Ecology and Racism.

[Uncensored2008]

The graphs came from scientists making measurments.

No they didn't.

You might have lifted them from a whackjob leftist hate site, but since there is no observed correlation between CO2 and temperature, your graphs or absurd fakes.

Not me. If you want to debate them, look to the organizations who created them and take up the argument with them.

And what organization is that?

Why can't you give me the formula, the ratio of CO2 to temperature?

 

[Crick]

Like it or not, the population of White people isn't rising. In some places, it may even be going down a little. So what can White people do about this problem that they aren't contributing to without being called "racist." Well there is only one sane path to take. EMBRACE "RACISM!" If you are White and care anything at all about our ecological system, like it or not, you HAVE to embrace racism. It's the only way.

How is it that this portion of the OP has not garnered a single comment?

Krypto, why should we care what proportion of the world's population is made up of caucasians?

There are zillions of reasons. Probably none of which a non-white would agree with. But who gives a damn what they think. They are destroying the planet with a population explosion. White people aren't doing that. That is just one reason why you should care what percentage of the world's population is made up of Whites.

So, you think we should be racist bigots because you're racist bigotry wants company.

 

[westwall]

Your "guarantee" is nonsense.

No. My guarantee is a guarantee. Our current population level is unsustainable. In fact, it is already too high.

Completely untrue but never let a murderous progressive actually pay attention to facts. The real facts are this. The carrying capacity of this planet is around 40 billion people. We will top out at around 9 billion and then slowly drop back to around 6 billion if we do nothing. Yet another progressive lie put forth as an excuse to commit mass murder. You scum are all the same.

If you are going to post me, I would appreciate it if you didn't sniff glue first. Let me guess, you also think that human caused global warming is a hoax. So I guess there's no point in pointing out that humans cause HCGW. Another point is that there are about 65 million people in the U.K. I have heard it estimated that if they all switched over to living an agrarian lifestyle, they could only produce enough food to feed 8 million people. So there alone, they are beyond their carrying capacity by 57 million people.

Also, what about all the environmental damage caused by humans. Then there are animals going extinct. Some even before they become known to science. And as things now stand, we are basically killing our oceans. You should check out a documentary called, "End of the line." Then, for what food is grown, there would be far less if we didn't manufacture fertalizer out of oil. Etc, etc, etc, etc.

And you think the earth could support 40 billion people!? But let's just say for argument's sake that it could. What makes you think the population would stop at 9 billion. Because when it comes to breeding, non-whites are no different from bacteria. White people used to be the same way. But the population levels of Whites isn't rising any more. Another thing is what is this magical thing that is supposed to drop the population from 9 billion to 6 billion. Whatever it is, you should use it to drop the world population of over 7 billion to 4 billion.

Yes. There is zero empirical data to support that now very failed "theory". The only people pushing that particular load of bull poo, are globalists who wish to use the supposed danger of global warming to push their socialist agenda.

If you took your blood pressure with one of those digital blood pressure monitors, would the readout it gave be a "theory?" The graphs I shoud came from actual measurements. Also, everybody want's more. Scientists are no different. But reality dissuades them. What is going on isn't a socialist agenda. It is a survival agenda.

Correlation does not equal causation is a scientific axiom that you should aquaint yourself with.

 

[Crick]

Even babies have been shown to be "bigoted." Do you suppose they are because they are "gay?" Also, "racism" wouldn't even exist if there wasn't an evolutionary necessity for it.

Babies piss and shit on themselves, drool and stick anything they can pick up in their mouths. Do you believe those are all behaviors we should emulate?

You seem to believe there is an evolutionary necessity for every human behavior. Is that right? Would that include behaviors that have no effect or even a negative effect on reproductive success? I see lots of people who are NOT racist? Why isn't that an evolutionary necessity?

The truth is that you're a racist bigot and you're not very smart. I'm glad you accept AGW and think we ought to do something about it. But you need to separate environmentalism and racism. They are not related as you believe. Neither are the terms "ecology" and "environmentalism" equivalent.

 

[jc456]

'
There is no logical reason there should be more than a hundred million hominids on this planet.
.

so why are there more than that?

I wish you would have asked me that question.

Why?

 

[Uncensored2008]

So, you think we should be racist bigots because you're racist bigotry wants company.

The idiocy of racism melds well with the idiocy of the AGW cult.

Both are predicated upon the denial of reality and the perversion of fact within pseudo-science.

 

[jc456]

Human caused global warming is probably the biggest danger to our planet. But there is another problem that is as bad. If in fact not worse. Overpopulation. Right now, like it or not, there are too many people on the planet for it to sustainably support. Like it or not, every single day there are about 228,000 more people on the planet than there was the day before. Like it or not, the population of White people isn't rising. In some places, it may even be going down a little. So what can White people do about this problem that they aren't contributing to without being called "racist." Well there is only one sane path to take. EMBRACE "RACISM!" If you are White and care anything at all about our ecological system, like it or not, you HAVE to embrace racism. It's the only way.

Boi, you are an idiot from every conceivable angle.

If I said anything that is wrong, tell me what it is. We will see who the idiot is.

all of what you post. There! move to another topic cause you have nothing worth discussing here anymore.

