The rather large lady is starting to warble

[westwall]

Ah yes, maintain a iron curtain against the truth. That has worked so well in the past.

Until the turn of this century, people like you maintained that there was no warming occuring, in the face of all the scientific evidence to the contrary. Now that the evidence of the warming is so overwhelming, you are maintaining that it has nothing to do with the GHGs that we are putting into the atmosphere, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Now as for the warming being so good for us, why don't you ask the Russian farmers how much the warming this year aided them? Or the Pakistani farmer how much a change in weather pattern aided him?

Like truthinessmatters you wouldn't know the truth if it bit you on the ass.

I know that 95% of the scientists in the world think that you are full of shit.

Don't you mean 95% of 79 scientists?

 

[westwall]

Sure, PC, wind is so undependable that it is being installed by the gigawatt anually in several states now. Here is an animated map to show where this is taking place.

Solar will soon be growing at this rate, as will geo-thermal. Then we can junk the coal fired atrocities.

Wind Powering America: U.S. Installed Wind Capacity and Wind Project Locations

They are being installed not because its such good technology.... Its because we ARE forced to do it by you enviro-idiots!

If you were sooooo concerned about OUR "fragile little planet" you would concede that nuclear is the way to go.

Actually if were truly concerned he would quit his job working for a very polluting company in a very polluting industry. He doesn't so he doesn't really care. My personal belief is he is heavily invested in so called green techs and just hopes that the enviro nuts get cap and tax passed.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Like truthinessmatters you wouldn't know the truth if it bit you on the ass.

I know that 95% of the scientists in the world think that you are full of shit.

Don't you mean 95% of 79 scientists?

Only only 6% of them are Republicans! LOLOLOL

(Yeah, I don't get the joke either)

 

[Charles_Main]

Ah yes, maintain a iron curtain against the truth. That has worked so well in the past.

Until the turn of this century, people like you maintained that there was no warming occuring, in the face of all the scientific evidence to the contrary. Now that the evidence of the warming is so overwhelming, you are maintaining that it has nothing to do with the GHGs that we are putting into the atmosphere, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Now as for the warming being so good for us, why don't you ask the Russian farmers how much the warming this year aided them? Or the Pakistani farmer how much a change in weather pattern aided him?

Why do people like you always assume you know what people like me thought.

I have never denied the earth is warming. It has in fact been warming since the end of the last Ice Age.

and I never said it was good for us.

 

[Old Rocks]

I know that 95% of the scientists in the world think that you are full of shit.

oH REALLY...?

So says you. But without citing sources, just yap-yap from a unknown poster on an internet message board.

Anyone else see the irony in this idiots posts?




Old Rocks.... you are a useful idiot and you just dont know it.

Really? So show me scientific evidence that shows the absorption spectra of the GHGs is differant than the physicists have been stating for 150 years.

Since all you do is yap, I access you as another willfully ignorant fool.

 

[Old Rocks]

Like truthinessmatters you wouldn't know the truth if it bit you on the ass.

I know that 95% of the scientists in the world think that you are full of shit.

Don't you mean 95% of 79 scientists?

Very funny, faux geologist. There are 79 scientists that have over 50% of their work published in peer reviewed journals concerning climate. In other words, these are the world's leading scientists on this subject. And 75 of them state unequivocally that AGW is real, and we are already seeing changes from it's effects.

Now when you add people from other disciplines that write papers that include observations that concern impact from the climate, such as geologists, oceanographers, geophysicists, biologists, ect., then the number is probably well above 95%.

There will be a number of papers at both the AGS and the AGU conventions this year that show the evidence of changes that the present warming is creating. Are you going to be at either place, and present counter evidence?

 

[westwall]

I know that 95% of the scientists in the world think that you are full of shit.

oH REALLY...?

So says you. But without citing sources, just yap-yap from a unknown poster on an internet message board.

Anyone else see the irony in this idiots posts?




Old Rocks.... you are a useful idiot and you just dont know it.

Really? So show me scientific evidence that shows the absorption spectra of the GHGs is differant than the physicists have been stating for 150 years.

Since all you do is yap, I access you as another willfully ignorant fool.

Well the only one you guys care about is CO2 and that is 14.5 microns and that is allready covered by water vapor. Anything else faux environmentalist?

