Why Do Mark Levin And Other Conservatives Lie About Rachel Carson & Her 1963 Book, Silent Spring?

[Mustang]

The work to establish a connection between CO2 and climate was done way back in the 19th century by John Tyndall.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Again, you fail to understand the argument. Causation, still not proven. All kinds of mention how the warmer temps caused more CO2 released from the oceans, yet funny enough none the other way. Yes, they questioned whether that was possible, but never, I repeat, never proven. So laddi dah.

I understand the causality issue. However, it is CLEAR that GHG cause rising temperatures. It is also clear that humans have been pumping ever greater amounts of CO2 and other GHG into the atmosphere ever since the industrial revolution even as the population of the planet has risen seven-fold WHILE we (the collectively we) have also been engaging in massive deforestation. It's no quantum jump in logic to see where these events COULD lead us, and it just so happens that we are there.

And yet you have no proof.

Nothing of what I said above is in dispute.

sure, it all is. WiNNiNg...

Below are the factual points I made in the previous post:

1. GHG cause rising temperatures.

2. Humans have been pumping ever greater amounts of CO2 and other GHG into the atmosphere ever since the industrial revolution even as the population of the planet has risen seven-fold WHILE we (the collectively we) have also been engaging in massive deforestation.

What is untrue about either of those statements?

Afterward, I stated the follow:

"It's no quantum jump in logic to see where these events COULD lead us, and it just so happens that we are there."

Are we or are we not now at that point where industrialization's side effects are seen as quite possibly having a planet-wide impact on our environment?

 

[jc456]

Again, you fail to understand the argument. Causation, still not proven. All kinds of mention how the warmer temps caused more CO2 released from the oceans, yet funny enough none the other way. Yes, they questioned whether that was possible, but never, I repeat, never proven. So laddi dah.

I understand the causality issue. However, it is CLEAR that GHG cause rising temperatures. It is also clear that humans have been pumping ever greater amounts of CO2 and other GHG into the atmosphere ever since the industrial revolution even as the population of the planet has risen seven-fold WHILE we (the collectively we) have also been engaging in massive deforestation. It's no quantum jump in logic to see where these events COULD lead us, and it just so happens that we are there.

And yet you have no proof.

Nothing of what I said above is in dispute.

sure, it all is. WiNNiNg...

Below are the factual points I made in the previous post:

1. GHG cause rising temperatures.

2. Humans have been pumping ever greater amounts of CO2 and other GHG into the atmosphere ever since the industrial revolution even as the population of the planet has risen seven-fold WHILE we (the collectively we) have also been engaging in massive deforestation.

What is untrue about either of those statements?

Afterward, I stated the follow:

"It's no quantum jump in logic to see where these events COULD lead us, and it just so happens that we are there."

Are we or are we not now at that point where industrialization's side effects are seen as quite possibly having a planet-wide impact on our environment?

yep, kow what you wrote. GHG cause rising temperatures, hmmm unproven. No evidence, none, zip zero that humans do anything. So both of those unproven. Therefore, I don't have to leap anywhere cause there is no problem to be concened with.

 

[Mustang]

I understand the causality issue. However, it is CLEAR that GHG cause rising temperatures. It is also clear that humans have been pumping ever greater amounts of CO2 and other GHG into the atmosphere ever since the industrial revolution even as the population of the planet has risen seven-fold WHILE we (the collectively we) have also been engaging in massive deforestation. It's no quantum jump in logic to see where these events COULD lead us, and it just so happens that we are there.

And yet you have no proof.

Nothing of what I said above is in dispute.

sure, it all is. WiNNiNg...

Below are the factual points I made in the previous post:

1. GHG cause rising temperatures.

2. Humans have been pumping ever greater amounts of CO2 and other GHG into the atmosphere ever since the industrial revolution even as the population of the planet has risen seven-fold WHILE we (the collectively we) have also been engaging in massive deforestation.

What is untrue about either of those statements?

Afterward, I stated the follow:

"It's no quantum jump in logic to see where these events COULD lead us, and it just so happens that we are there."

Are we or are we not now at that point where industrialization's side effects are seen as quite possibly having a planet-wide impact on our environment?

yep, kow what you wrote. GHG cause rising temperatures, hmmm unproven. No evidence, none, zip zero that humans do anything. So both of those unproven. Therefore, I don't have to leap anywhere cause there is no problem to be concened with.

