Republicans, is CO2 a Greenhouse gas???

[Old Rocks]

I don't think you understand the basics of how CO2 contributes to Global Warming.

Is it a greenhouse gas or not?

No, demonstrably it is you who don't understand how CO2 does, or doesn't work as a GHG. Is it a GHG? Yes. Can it do all of the magical things you claim? No.

Actually yes it can do all the "magical" things. The science on that is settled.

Sorry you're retarded.

Ummmm, no. It can't. The "science" is not "settled" save in the minds of those who stand to profit from the legislation that they wish to ram down the throats of the middle class of the world. The facts are that there is ZERO empirical data to support the theory. ZERO. Some day, when you actually learn how to think for yourself feel free to come back and show us some empirical data that supports it.

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Let us know when logical fallacy's actually mean something. M'kay....

Really? Do you want me to post the American Geophysical Union's statement on AGW again? How that of the Geological Society of America? You are the fraud here, Mr. Westwall.

 

[bripat9643]

No, demonstrably it is you who don't understand how CO2 does, or doesn't work as a GHG. Is it a GHG? Yes. Can it do all of the magical things you claim? No.

Actually yes it can do all the "magical" things. The science on that is settled.

Sorry you're retarded.

Ummmm, no. It can't. The "science" is not "settled" save in the minds of those who stand to profit from the legislation that they wish to ram down the throats of the middle class of the world. The facts are that there is ZERO empirical data to support the theory. ZERO. Some day, when you actually learn how to think for yourself feel free to come back and show us some empirical data that supports it.

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Let us know when logical fallacy's actually mean something. M'kay....

Really? Do you want me to post the American Geophysical Union's statement on AGW again? How that of the Geological Society of America? You are the fraud here, Mr. Westwall.

The statement is drafted by the ass kissers in the leadership.

 

[Old Rocks]

Actually yes it can do all the "magical" things. The science on that is settled.

Sorry you're retarded.

Ummmm, no. It can't. The "science" is not "settled" save in the minds of those who stand to profit from the legislation that they wish to ram down the throats of the middle class of the world. The facts are that there is ZERO empirical data to support the theory. ZERO. Some day, when you actually learn how to think for yourself feel free to come back and show us some empirical data that supports it.

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Appeal to authority, your favorite logical fallacy.

By "every practicing scientist" you mean every scientist on the government AGW payroll.

Dumb ass. The whole of the AGU and the GSA state that AGW is real, and most of them do not work for the government.

Every member says that? The GSA is a government agency, and I don't recall ever seeing a poll taken of the AGU on the issue.

Climate Change
Adopted in October 2006; revised April 2010; March 2013; April 2015

Position Statement
Decades of scientific research have shown that climate can change from both natural and anthropogenic causes. The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2011), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2013) and the U.S. Global Change Research Program (Melillo et al., 2014) that global climate has warmed in response to increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases. The concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are now higher than they have been for many thousands of years. Human activities (mainly greenhouse-gas emissions) are the dominant cause of the rapid warming since the middle 1900s (IPCC, 2013). If the upward trend in greenhouse-gas concentrations continues, the projected global climate change by the end of the twenty-first century will result in significant impacts on humans and other species. The tangible effects of climate change are already occurring. Addressing the challenges posed by climate change will require a combination of adaptation to the changes that are likely to occur and global reductions of CO2 emissions from anthropogenic sources.

Purpose
This position statement (1) summarizes the scientific basis for the conclusion that human activities are the primary cause of recent global warming; (2) describes the significant effects on humans and ecosystems as greenhouse-gas concentrations and global climate reach projected levels; and (3) provides information for policy decisions guiding mitigation and adaptation strategies designed to address the current and future impacts of anthropogenic warming.

The Geological Society of America - Position Statement on Climate Change

GSA, Geological Society of America

 

[bripat9643]

Ummmm, no. It can't. The "science" is not "settled" save in the minds of those who stand to profit from the legislation that they wish to ram down the throats of the middle class of the world. The facts are that there is ZERO empirical data to support the theory. ZERO. Some day, when you actually learn how to think for yourself feel free to come back and show us some empirical data that supports it.