 

[jc456]

To live like a wealthy person, somebody else would have to do most of the work. As to whether or not 3 billion people could live sustainably is debatable. But I can guarantee you that 7+ billion people can't.

Your "guarantee" is nonsense.

No. My guarantee is a guarantee. Our current population level is unsustainable. In fact, it is already too high.

Completely untrue but never let a murderous progressive actually pay attention to facts. The real facts are this. The carrying capacity of this planet is around 40 billion people. We will top out at around 9 billion and then slowly drop back to around 6 billion if we do nothing. Yet another progressive lie put forth as an excuse to commit mass murder. You scum are all the same.

If you are going to post me, I would appreciate it if you didn't sniff glue first. Let me guess, you also think that human caused global warming is a hoax. So I guess there's no point in pointing out that humans cause HCGW. Another point is that there are about 65 million people in the U.K. I have heard it estimated that if they all switched over to living an agrarian lifestyle, they could only produce enough food to feed 8 million people. So there alone, they are beyond their carrying capacity by 57 million people.

Also, what about all the environmental damage caused by humans. Then there are animals going extinct. Some even before they become known to science. And as things now stand, we are basically killing our oceans. You should check out a documentary called, "End of the line." Then, for what food is grown, there would be far less if we didn't manufacture fertalizer out of oil. Etc, etc, etc, etc.

And you think the earth could support 40 billion people!? But let's just say for argument's sake that it could. What makes you think the population would stop at 9 billion. Because when it comes to breeding, non-whites are no different from bacteria. White people used to be the same way. But the population levels of Whites isn't rising any more. Another thing is what is this magical thing that is supposed to drop the population from 9 billion to 6 billion. Whatever it is, you should use it to drop the world population of over 7 billion to 4 billion.

Yes. There is zero empirical data to support that now very failed "theory". The only people pushing that particular load of bull poo, are globalists who wish to use the supposed danger of global warming to push their socialist agenda.

and to continue to make a living on a lie.

 

[jc456]

[
It's what is called "science."

Oh? So "science" is deliberate fraud?

It is something you should look into. For example, each year all the volcanoes on earth release about 200 million tons of CO2 into the biosphere. Each year, mankind is responsible for putting out 26.8 BILLION tons.

And we can show causation that CO2 increases global temperatures, the way those graphs you posted did.

What is the formula? Temperature will increase on slope Y for R metric tons of CO2 along axis T. Give me the formula so I can run a linear regression. It will of course track perfectly to observed data, right?

The graphs came from scientists making measurments. Not me. If you want to debate them, look to the organizations who created them and take up the argument with them.

why are they making measurements if the data is observed?

 

[jc456]

The graphs came from scientists making measurments.

No they didn't.

You might have lifted them from a whackjob leftist hate site, but since there is no observed correlation between CO2 and temperature, your graphs or absurd fakes.

Not me. If you want to debate them, look to the organizations who created them and take up the argument with them.

And what organization is that?

Why can't you give me the formula, the ratio of CO2 to temperature?

Oh, I believe they were manufactured as he stated. Yep it is without a doubt manipulated data made by scientists earning a living off of the pork that is the government.

 

[jc456]

Like it or not, the population of White people isn't rising. In some places, it may even be going down a little. So what can White people do about this problem that they aren't contributing to without being called "racist." Well there is only one sane path to take. EMBRACE "RACISM!" If you are White and care anything at all about our ecological system, like it or not, you HAVE to embrace racism. It's the only way.

How is it that this portion of the OP has not garnered a single comment?

Krypto, why should we care what proportion of the world's population is made up of caucasians?

There are zillions of reasons. Probably none of which a non-white would agree with. But who gives a damn what they think. They are destroying the planet with a population explosion. White people aren't doing that. That is just one reason why you should care what percentage of the world's population is made up of Whites.

So, you think we should be racist bigots because you're racist bigotry wants company.

holy crap, I agree with you. all of the sudden it got very cold around me. I hope hell ain't freezing over.

 

[krypto]

I'm not the best person to ask. But I would say the best global temperature would be what it was at about the beginning of the industrial revolution.

But I would say the best global temperature would be what it was at about the beginning of the industrial revolution.

Why?

Because it was what it was due to nature. Not humanity.

If nature did it, that's ideal?
In Chicago, it gets pretty cold in the winter.
The ideal temperature for me is much higher.

It is pretty much ideal. Because human technology and greed isn't the cause. Next, it can also get pretty hot in Chicago. In 1995, it caused 739 deaths. I don't think cold is as hard on people. I can handle cold. Because all I have to do is wear warmer clothing. But it wipes me out when it gets hot out. And apart from air conditioning, there isn't anything you can do about it.

It is pretty much ideal.

So you claim. With no back up.

Because human technology and greed isn't the cause.

Human technology allows us to live where the temperature is not your ideal.

Next, it can also get pretty hot in Chicago. In 1995, it caused 739 deaths. I don't think cold is as hard on people.

You're wrong. More people die from cold and its effects than from heat.

I can handle cold. Because all I have to do is wear warmer clothing.

And release CO2. Fossils fuels come in handy.

