pays what isn't the point. The point is what percentace of somebody's income must be paid. With the wealthy, they have lawyers to help them hide wealth. I am reminded of the Clinton administration. They used accounting practices that would have been illegal in the private sector to make it look like the U.S. had a balanced budget.

When it comes to who pays what, I was talking to SSDD about companies that pollute. The poor are the ones who pick up the lion's share in that. One way how comes from a story of when I was in the military. I got involved with a crooked used car company. They ended up having to go to a military hearing at which I and some other service people spoke. The military ended up putting the place off limits to service personnel. What did the used car company do? Change the name of their business. From what I saw, that was all that changed. The point is that there are endless ways for the wealthy to keep from paying the piper. And when it comes to HCGW, everybody is going to end up paying the piper far more than they can afford.

 

[Billy_Bob]

hahahahahahahaahahhahahhahahhhahaha oh dude, you got hit by multiple stupid sticks. Holy crap.

I'm struggling to find something simple enough for you...I'm trying Donald Duck cartoons now but I'm not sure I can do it.

so it's actually quite simple, let me dumb it down for ya, Do you.......you idb, have an experiment that shows what 120 PPM of CO2 does to temperatures? Do you? a controlled experiment that starts with benchmark values and then in a controlled manner and incremental 10 PPM amounts of CO2 are added and the temperature recorded for each increment? Not some guy filling up a jar with all CO2 and saying seee it's a gas!!!! wow such stupid.

Ya know what?
I've just done a scan back on this thread to see what you're putting up as counter-evidence.
I found some of these
some of these
and a heap of other rubbish.

One thing I couldn't find is you actually using any facts to support your position...in fact, to be truthful, you haven't actually stated your position that I can see although I can infer that Global Warming is probably Liberal so must be wrong...or bad...or something...I'm not really sure.

son, I am not claiming anything. You are, therefore the burden is on your stupid ass to present your evidence to support your claim. See you state that 120 PPM of CO2 added in the atmosphere increases temperatures, I say prove it. there is my position. Now can you prove it? Do you have an experiment that defines the climb in temperature as CO2 is added up to 120 PPM in a controlled lab? Got that one do you? Until you do, your position is in quicksand and has no ground to stand on.

jc456,
How long can you state stupidity. Instead of an experiment, how about you look at some results again.View attachment 34729 View attachment 34731 .

Same old wall of shit...

Empirical evidence blows your fantasy to bits...--> Human Caused Global Warming Page 79 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[cultsmasher]

I'm struggling to find something simple enough for you...I'm trying Donald Duck cartoons now but I'm not sure I can do it.

so it's actually quite simple, let me dumb it down for ya, Do you.......you idb, have an experiment that shows what 120 PPM of CO2 does to temperatures? Do you? a controlled experiment that starts with benchmark values and then in a controlled manner and incremental 10 PPM amounts of CO2 are added and the temperature recorded for each increment? Not some guy filling up a jar with all CO2 and saying seee it's a gas!!!! wow such stupid.

Ya know what?
I've just done a scan back on this thread to see what you're putting up as counter-evidence.
I found some of these
some of these
and a heap of other rubbish.

One thing I couldn't find is you actually using any facts to support your position...in fact, to be truthful, you haven't actually stated your position that I can see although I can infer that Global Warming is probably Liberal so must be wrong...or bad...or something...I'm not really sure.

son, I am not claiming anything. You are, therefore the burden is on your stupid ass to present your evidence to support your claim. See you state that 120 PPM of CO2 added in the atmosphere increases temperatures, I say prove it. there is my position. Now can you prove it? Do you have an experiment that defines the climb in temperature as CO2 is added up to 120 PPM in a controlled lab? Got that one do you? Until you do, your position is in quicksand and has no ground to stand on.

jc456,
How long can you state stupidity. Instead of an experiment, how about you look at some results again.View attachment 34729 View attachment 34731 .

Same old wall of shit...

Empirical evidence blows your fantasy to bits...--> Human Caused Global Warming Page 79 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Billy_Bob,
My graphs are better than yours. Why? Because mine are backed up by the vast majority of scientists. Now it's your turn to tell me that most scientists are part of an evil conspiracy.