 

[westwall]

I know that 95% of the scientists in the world think that you are full of shit.

Don't you mean 95% of 79 scientists?

Very funny, faux geologist. There are 79 scientists that have over 50% of their work published in peer reviewed journals concerning climate. In other words, these are the world's leading scientists on this subject. And 75 of them state unequivocally that AGW is real, and we are already seeing changes from it's effects.

Now when you add people from other disciplines that write papers that include observations that concern impact from the climate, such as geologists, oceanographers, geophysicists, biologists, ect., then the number is probably well above 95%.

There will be a number of papers at both the AGS and the AGU conventions this year that show the evidence of changes that the present warming is creating. Are you going to be at either place, and present counter evidence?

Prove it faux environmentalist.

 

[Si modo]

I know that 95% of the scientists in the world think that you are full of shit.

oH REALLY...?

So says you. But without citing sources, just yap-yap from a unknown poster on an internet message board.

Anyone else see the irony in this idiots posts?




Old Rocks.... you are a useful idiot and you just dont know it.

Really? So show me scientific evidence that shows the absorption spectra of the GHGs is differant than the physicists have been stating for 150 years.

Since all you do is yap, I access you as another willfully ignorant fool.

As no one is saying the spectra are something other than what they are, you are being irrelevant, as usual.

Strawman.

Gotta love your 'logic'.

Moron.

 

[Old Rocks]

oH REALLY...?



Anyone else see the irony in this idiots posts?




Old Rocks.... you are a useful idiot and you just dont know it.

Really? So show me scientific evidence that shows the absorption spectra of the GHGs is differant than the physicists have been stating for 150 years.

Since all you do is yap, I access you as another willfully ignorant fool.

Well the only one you guys care about is CO2 and that is 14.5 microns and that is allready covered by water vapor. Anything else faux environmentalist?

Other than the fact that you are lying again? And here is the proof.

Climate Change - A quick rebuttal to Augie Auer's opinion in the NZ Herald

 

[Old Rocks]

oH REALLY...?



Anyone else see the irony in this idiots posts?




Old Rocks.... you are a useful idiot and you just dont know it.

Really? So show me scientific evidence that shows the absorption spectra of the GHGs is differant than the physicists have been stating for 150 years.

Since all you do is yap, I access you as another willfully ignorant fool.

As no one is saying the spectra are something other than what they are, you are being irrelevant, as usual.

Strawman.

Gotta love your 'logic'.

Moron.

LOL. No answer, just ignorant yap-yap. Sure you are a scientist. And I am Paul Bunyan.

Papers on laboratory measurements of CO2 absorption properties AGW Observer

Papers on laboratory measurements of CO2 absorption properties
Posted by Ari Jokimäki on September 25, 2009

This is a list of papers on laboratory measurements of the absorption properties of carbon dioxide. In the context of these paperlists this is a difficult subject because only few of the papers are freely available online, so we have to settle on abstracts only (of course, interested reader can purchase the full texts for the papers from the linked abstract pages). However, I don’t think that matters that much because the main point of this list really is to show that the basic research on the subject exists. The list is not complete, and will most likely be updated in the future in order to make it more thorough and more representative

 

[westwall]

Really? So show me scientific evidence that shows the absorption spectra of the GHGs is differant than the physicists have been stating for 150 years.

Since all you do is yap, I access you as another willfully ignorant fool.

Well the only one you guys care about is CO2 and that is 14.5 microns and that is allready covered by water vapor. Anything else faux environmentalist?

Other than the fact that you are lying again? And here is the proof.

Climate Change - A quick rebuttal to Augie Auer's opinion in the NZ Herald

Lying? No, but I did make a mistake. It is actually three small bands that it reflects in 2.7, 4.3 and 15 micrometers.


A few decades ago, even before the GW fraud began, scientists figured out that CO2 blockes around 8% of the infrared radiation from penetrating the atmosphere. This corelates to bandwidth quite well. The width of the 15 micron peak is two microns wide from outer edges of shoulders. The total range of IR radiation is about 100 microns, tapering off after 50 microns. Additionally CO2 does its work within 10 meters. After that 10 meter distance it basically does nothing. Combine that with the theoretical increase in temp of .6C when you double the first time followed by a .4C increase the next time you double followed by a .2C increase after ytou double again and you don't get near that 2 degree rise that you are so worried about.