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Appeal to authority, your favorite logical fallacy.

By "every practicing scientist" you mean every scientist on the government AGW payroll.

Dumb ass. The whole of the AGU and the GSA state that AGW is real, and most of them do not work for the government.

Every member says that? The GSA is a government agency, and I don't recall ever seeing a poll taken of the AGU on the issue.

Climate Change
Adopted in October 2006; revised April 2010; March 2013; April 2015

Position Statement
Decades of scientific research have shown that climate can change from both natural and anthropogenic causes. The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2011), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2013) and the U.S. Global Change Research Program (Melillo et al., 2014) that global climate has warmed in response to increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases. The concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are now higher than they have been for many thousands of years. Human activities (mainly greenhouse-gas emissions) are the dominant cause of the rapid warming since the middle 1900s (IPCC, 2013). If the upward trend in greenhouse-gas concentrations continues, the projected global climate change by the end of the twenty-first century will result in significant impacts on humans and other species. The tangible effects of climate change are already occurring. Addressing the challenges posed by climate change will require a combination of adaptation to the changes that are likely to occur and global reductions of CO2 emissions from anthropogenic sources.

Purpose
This position statement (1) summarizes the scientific basis for the conclusion that human activities are the primary cause of recent global warming; (2) describes the significant effects on humans and ecosystems as greenhouse-gas concentrations and global climate reach projected levels; and (3) provides information for policy decisions guiding mitigation and adaptation strategies designed to address the current and future impacts of anthropogenic warming.

The Geological Society of America - Position Statement on Climate Change

GSA, Geological Society of America

A statement drafted by some ass kissers in the leadership. Where is the poll of all the members on the issue?

 

[westwall]

No, demonstrably it is you who don't understand how CO2 does, or doesn't work as a GHG. Is it a GHG? Yes. Can it do all of the magical things you claim? No.

Actually yes it can do all the "magical" things. The science on that is settled.

Sorry you're retarded.

Ummmm, no. It can't. The "science" is not "settled" save in the minds of those who stand to profit from the legislation that they wish to ram down the throats of the middle class of the world. The facts are that there is ZERO empirical data to support the theory. ZERO. Some day, when you actually learn how to think for yourself feel free to come back and show us some empirical data that supports it.

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Let us know when logical fallacy's actually mean something. M'kay....

Really? Do you want me to post the American Geophysical Union's statement on AGW again? How that of the Geological Society of America? You are the fraud here, Mr. Westwall.

Once again, let me know when a logical fallacy means a gosh damned thing. Relying on a bunch of people who's funding is dependent on their surrender to the powers that be is meaningless!

 

[Old Rocks]

Actually yes it can do all the "magical" things. The science on that is settled.

Sorry you're retarded.

Ummmm, no. It can't. The "science" is not "settled" save in the minds of those who stand to profit from the legislation that they wish to ram down the throats of the middle class of the world. The facts are that there is ZERO empirical data to support the theory. ZERO. Some day, when you actually learn how to think for yourself feel free to come back and show us some empirical data that supports it.

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Appeal to authority, your favorite logical fallacy.

By "every practicing scientist" you mean every scientist on the government AGW payroll.

Dumb ass. The whole of the AGU and the GSA state that AGW is real, and most of them do not work for the government.

Bullshit. Their leadership only does. The general membership doesn't you lying sack of poo.


And what the hell would the General Services Administration have to say about it you 'tard.

Now you are the lying sack of shit, Mr. Westwall. Those of us that are members vote on the leadership, and the statements have gotten stronger over the year as the evidence mounts for the changes that AGW is creating. That you are a liar and a fraud is clearly evident from you posts here. In fact, were you not such, you would have by now presented your views at the convention in San Francisco.

 

[jc456]

Do Republicans even understand that CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

Do Republicans understand there are even worse Greenhouse gasses? Such as Sulfur Hexaflouride, a non-toxic gas that is 32,000x more potent than CO2?

Can you imagine what would happen to the Earth if a gas that traps 32,000x more heat in the atmosphere than CO2 were to escape our industries on the scale that we have released CO2?