 

[Billy_Bob]

so it's actually quite simple, let me dumb it down for ya, Do you.......you idb, have an experiment that shows what 120 PPM of CO2 does to temperatures? Do you? a controlled experiment that starts with benchmark values and then in a controlled manner and incremental 10 PPM amounts of CO2 are added and the temperature recorded for each increment? Not some guy filling up a jar with all CO2 and saying seee it's a gas!!!! wow such stupid.

Ya know what?
I've just done a scan back on this thread to see what you're putting up as counter-evidence.
I found some of these
some of these
and a heap of other rubbish.

One thing I couldn't find is you actually using any facts to support your position...in fact, to be truthful, you haven't actually stated your position that I can see although I can infer that Global Warming is probably Liberal so must be wrong...or bad...or something...I'm not really sure.

son, I am not claiming anything. You are, therefore the burden is on your stupid ass to present your evidence to support your claim. See you state that 120 PPM of CO2 added in the atmosphere increases temperatures, I say prove it. there is my position. Now can you prove it? Do you have an experiment that defines the climb in temperature as CO2 is added up to 120 PPM in a controlled lab? Got that one do you? Until you do, your position is in quicksand and has no ground to stand on.

jc456,
How long can you state stupidity. Instead of an experiment, how about you look at some results again.View attachment 34729 View attachment 34731 .

Same old wall of shit...

Empirical evidence blows your fantasy to bits...--> Human Caused Global Warming Page 79 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Billy_Bob,
My graphs are better than yours. Why? Because mine are backed up by the vast majority of scientists. Now it's your turn to tell me that most scientists are part of an evil conspiracy.

You rely on consensus.... I believe you still think the world is flat, and it didn't work out so well for the consensus back then as it will not for them now.. In both instances the consensus has had a political agenda to push which was and is still control of people..

True science is always skeptical thus consensus is not scientific in any way as it is the antithesis of what science is..

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

so it's actually quite simple, let me dumb it down for ya, Do you.......you idb, have an experiment that shows what 120 PPM of CO2 does to temperatures? Do you? a controlled experiment that starts with benchmark values and then in a controlled manner and incremental 10 PPM amounts of CO2 are added and the temperature recorded for each increment? Not some guy filling up a jar with all CO2 and saying seee it's a gas!!!! wow such stupid.

Ya know what?
I've just done a scan back on this thread to see what you're putting up as counter-evidence.
I found some of these
some of these
and a heap of other rubbish.

One thing I couldn't find is you actually using any facts to support your position...in fact, to be truthful, you haven't actually stated your position that I can see although I can infer that Global Warming is probably Liberal so must be wrong...or bad...or something...I'm not really sure.

son, I am not claiming anything. You are, therefore the burden is on your stupid ass to present your evidence to support your claim. See you state that 120 PPM of CO2 added in the atmosphere increases temperatures, I say prove it. there is my position. Now can you prove it? Do you have an experiment that defines the climb in temperature as CO2 is added up to 120 PPM in a controlled lab? Got that one do you? Until you do, your position is in quicksand and has no ground to stand on.

jc456,
How long can you state stupidity. Instead of an experiment, how about you look at some results again.View attachment 34729 View attachment 34731 .

Same old wall of shit...

Empirical evidence blows your fantasy to bits...--> Human Caused Global Warming Page 79 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Billy_Bob,
My graphs are better than yours. Why? Because mine are backed up by the vast majority of scientists. Now it's your turn to tell me that most scientists are part of an evil conspiracy.

Jewish scientists back your position?

 

[Saigon]

True science is always skeptical thus consensus is not scientific in any way as it is the antithesis of what science is..

So the fringe minority is usually correct, is it?

 

[jc456]

that dude's been hit with a stupid stick a long time ago. he doesn't understand climate and so I know he doesn't understand economics..

Aren't you the same free market fools who gave the rich tax breaks while starting two wars you didn't win, hired illegals who were only doing jobs Americans wouldn't do, and sent all our good paying manufacturing jobs overseas and caused the Great Recession of 2007?

This is the same thing you'll do with Global Warming. You'll deny deny deny until you can't any longer then you'll blame Carter, Obama, Clinton, Freddy Mack and Fanny Mae, Pelosi, Reed.