Even thought the world would be better off if it were warmer. So there you go you faux environmentalist. Over to you!

 

[Si modo]

Really? So show me scientific evidence that shows the absorption spectra of the GHGs is differant than the physicists have been stating for 150 years.

Since all you do is yap, I access you as another willfully ignorant fool.

As no one is saying the spectra are something other than what they are, you are being irrelevant, as usual.

Strawman.

Gotta love your 'logic'.

Moron.

LOL. No answer, just ignorant yap-yap. Sure you are a scientist. And I am Paul Bunyan.

Answer? To what? To something I never argued and have no intention of arguing (ie. your tired strawman)?

What part of the word 'irrelevance' has you so confused?

As you have not demonstrated even an ounce of logic, yet, I can understand why you are clueless about strawman fallacies, even when I used it in a perfectly defining context.

You continue arguing with yourself, though, and keep being irrelevant. You consistently haven't a clue.

You are a perfect clown, though.

Papers on laboratory measurements of CO2 absorption properties AGW Observer

Papers on laboratory measurements of CO2 absorption properties
Posted by Ari Jokimäki on September 25, 2009

This is a list of papers on laboratory measurements of the absorption properties of carbon dioxide. In the context of these paperlists this is a difficult subject because only few of the papers are freely available online, so we have to settle on abstracts only (of course, interested reader can purchase the full texts for the papers from the linked abstract pages). However, I don’t think that matters that much because the main point of this list really is to show that the basic research on the subject exists. The list is not complete, and will most likely be updated in the future in order to make it more thorough and more representative

So, let me get this straight: You argue your strawman - that folks are saying the spectra are something other than what they are; I tell you that no one is arguing that the spectra are something other than what they are; you come back and tell me I am ignorant and yapping for telling you that you're arguing a strawman (arguing something that no one is saying differently); then you post EXACTLY what I just told you - that no one is arguing the spectra - no one that I have ever seen.

Damn, you are one complete moron. You obviously don't even know what basic research is. You gave an example of content on an AGW site that explicitely states that the basic research on the spectra exists and you seem to think that proves that there is someone arguing that the spectra are something other than what they are????????????????????

You are a moron or on crack. I cannot see there being any other possible conclusions about your mental capacity, or lack there of. News flash, idiot: someone saying that the basic research exists on the spectra of CO2 does not mean they are saying the spectra are something other than what they are.

You clearly do not understand any content of what you read.

 

[editec]

Yet more evidence that the fraud known as "climate change" is ending. Clean Energy Works is closing down the store after the Congress decided to halt Cap and Tax legislation.
Seems to me if they really believed that what they were doing was to save the world they would stay in business, however, if all they wanted was our money then it makes sense to shut down because clearly, they won't be getting anymore!


Environmental lobbying group shuts down after climate bill stalls - Darren Samuelsohn - POLITICO.com

You don't seem to understand what a political coalition is.

Typically a coalition is like minded organziations joining forces to achieve a specific goal.

They are created as temporary organizations, not permanent ones.

 

[Si modo]

Yet more evidence that the fraud known as "climate change" is ending. Clean Energy Works is closing down the store after the Congress decided to halt Cap and Tax legislation.
Seems to me if they really believed that what they were doing was to save the world they would stay in business, however, if all they wanted was our money then it makes sense to shut down because clearly, they won't be getting anymore!


Environmental lobbying group shuts down after climate bill stalls - Darren Samuelsohn - POLITICO.com

You don't seem to understand what a political coalition is.

Typically a coalition is like minded organziations joining forces to achieve a specific goal.

They are created as temporary organizations, not permanent ones.

Far be it for me to speak for Westwall, but I think that was exactly his point.

 

[Truthmatters]

Here they are yet again spewing hate on science.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Here they are yet again spewing hate on science.

You always add so much to the debate

 

[Si modo]

Here they are yet again spewing hate on science.

Who is they? What hate?

 

[Truthmatters]

The sceintific world knows that man effects global warming.

Many political hacks refuse this sceince for political reasons

 

[Si modo]

.... Many political hacks refuse this sceince for political reasons

You are correct, but I bet you didn't know that.



















Now, who is they and what hate?