New IIPC report leaked!

[CrusaderFrank]

AGW, it can't be proved, it can only be believed!

 

[jon_berzerk]

AGW, it can't be proved, it can only be believed!

behold

the seas will rise

and the lands will burn -weather shaman al gore

--LOL

 

[Oddball]

It is probably true that the time period in which we live is probably the most unique event in the accepted history of the Earth, there is no precedent for a species being able to effect the ecology of the entire planet; life has never encountered such a situation before. Even if global warming is true, and it still has not been entirely proven I believe; there are numerous other impacts civilization is having on the planet's environment such as radioactive contamination from nuclear accidents and bombs tests and carcinogens being released into the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels. Is it not a fact that the statistical rates of people falling ill from cancer began to steadily increase as the twentieth century progressed; is there a possibility that it is linked to technological civilization and its impact on the Earth's ecology. We might be living in the most important and cataclysmic period in human history if not the history of life on Earth. Let us hope that future generations don't inherit a poisoned, dying world which is harsh to the existence of complex lifeforms; that humanity will be the first species in the planet's history which triggered an extinction level event where even he may perish. If this is true; then these issues are probably the most profound and urgent issues confronting all of humanity. Will humanity still exist in ten thousand years or even a thousand; what is the fate of our species?

Thank you, Reverend Malthus.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ5ob9B9yD4]Gloom despair and agony on me - YouTube[/ame]

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I stated that droughts occurred when CO2 levels were both HIGH AND LOW.

Exactly.

So why do you assume that ALL droughts have the same cause?


Frank - please do not spam the thread with gibberish.

Translation: The desertification of the Sahara destroys AGWCult's basic premise and what we cannot explain we must supress, for the good of consensus and settled science

 

[Saigon]

Frank -

Translation - you have yet to post a single sensible or coherent thread on this board, and you aren't about to start now.

I'd be more than happy to debate the Sahara with you, but for the fact that you couldn't place it on a map, and will run away as soon as any science is posted anyway.

 

[westwall]

Frank -

Translation - you have yet to post a single sensible or coherent thread on this board, and you aren't about to start now.

I'd be more than happy to debate the Sahara with you, but for the fact that you couldn't place it on a map, and will run away as soon as any science is posted anyway.

Frank makes very cogent observations and the Sahara comment is an excellent example of that. The desertification of the Sahara does blow a huge hole in one of the basic tenets (like how I use a religious term here?) of AGW theory.

You see saggy old boy, you and blunder and olfraud will post blizzards of pointless scripture that gets refuted with a couple of lines from a smart person. That's your problem.
You're not smart.

 

[mamooth]

Denialist cultists are funny when they preach their religion at each other.

"The models were wrong!".

"The Sahara proves ... something ... but I can't explain how!".

"I'm obsessed with Al Gore!".

It's a form of validation for them. They literally don't care if it's true or not. Which is good for them, because it's always BS. The point is to demonstrated to their fellow cultists that they are indeed still a loyal member of the cult, willing to parrot any bit of cult dogma, no matter how stupid it is.

 

[westwall]

Denialist cultists are funny when they preach their religion at each other.

"The models were wrong!".

"The Sahara proves ... something ... but I can't explain how!".

"I'm obsessed with Al Gore!".

It's a form of validation for them. They literally don't care if it's true or not. Which is good for them, because it's always BS. The point is to demonstrated to their fellow cultists that they are indeed still a loyal member of the cult, willing to parrot any bit of cult dogma, no matter how stupid it is.

Really, that's the best you can do? You need to come back as trolling blunder to make a proper effort!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Frank -

Translation - you have yet to post a single sensible or coherent thread on this board, and you aren't about to start now.

I'd be more than happy to debate the Sahara with you, but for the fact that you couldn't place it on a map, and will run away as soon as any science is posted anyway.

Debate the Sahara? What's to debate? The climate changed and what was once green and lush is now desert. The problem that causes for you is that either pharaoh drove in an SUV or your theory fails

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[Saigon]

Frank -

So you thought the climate would be stable were it not for CO2?

The climate has alway changed - but what you seem to struggle to understand is that whenever the climate changes dramatically - something CAUSES it to change. In most cases going back thousands of years we know what those causes are.