Aren't you the same free market fools who gave the rich tax breaks

Everyone got tax breaks.

hired illegals who were only doing jobs Americans wouldn't do

I'm in favor of sealing the border and sending those illegals back, unlike Obama.

todsterpatriot,
Nice to see you spread your stupidity around. I have some tax break information for you. Also, there are no jobs that Americans won't do. Desperate wetbacks are just willing to do them for a cheaper price than Americans will stand for.
View attachment 34732 View attachment 34734 View attachment 34735 View attachment 34736 View attachment 34737

check out this link

From the report:
2010 taxpayer income (in 2011 dollars) Share of all federal taxes paid


$16,961 and under (Bottom 20%) -0.1%


$16,962 to $33,870 (21%-40%) 2.8%


$33,871 to $59,154 (41%-60%) 9.8%

 $59,155 to $103,428 (61%-80%) 18.7%

$103,428 and over (Top 20%) 68.6%

jc456,
My thread "War on the rich: best idea in the history of man" is the best place to be having this discussion. But I will play along. Who pays what isn't the point. The point is what percentace of somebody's income must be paid. With the wealthy, they have lawyers to help them hide wealth. I am reminded of the Clinton administration. They used accounting practices that would have been illegal in the private sector to make it look like the U.S. had a balanced budget.

When it comes to who pays what, I was talking to SSDD about companies that pollute. The poor are the ones who pick up the lion's share in that. One way how comes from a story of when I was in the military. I got involved with a crooked used car company. They ended up having to go to a military hearing at which I and some other service people spoke. The military ended up putting the place off limits to service personnel. What did the used car company do? Change the name of their business. From what I saw, that was all that changed. The point is that there are endless ways for the wealthy to keep from paying the piper. And when it comes to HCGW, everybody is going to end up paying the piper far more than they can afford.

dude, I'm happy to go over there and limit the discussion in the environmental forum.

But it seems to me that you aren't using all of your genius to understand that the percentage of tax from someone making more is going to be more even if the percentage between brackets is the same.

i.e., 11% of 50k is 5k and the 11% of a 100k is double to the 50k. Basic math. So is it you're jealous because someone makes more than you?

 

[jc456]

True science is always skeptical thus consensus is not scientific in any way as it is the antithesis of what science is..

So the fringe minority is usually correct, is it?

it is when the observed doesn't match the models!

 

[sealybobo]

In my thread "Will You Vote Republican," somebody who goes by Vigilante sent me a reply that seems to refute the whole human caused global warming thing. But I thought my reply is something that you would all like to weigh in on.

Each year, all the volcanoes on earth put out an estimated 200 MILLION tons of CO2. Though some of this of course goes directly into the oceans. Humans on the other hand are responsible for an estimated 26.8 BILLION tons per year. Also, anybody who wishes to can look up a graph of the ammount of CO2 humans have put out since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Lately, human generated CO2 appears to be going up at a rate that is beyond exponential. There is a good chance that temperatures will follow suit.

This past summer, temperatures were fairly cool around where I live. But from what I have seen, if there are cooler temperatures in one area, it means that temperatures are hotter in another area of the earth.

I have a sister who is a human caused global warming denier. She points that in the far distant past, atmospheric CO2 levels were much higher than they are now. Which is true. Around one hundred million years ago or so, they were much higher. Apparently because of the breakup of the continents, things have been cooling down over a long time. Causing many ice ages. But as far as I have seen, this isn't something that happened a very long time ago. When global CO2 levels were much higher. We are in uncharted territory. No doubt there is much more methane in places like frozen tundra or shallow seas than there was in the far past. And methane is 20 times better at causing global warming than CO2. Just how much warming will it take for that to start getting released in ever greater quantity. It's hard to say. But there is one thing I know for sure. Most people don't really care what happens. As long as it happens to someone else.

I heard this while watching The Cosmos. The new one. Everyone should watch the old one and the new one.

We can read the unbroken record of Earth's atmosphere that extends back over the last 800,000 years. In all that time, the amount of carbon dioxide in the air never rose above three-hundredths of one percent. That is, until the turn of the 20th century. It's now more than 40% higher than before the Industrial Revolution. By burning coal, oil and gas, our civilization is exhaling carbon dioxide much faster than Earth can absorb it. So CO2 is building up in the atmosphere. The planet is heating up.

