Climate Scientists are Laughing at You

[jc456]

My Global Warming Skepticism, for Dummies « Roy Spencer, PhD

That guy said everything I have always said.
We don't know. Claiming we do is not scientific. It's bullshit.
NOBODY is looking at potential alternatives because they get paid to look for HUMAN causes and that drives their results.

Deniers of a feather flock together.

oh the irony!!

 

[SandSquid]

Yes, Spencer is a creationist and believes in ID.

As am I. But we have seen where climate has nearly caused extinction in the past. Ice ages nearly wiped out mankind. The black plague was NOT suitable for humans to thrive, it killed about 1/4 of the worlds people, mostly those in Christian nations.

Even Biblically, what happened when they at the fruit of knowledge. "cursed is the ground because of you"

Numbers talks about "You shall not pollute the land in which you live"

Revelation talks about people being the "destroyers of the earth".

Other verses talk about the earth withering and becoming scorched.

What he said their is actually in opposition of the Bible itself. So why does he want to contract the Bible and reality with his own lies?


Do you think we should believe God's word or Spencers opposing word? Because they are telling two completely different stories.

 

[jc456]

Yes, Spencer is a creationist and believes in ID.

As am I. But we have seen where climate has nearly caused extinction in the past. Ice ages nearly wiped out mankind.

Even Biblically, what happened when they at the fruit of knowledge. "cursed is the ground because of you"

Numbers talks about "You shall not pollute the land in which you live"

Revelation talks about people being the "destroyers of the earth".

Other verses talk about the earth withering and becoming scorched.

What he said their is actually in opposition of the Bible itself. So why does he want to contract the Bible and reality with his own lies?

Do you think we should believe God's word or Spencers opposing word? Because they are telling two completely different stories.

how do humans destroy the earth? you think the earth will die?

 

[SandSquid]

how do humans destroy the earth? you think the earth will die?

Yes. I think it eventually will. And I think human action can make it more or less hospitable for human life as well, and we should strive for the former rather than the latter.

I also choose to believe the Bible and not Spencers anti-Christian statement.

 

[jc456]

how do humans destroy the earth? you think the earth will die?

Yes. I think it eventually will. And I think human action can make it more or less hospitable for human life as well, and we should strive for the former rather than the latter.

I also choose to believe the Bible and not Spencers anti-Christian statement.

name a solution. making claims you have nothing to replace or solve is stupid. did man destroy dinosaurs?

 

[Billy_Bob]

POLLUTANT: any substance, as certain chemicals or waste products, that renders the air, soil, water, or other natural resource harmful or unsuitable for a specific purpose.

CO2 is an element of the normal mixture of air and supports plant life on this planet. Rapidly elevating levels of CO2 lead to rapid greenhouse warming which is harmful to life on this planet. Excess CO2 is a pollutant.

And yet you have not quantified what is "excess".. The earth has had naturally occurring levels of CO2 above 1,700ppm for over 75% of its life.

When do we say what we are seeing is excess? Prove that the entire current rise is not natural variation..

 

[Billy_Bob]

A CO2 molecule having absorbed a photon vibrates. It has no other options. That increased vibration is synonymous with increased temperature. When it emits a photon or loses that energy via collision, it ceases to vibrate - it cools. Your contention is idiotic bullshit.

what does it do as it vibrates and how long does it vibrate? does it get warmer than it is as it vibrates? Does it collide or emit most often?

He cant tell you. He is a moron...

Collision is the primary mode of CO2 energy transfer over emission. 300,000,000-1

CO2 stretches and does not vibrate, thus it can not warm.

Two very basic physical properties that disprove the AGW hypothesis.

 

[jc456]

A CO2 molecule having absorbed a photon vibrates. It has no other options. That increased vibration is synonymous with increased temperature. When it emits a photon or loses that energy via collision, it ceases to vibrate - it cools. Your contention is idiotic bullshit.

what does it do as it vibrates and how long does it vibrate? does it get warmer than it is as it vibrates? Does it collide or emit most often?

He cant tell you. He is a moron...

Collision is the primary mode of CO2 energy transfer over emission. 300,000,000-1

CO2 stretches and does not vibrate, thus it can not warm.

Two very basic physical properties that disprove the AGW hypothesis.

I know he won't answer. he will insult me and call me a troll. cause it's him. thanks though.

 

[SandSquid]

name a solution. making claims you have nothing to replace or solve is stupid. did man destroy dinosaurs?

Again, do you believe in the Bible, or Spencer's quote which says the Bible is a lie?

 

[SandSquid]

And yet you have not quantified what is "excess".. The earth has had naturally occurring levels of CO2 above 1,700ppm for over 75% of its life.

When do we say what we are seeing is excess? Prove that the entire current rise is not natural variation..