Why do you think the Earth is so warm and the moon is so cold?

 

[jc456]

And yet you have no proof.

Nothing of what I said above is in dispute.

sure, it all is. WiNNiNg...

Below are the factual points I made in the previous post:

1. GHG cause rising temperatures.

2. Humans have been pumping ever greater amounts of CO2 and other GHG into the atmosphere ever since the industrial revolution even as the population of the planet has risen seven-fold WHILE we (the collectively we) have also been engaging in massive deforestation.

What is untrue about either of those statements?

Afterward, I stated the follow:

"It's no quantum jump in logic to see where these events COULD lead us, and it just so happens that we are there."

Are we or are we not now at that point where industrialization's side effects are seen as quite possibly having a planet-wide impact on our environment?

yep, kow what you wrote. GHG cause rising temperatures, hmmm unproven. No evidence, none, zip zero that humans do anything. So both of those unproven. Therefore, I don't have to leap anywhere cause there is no problem to be concened with.

Why do you think the Earth is so warm and the moon is so cold?

Why do I need to answer that question. I already stated my thoughts. You have no proof. Taking this down a rat hole doesn't do anything to validate what I said about your claims. so, why not provide the experimental evidence and move on from there.

 

[Mustang]

Nothing of what I said above is in dispute.

sure, it all is. WiNNiNg...

Below are the factual points I made in the previous post:

1. GHG cause rising temperatures.

2. Humans have been pumping ever greater amounts of CO2 and other GHG into the atmosphere ever since the industrial revolution even as the population of the planet has risen seven-fold WHILE we (the collectively we) have also been engaging in massive deforestation.

What is untrue about either of those statements?

Afterward, I stated the follow:

"It's no quantum jump in logic to see where these events COULD lead us, and it just so happens that we are there."

Are we or are we not now at that point where industrialization's side effects are seen as quite possibly having a planet-wide impact on our environment?

yep, kow what you wrote. GHG cause rising temperatures, hmmm unproven. No evidence, none, zip zero that humans do anything. So both of those unproven. Therefore, I don't have to leap anywhere cause there is no problem to be concened with.

Why do you think the Earth is so warm and the moon is so cold?

Why do I need to answer that question. I already stated my thoughts. You have no proof. Taking this down a rat hole doesn't do anything to validate what I said about your claims. so, why not provide the experimental evidence and move on from there.

People can pollute all they want without much in the way of consequences as long as the amount is relatively small simply because the environment can absorb (and dilute and diffuse) small amounts of pollution.

As an example of that, one small factory pouring toxic byproducts into one of the Great Lakes probably wouldn't have been a big deal. Hundreds of heavy industry factories was another story. That's why the Great Lakes started dying a few decades ago.

Climate change is pretty much the same kind of story on a more massive scale.

 

[jc456]

sure, it all is. WiNNiNg...

Below are the factual points I made in the previous post:

1. GHG cause rising temperatures.

2. Humans have been pumping ever greater amounts of CO2 and other GHG into the atmosphere ever since the industrial revolution even as the population of the planet has risen seven-fold WHILE we (the collectively we) have also been engaging in massive deforestation.

What is untrue about either of those statements?

Afterward, I stated the follow:

"It's no quantum jump in logic to see where these events COULD lead us, and it just so happens that we are there."

Are we or are we not now at that point where industrialization's side effects are seen as quite possibly having a planet-wide impact on our environment?

yep, kow what you wrote. GHG cause rising temperatures, hmmm unproven. No evidence, none, zip zero that humans do anything. So both of those unproven. Therefore, I don't have to leap anywhere cause there is no problem to be concened with.

Why do you think the Earth is so warm and the moon is so cold?

Why do I need to answer that question. I already stated my thoughts. You have no proof. Taking this down a rat hole doesn't do anything to validate what I said about your claims. so, why not provide the experimental evidence and move on from there.

People can pollute all they want without much in the way of consequences as long as the amount is relatively small simply because the environment can absorb (and dilute and diffuse) small amounts of pollution.

As an example of that, one small factory pouring toxic byproducts into one of the Great Lakes probably wouldn't have been a big deal. Hundreds of heavy industry factories was another story. That's why the Great Lakes started dying a few decades ago.

Climate change is pretty much the same kind of story on a more massive scale.

nope!

Edit: Oh BTW, I see you still can't find that proof. Time to put that mustang back on the prairie and relax.