All right but how do we know that we're the problem? Maybe it's those damn volcanoes. Every few years, Mount Etna, in Sicily, blows its stack. Each big eruption sends millions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. Now, combine that with the output of all the other volcanic activity on the planet. Let's take the largest scientific estimate-- about 500 million tons of volcanic CO2 entering the atmosphere ever year.
Sounds like a lot, right? But that's not even two percent of the 30 billion tons of CO2 that our civilization is cranking out every year.

It's clear that the increased CO2 in the air is not from volcanoes. It's a pretty tight case. Our fingerprints are all over this one.

 

[Billy_Bob]

In my thread "Will You Vote Republican," somebody who goes by Vigilante sent me a reply that seems to refute the whole human caused global warming thing. But I thought my reply is something that you would all like to weigh in on.

Each year, all the volcanoes on earth put out an estimated 200 MILLION tons of CO2. Though some of this of course goes directly into the oceans. Humans on the other hand are responsible for an estimated 26.8 BILLION tons per year. Also, anybody who wishes to can look up a graph of the ammount of CO2 humans have put out since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Lately, human generated CO2 appears to be going up at a rate that is beyond exponential. There is a good chance that temperatures will follow suit.

This past summer, temperatures were fairly cool around where I live. But from what I have seen, if there are cooler temperatures in one area, it means that temperatures are hotter in another area of the earth.

I have a sister who is a human caused global warming denier. She points that in the far distant past, atmospheric CO2 levels were much higher than they are now. Which is true. Around one hundred million years ago or so, they were much higher. Apparently because of the breakup of the continents, things have been cooling down over a long time. Causing many ice ages. But as far as I have seen, this isn't something that happened a very long time ago. When global CO2 levels were much higher. We are in uncharted territory. No doubt there is much more methane in places like frozen tundra or shallow seas than there was in the far past. And methane is 20 times better at causing global warming than CO2. Just how much warming will it take for that to start getting released in ever greater quantity. It's hard to say. But there is one thing I know for sure. Most people don't really care what happens. As long as it happens to someone else.

I heard this while watching The Cosmos. The new one. Everyone should watch the old one and the new one.

We can read the unbroken record of Earth's atmosphere that extends back over the last 800,000 years. In all that time, the amount of carbon dioxide in the air never rose above three-hundredths of one percent. That is, until the turn of the 20th century. It's now more than 40% higher than before the Industrial Revolution. By burning coal, oil and gas, our civilization is exhaling carbon dioxide much faster than Earth can absorb it. So CO2 is building up in the atmosphere. The planet is heating up.

All right but how do we know that we're the problem? Maybe it's those damn volcanoes. Every few years, Mount Etna, in Sicily, blows its stack. Each big eruption sends millions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. Now, combine that with the output of all the other volcanic activity on the planet. Let's take the largest scientific estimate-- about 500 million tons of volcanic CO2 entering the atmosphere ever year.
Sounds like a lot, right? But that's not even two percent of the 30 billion tons of CO2 that our civilization is cranking out every year.

It's clear that the increased CO2 in the air is not from volcanoes. It's a pretty tight case. Our fingerprints are all over this one.

SIlly you...

You think CO2 has never before been higher than today? That is an outright lie and a fabrication. You should check your sources more carefully.

We have been well over 7,000ppm and the earth has been over 1,500 for most of its history.

Epic Cult FAIL

 

[Crick]

SIlly you...

You think CO2 has never before been higher than today? That is an outright lie and a fabrication. You should check your sources more carefully.
View attachment 35838

We have been well over 7,000ppm and the earth has been over 1,500 for most of its history.

Epic Cult FAIL

Stupid you Billy Bob...

Can you not read?!?!?

We can read the unbroken record of Earth's atmosphere that extends back over the last 800,000 years. In all that time, the amount of carbon dioxide in the air never rose above three-hundredths of one percent.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

SIlly you...

You think CO2 has never before been higher than today? That is an outright lie and a fabrication. You should check your sources more carefully.
View attachment 35838

We have been well over 7,000ppm and the earth has been over 1,500 for most of its history.

Epic Cult FAIL

Stupid you Billy Bob...

Can you not read?!?!?

We can read the unbroken record of Earth's atmosphere that extends back over the last 800,000 years. In all that time, the amount of carbon dioxide in the air never rose above three-hundredths of one percent.

You mean the data set that shows CO2 lagging temperature on both the increase and decline for 800,000 consecutive years?