Just think about what your idiotic lack of scientific understanding implies.

I thought CO2 was what humans exhaled as they breathed? Why is it a greenhouse gas? Do greenhouses use CO2? you should check that out.

jc, you have obviously checked out your brain. CO2 is a GHG because of it's absorption spectra.

No it isn't and you can't prove it. Any day

 

[Old Rocks]

Indeed...

Time to outlaw breathing.

People don't even contribute a fraction to CO2 increase in the atmosphere that Power Plants are producing.

Actually as part of the carbon cycle living things don't contribute to the increase in CO2 concentrations.

Apparently to your progress of friends in the government they do, dang Cow farts

Are you ever going to say anything that shows any degree of thought? The issue is whether CO2 is a GHG. Many 'Conservatives' like you like to demonstrate their vast ignorance by claiming it is not.

Oh Jesus Christ old rocks the US government says electricity is defined as a fuel.

How the fuck can CO2 be deadly when we need it and you need something to make electricity?

Now why don't you read that slowly. What kind of logic is that? How can something be deadly when we need it? How many medicines are there that will kill you if you take too much? You cannot live without salt. So you can just eat a quart of salt with no ill effects, right?

And there are many ways of making electricity without producing CO2.

 

[flacaltenn]

Do Republicans even understand that CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

Do Republicans understand there are even worse Greenhouse gasses? Such as Sulfur Hexaflouride, a non-toxic gas that is 32,000x more potent than CO2?

Can you imagine what would happen to the Earth if a gas that traps 32,000x more heat in the atmosphere than CO2 were to escape our industries on the scale that we have released CO2?

Just think about what your idiotic lack of scientific understanding implies.

Do you know what the #1 greenhouse gas is? I'll give you a hint: It's the main ingredient in your body. You know....aside from you being full of hot air.

I don't think you understand the basics of how CO2 contributes to Global Warming.

Is it a greenhouse gas or not?

Yes.. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. It has a LIMITED and decreasingly effective rate of warming the atmos. To get about 1.1degC increase you need to DOUBLE the amount. So we haven't yet even doubled since the industrial revolution. That doubling ends at 280ppm X 2 = 560ppm. The NEXT 1,1deg requires we release TWICE that amount and end up at 1120ppm.

But H2O vapor is the PREDOMINANT GHouse gas. And NEITHER of those are pollutants. As your movement has tried to classified them.

So ---- what next? And when are you gonna figure out what's ACTUALLY being "denied" about the set of GW theories? You're way behind in figuring this farce out... But keep pluggin' man..

 

[jc456]

Actually yes it can do all the "magical" things. The science on that is settled.

Sorry you're retarded.

Ummmm, no. It can't. The "science" is not "settled" save in the minds of those who stand to profit from the legislation that they wish to ram down the throats of the middle class of the world. The facts are that there is ZERO empirical data to support the theory. ZERO. Some day, when you actually learn how to think for yourself feel free to come back and show us some empirical data that supports it.

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Let us know when logical fallacy's actually mean something. M'kay....

Really? Do you want me to post the American Geophysical Union's statement on AGW again? How that of the Geological Society of America? You are the fraud here, Mr. Westwall.

The statement is drafted by the ass kissers in the leadership.

Statements made by any organization do not include everyone for input. Anyone, and I mean anyone who believes that is just clueless. Let me laugh at old rocks for his perception thinking they do. Hahahaha

 

[Old Rocks]

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Kinda like how virtually every scientist in every scientific society and major university used to say that fat was the devil?

50 Years Ago, Sugar Industry Quietly Paid Scientists To Point Blame At Fat

Well yes, just like the energy corporations have paid scientists to testify in front of Congress that there is no AGW. The very same scientists that the tobacco companies paid to testify in front of Congress that tobacco had nothing to do with cancer and other illnesses. Singer and Lindzen to name two.

 

[flacaltenn]

No, demonstrably it is you who don't understand how CO2 does, or doesn't work as a GHG. Is it a GHG? Yes. Can it do all of the magical things you claim? No.