 

[Kosh]

Again, you fail to understand the argument. Causation, still not proven. All kinds of mention how the warmer temps caused more CO2 released from the oceans, yet funny enough none the other way. Yes, they questioned whether that was possible, but never, I repeat, never proven. So laddi dah.

I understand the causality issue. However, it is CLEAR that GHG cause rising temperatures. It is also clear that humans have been pumping ever greater amounts of CO2 and other GHG into the atmosphere ever since the industrial revolution even as the population of the planet has risen seven-fold WHILE we (the collectively we) have also been engaging in massive deforestation. It's no quantum jump in logic to see where these events COULD lead us, and it just so happens that we are there.

And yet you have no proof.

Nothing of what I said above is in dispute.

sure, it all is. WiNNiNg...

Below are the factual points I made in the previous post:

1. GHG cause rising temperatures.

2. Humans have been pumping ever greater amounts of CO2 and other GHG into the atmosphere ever since the industrial revolution even as the population of the planet has risen seven-fold WHILE we (the collectively we) have also been engaging in massive deforestation.

What is untrue about either of those statements?

Afterward, I stated the follow:

"It's no quantum jump in logic to see where these events COULD lead us, and it just so happens that we are there."

Are we or are we not now at that point where industrialization's side effects are seen as quite possibly having a planet-wide impact on our environment?

Those are not facts they are myths and religious dogma from the AGW bible.

Rather than changes in earth's CO2 causing temperature to change, scientists have actually found that changes in earth's temperatures always precedes changes in CO2 by 400 to a 1000 years -- just the opposite of what global warming proponents would have us believe.

It is often reported that the temperature of the earth is higher the past 20 years than it has ever been in history. This is simply not true, nor has it ever been. Hundreds of research studies using ice cores, pollen sedimentation, tree rings, etc. have shown that there were dozens of periods in the past 11,000 years (the Holocene period) that earth's temperature was warmer than it is today. Earth's temperature was very much warmer at least four times during the current interglacial period.

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Liberal environmentalist love dead babies. particularly black babies

It's certainly true that the best way to halt environmental degradation is to eliminate the Third World. Conservationists and those like us wish to educate people and invest in their infrastructure so that they can claw their way out of corruption and despair.

Progressive environmentalists however wish them to remain backwards technologically, medically, educationally, and in their creation and use of energy. That of course condemns those peoples (primarily brown and black skinned) to much shorter, more violent and less productive lives.

The evidence certainly shows that progressives are overwhelmingly bigoted who feel that the millions of deaths directly attributable to their ideas and programs are a good thing.

Scary, scary people indeed.

Liberals have this thing about population control. they think the planet is crowded too many people

Its as Gandhi said - 'there's enough for everyone's need but not enough for everyone's greed'.

The lies about the environment are for the same reason as tobacco companies lied about cancer - money.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

sure, it all is. WiNNiNg...

Below are the factual points I made in the previous post:

1. GHG cause rising temperatures.

2. Humans have been pumping ever greater amounts of CO2 and other GHG into the atmosphere ever since the industrial revolution even as the population of the planet has risen seven-fold WHILE we (the collectively we) have also been engaging in massive deforestation.

What is untrue about either of those statements?

Afterward, I stated the follow:

"It's no quantum jump in logic to see where these events COULD lead us, and it just so happens that we are there."

Are we or are we not now at that point where industrialization's side effects are seen as quite possibly having a planet-wide impact on our environment?

yep, kow what you wrote. GHG cause rising temperatures, hmmm unproven. No evidence, none, zip zero that humans do anything. So both of those unproven. Therefore, I don't have to leap anywhere cause there is no problem to be concened with.

Why do you think the Earth is so warm and the moon is so cold?

Why do I need to answer that question. I already stated my thoughts. You have no proof. Taking this down a rat hole doesn't do anything to validate what I said about your claims. so, why not provide the experimental evidence and move on from there.

People can pollute all they want without much in the way of consequences as long as the amount is relatively small simply because the environment can absorb (and dilute and diffuse) small amounts of pollution.

As an example of that, one small factory pouring toxic byproducts into one of the Great Lakes probably wouldn't have been a big deal. Hundreds of heavy industry factories was another story. That's why the Great Lakes started dying a few decades ago.

Climate change is pretty much the same kind of story on a more massive scale.

And the number of dead or dying bodies of water grows and grows. We hear reports all the time and choose to ignore them.