Yes it has been higher, and scientists have proven that those eras were not conducive to human life. Why would you want to return to them?

Sure, from the Trump administration dept of NASA.

Nasa literally uses the heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and its ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many instruments flown by NASA.

Our space program wouldn't work if CO2 didn't trap heat. You literally have to buy the Flat Earth theory with this conspiracy theory. It's the only way it works, package deal.

 

[80zephyr]

And yet you have not quantified what is "excess".. The earth has had naturally occurring levels of CO2 above 1,700ppm for over 75% of its life.

When do we say what we are seeing is excess? Prove that the entire current rise is not natural variation..

Yes it has been higher, and scientists have proven that those eras were not conducive to human life. Why would you want to return to them?

Sure, from the Trump administration dept of NASA.

Nasa literally uses the heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and its ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many instruments flown by NASA.

Our space program wouldn't work if CO2 didn't trap heat. You literally have to buy the Flat Earth theory with this conspiracy theory. It's the only way it works, package deal.

You said "scientists have proven that those eras were not conducive to human life".

Why wouldn't it be? Humans are pretty adaptable. If the dinosaurs could live in an environment with 5 times the CO2 as we have currently, why couldn't humans not only survive, thrive.

Mark

 

[Crick]

Humans are adaptable, like all other life forms, when they've got hundreds of thousands of years with which to adapt.

 

[jc456]

Humans are adaptable, like all other life forms, when they've got hundreds of thousands of years with which to adapt.

so what are you worried about? aren't we adapting now? or do you have a timeline we should be following because you pulled it out of your ass?

 

[80zephyr]

Humans are adaptable, like all other life forms, when they've got hundreds of thousands of years with which to adapt.

?? I can live in sunny California, or cold Alaska, right now.

What climate are we adapting to, exactly?

Mark

 

[jc456]

Humans are adaptable, like all other life forms, when they've got hundreds of thousands of years with which to adapt.

?? I can live in sunny California, or cold Alaska, right now.

What climate are we adapting to, exactly?

Mark

well he says that alaska isn't cold any more.

 

[Crick]

The intervening period between radical environment change and final adaptation is filled with misery. Do you not care what you children and your grand children and your great grand children will suffer? From all that you have posted here, it seems that you do not.

 

[Billy_Bob]

And yet you have not quantified what is "excess".. The earth has had naturally occurring levels of CO2 above 1,700ppm for over 75% of its life.

When do we say what we are seeing is excess? Prove that the entire current rise is not natural variation..

Yes it has been higher, and scientists have proven that those eras were not conducive to human life. Why would you want to return to them?

Sure, from the Trump administration dept of NASA.

Nasa literally uses the heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and its ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many instruments flown by NASA.

Our space program wouldn't work if CO2 didn't trap heat. You literally have to buy the Flat Earth theory with this conspiracy theory. It's the only way it works, package deal.

You said "scientists have proven that those eras were not conducive to human life".

Why wouldn't it be? Humans are pretty adaptable. If the dinosaurs could live in an environment with 5 times the CO2 as we have currently, why couldn't humans not only survive, thrive.

Mark

The skidmark has no concept that the very work place he works at is generally 780ppm all the time... Its shear ignorance..

 

[Crick]

That would be "sheer" not shear, you ignorant asshole.

How about admitting that you aren't in a doctorate program? That would be a morally admirable thing to do.

 

[SandSquid]

And yet you have not quantified what is "excess".. The earth has had naturally occurring levels of CO2 above 1,700ppm for over 75% of its life.

When do we say what we are seeing is excess? Prove that the entire current rise is not natural variation..

Yes it has been higher, and scientists have proven that those eras were not conducive to human life. Why would you want to return to them?

Sure, from the Trump administration dept of NASA.

Nasa literally uses the heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and its ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many instruments flown by NASA.

Our space program wouldn't work if CO2 didn't trap heat. You literally have to buy the Flat Earth theory with this conspiracy theory. It's the only way it works, package deal.

You said "scientists have proven that those eras were not conducive to human life".

Why wouldn't it be? Humans are pretty adaptable. If the dinosaurs could live in an environment with 5 times the CO2 as we have currently, why couldn't humans not only survive, thrive.

Mark

Ok, you really don't understand the basics of how animals evolve, and the impacts of quickly changing climates on life on earth do you? I mean there's no way you could have even an elementary knowledge of that and try and say that.

 

[SandSquid]

That would be "sheer" not shear, you ignorant asshole.

How about admitting that you aren't in a doctorate program? That would be a morally admirable thing to do.

Agree...

Which is why instead of politicians and random trolls telling me what to believe, I'll go with the scientists, and that belief that man made climate change is real and threatens us is something they believe VERY strongly in based on their studies.