Actually yes it can do all the "magical" things. The science on that is settled.

Sorry you're retarded.

Ummmm, no. It can't. The "science" is not "settled" save in the minds of those who stand to profit from the legislation that they wish to ram down the throats of the middle class of the world. The facts are that there is ZERO empirical data to support the theory. ZERO. Some day, when you actually learn how to think for yourself feel free to come back and show us some empirical data that supports it.

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Let us know when logical fallacy's actually mean something. M'kay....

Really? Do you want me to post the American Geophysical Union's statement on AGW again? How that of the Geological Society of America? You are the fraud here, Mr. Westwall.

Nope,.. Would not do a THING to convince me. Unless there has been a POLL of the MEMBERS of that society to show their confidence in a politically written front office statement..

 

[westwall]

Ummmm, no. It can't. The "science" is not "settled" save in the minds of those who stand to profit from the legislation that they wish to ram down the throats of the middle class of the world. The facts are that there is ZERO empirical data to support the theory. ZERO. Some day, when you actually learn how to think for yourself feel free to come back and show us some empirical data that supports it.

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Appeal to authority, your favorite logical fallacy.

By "every practicing scientist" you mean every scientist on the government AGW payroll.

Dumb ass. The whole of the AGU and the GSA state that AGW is real, and most of them do not work for the government.

Bullshit. Their leadership only does. The general membership doesn't you lying sack of poo.


And what the hell would the General Services Administration have to say about it you 'tard.

Now you are the lying sack of shit, Mr. Westwall. Those of us that are members vote on the leadership, and the statements have gotten stronger over the year as the evidence mounts for the changes that AGW is creating. That you are a liar and a fraud is clearly evident from you posts here. In fact, were you not such, you would have by now presented your views at the convention in San Francisco.

You clearly have no idea of how a corrupt academia works. I even posted my invite to submit a paper for the AGU. The simple facts are these, if you are not toeing the line, you don't get to present. It's called censorship. It is modern day Lysenkoism and nothing more. Color me unsurprised that an uneducated halfwit, such as yourself, is easily misled.

 

[bripat9643]

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Kinda like how virtually every scientist in every scientific society and major university used to say that fat was the devil?

50 Years Ago, Sugar Industry Quietly Paid Scientists To Point Blame At Fat

Well yes, just like the energy corporations have paid scientists to testify in front of Congress that there is no AGW. The very same scientists that the tobacco companies paid to testify in front of Congress that tobacco had nothing to do with cancer and other illnesses. Singer and Lindzen to name two.

They never testified to any such thing, douche bag. And all the so-called "climate scientists" are paid by the government to defend the global warming fraud.

 

[flacaltenn]

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Kinda like how virtually every scientist in every scientific society and major university used to say that fat was the devil?

50 Years Ago, Sugar Industry Quietly Paid Scientists To Point Blame At Fat

Well yes, just like the energy corporations have paid scientists to testify in front of Congress that there is no AGW. The very same scientists that the tobacco companies paid to testify in front of Congress that tobacco had nothing to do with cancer and other illnesses. Singer and Lindzen to name two.

You aware that Exxon-Mobil is a major sponsor at the large AGU events --- right????
I thought that would automatically disqualify the AGU from having any valid opinion by leftist rules..

 

[SwimExpert]

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Kinda like how virtually every scientist in every scientific society and major university used to say that fat was the devil?

50 Years Ago, Sugar Industry Quietly Paid Scientists To Point Blame At Fat

Well yes, just like the energy corporations have paid scientists to testify in front of Congress that there is no AGW. The very same scientists that the tobacco companies paid to testify in front of Congress that tobacco had nothing to do with cancer and other illnesses. Singer and Lindzen to name two.

And kinda like how lots of government money goes into measuring global warming, but quickly dries up if your research doesn't support the government's premise, right?

 

[Old Rocks]

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Kinda like how virtually every scientist in every scientific society and major university used to say that fat was the devil?

50 Years Ago, Sugar Industry Quietly Paid Scientists To Point Blame At Fat

Well yes, just like the energy corporations have paid scientists to testify in front of Congress that there is no AGW. The very same scientists that the tobacco companies paid to testify in front of Congress that tobacco had nothing to do with cancer and other illnesses. Singer and Lindzen to name two.

And kinda like how lots of government money goes into measuring global warming, but quickly dries up if your research doesn't support the government's premise, right?

Really fucking dumb. Now if there were other studies in other nations that said that opposite of what those scientists are saying, you might have a point. But that is not the case. Even the scientists from the oil producing nations are stating that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. In fact, every National Academy of Science of all the nations state that AGW is real. So, to state what you have is to join the little tin hat people.

 

[westwall]

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Kinda like how virtually every scientist in every scientific society and major university used to say that fat was the devil?

50 Years Ago, Sugar Industry Quietly Paid Scientists To Point Blame At Fat

Well yes, just like the energy corporations have paid scientists to testify in front of Congress that there is no AGW. The very same scientists that the tobacco companies paid to testify in front of Congress that tobacco had nothing to do with cancer and other illnesses. Singer and Lindzen to name two.

And kinda like how lots of government money goes into measuring global warming, but quickly dries up if your research doesn't support the government's premise, right?

Really fucking dumb. Now if there were other studies in other nations that said that opposite of what those scientists are saying, you might have a point. But that is not the case. Even the scientists from the oil producing nations are stating that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. In fact, every National Academy of Science of all the nations state that AGW is real. So, to state what you have is to join the little tin hat people.

Yes, you are certainly one of the dumbest people on the planet. Every one of those so called scientists you are so proud of owe their monetary, and professional well being to perpetuating the fraud. The whole freaking world KNOWS this to be true. How is it that you are so blindly stupid that you can't figure it out.

 

[Old Rocks]

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Kinda like how virtually every scientist in every scientific society and major university used to say that fat was the devil?

50 Years Ago, Sugar Industry Quietly Paid Scientists To Point Blame At Fat

Well yes, just like the energy corporations have paid scientists to testify in front of Congress that there is no AGW. The very same scientists that the tobacco companies paid to testify in front of Congress that tobacco had nothing to do with cancer and other illnesses. Singer and Lindzen to name two.

You aware that Exxon-Mobil is a major sponsor at the large AGU events --- right????
I thought that would automatically disqualify the AGU from having any valid opinion by leftist rules..

Sure. Same for the GSA. However, they are also supporters of the liars that are denying the warming. They are covering the bases. Just like they contribute to both political parties. Like the tobacco companies, they are playing for time to keep the money rolling in. And that fact that people will die for that, is of no concern to them, just as it was no concern to the tobacco companies.

 

[Old Rocks]

And virtually every practicing scientist disagrees with you. All the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities.

Kinda like how virtually every scientist in every scientific society and major university used to say that fat was the devil?

50 Years Ago, Sugar Industry Quietly Paid Scientists To Point Blame At Fat

Well yes, just like the energy corporations have paid scientists to testify in front of Congress that there is no AGW. The very same scientists that the tobacco companies paid to testify in front of Congress that tobacco had nothing to do with cancer and other illnesses. Singer and Lindzen to name two.

And kinda like how lots of government money goes into measuring global warming, but quickly dries up if your research doesn't support the government's premise, right?

Really fucking dumb. Now if there were other studies in other nations that said that opposite of what those scientists are saying, you might have a point. But that is not the case. Even the scientists from the oil producing nations are stating that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. In fact, every National Academy of Science of all the nations state that AGW is real. So, to state what you have is to join the little tin hat people.

Yes, you are certainly one of the dumbest people on the planet. Every one of those so called scientists you are so proud of owe their monetary, and professional well being to perpetuating the fraud. The whole freaking world KNOWS this to be true. How is it that you are so blindly stupid that you can't figure it out.

Getting desperate now, you lying fuck? So, you are accusing the whole of the scientific community of fraud. The world's whole scientific community. For the thousands of articles that provide evidence of the warming often have citizens from the many nations of this world.

When you see a self proclaimed scientist stating that all the other scientists in the world are frauds, and only he knows the truth, you are dealing with a lying screwball.