Why would I need to back up that what nature does, relatively speaking, is ideal. Next, we can have technology, like air conditioning, without destroying the planet. Next, I have often hears about heat waves that killed many people over the years. I have never heard of massive numbers of deaths being created by cold waves. Next, I never heard of CO2 being released by wearing warmer clothing.

 

[krypto]

If you took your blood pressure with one of those digital blood pressure monitors, would the readout it gave be a "theory?" The graphs I shoud came from actual measurements.

No son, they sure didn't.

We are the wrong crowd to lie to.

Also, everybody want's more. Scientists are no different. But reality dissuades them. What is going on isn't a socialist agenda. It is a survival agenda.

No, it's a con.

Yes fetus, they sure do. Next, "I" am the wrong person to lie to. Next, a couple of years ago, for example, the entire continent of Greenland experienced melting for the first time. Even mountain tops. Was that a con? I have a documentary to suggest to you. It's called "Greedy Lying Bastards." One of the things you can see is the CEO of EXXON admitting that human caused global warming was a reality. If anybody would have reason to tell your kind of lies about HCGW, he would. So what does that have to say about your position on the matter.

 

[Unkotare]

.... Next, I have often hears [sic] about heat waves that killed many people over the years. I have never heard of massive numbers of deaths being created by cold waves. .....

Really? Ever heard of Napoleon or Hitler?

More deaths in eastern Europe's big freeze

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

But I would say the best global temperature would be what it was at about the beginning of the industrial revolution.

Why?

Because it was what it was due to nature. Not humanity.

If nature did it, that's ideal?
In Chicago, it gets pretty cold in the winter.
The ideal temperature for me is much higher.

It is pretty much ideal. Because human technology and greed isn't the cause. Next, it can also get pretty hot in Chicago. In 1995, it caused 739 deaths. I don't think cold is as hard on people. I can handle cold. Because all I have to do is wear warmer clothing. But it wipes me out when it gets hot out. And apart from air conditioning, there isn't anything you can do about it.

It is pretty much ideal.

So you claim. With no back up.

Because human technology and greed isn't the cause.

Human technology allows us to live where the temperature is not your ideal.

Next, it can also get pretty hot in Chicago. In 1995, it caused 739 deaths. I don't think cold is as hard on people.

You're wrong. More people die from cold and its effects than from heat.

I can handle cold. Because all I have to do is wear warmer clothing.

And release CO2. Fossils fuels come in handy.

Why would I need to back up that what nature does, relatively speaking, is ideal. Next, we can have technology, like air conditioning, without destroying the planet. Next, I have often hears about heat waves that killed many people over the years. I have never heard of massive numbers of deaths being created by cold waves. Next, I never heard of CO2 being released by wearing warmer clothing.

Why would I need to back up that what nature does, relatively speaking, is ideal.

Nature did starvation and smallpox. Should we keep those going, or work on vaccines and agriculture?

Next, we can have technology, like air conditioning, without destroying the planet.

And we can use fossil fuels without destroying the planet.

Next, I never heard of CO2 being released by wearing warmer clothing.

What is this magic clothing that gets made with no CO2 production?

 

[krypto]

Like it or not, the population of White people isn't rising. In some places, it may even be going down a little. So what can White people do about this problem that they aren't contributing to without being called "racist." Well there is only one sane path to take. EMBRACE "RACISM!" If you are White and care anything at all about our ecological system, like it or not, you HAVE to embrace racism. It's the only way.

How is it that this portion of the OP has not garnered a single comment?

Krypto, why should we care what proportion of the world's population is made up of caucasians?

There are zillions of reasons. Probably none of which a non-white would agree with. But who gives a damn what they think. They are destroying the planet with a population explosion. White people aren't doing that. That is just one reason why you should care what percentage of the world's population is made up of Whites.

So, you think we should be racist bigots because you're racist bigotry wants company.

Some patriotic, rational company would be nice. But that isn't the point. The point is overpopulation. And how non-whites are responsible for it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Yes fetus, they sure do. Next, "I" am the wrong person to lie to.

What you are son, is an ignorant buffoon. You don't even represent the cultist position competently.

Next, a couple of years ago, for example, the entire continent of Greenland experienced melting for the first time.

That explains all of the Viking relics they found when the ice melted!

You're sharp as a marshmallow.

Even mountain tops. Was that a con? I have a documentary to suggest to you. It's called "Greedy Lying Bastards." One of the things you can see is the CEO of EXXON admitting that human caused global warming was a reality. If anybody would have reason to tell your kind of lies about HCGW, he would. So what does that have to say about your position on the matter.

Some greedy lying bastards are trying to get in on the AGW fraud.

So truthfully, are you really a troll trying to discredit the AGW retards?

 

[krypto]

The graphs came from scientists making measurments.

No they didn't.

You might have lifted them from a whackjob leftist hate site, but since there is no observed correlation between CO2 and temperature, your graphs or absurd fakes.

Not me. If you want to debate them, look to the organizations who created them and take up the argument with them.

And what organization is that?

Why can't you give me the formula, the ratio of CO2 to temperature?

I'm pretty sure the graphs I showed included who made them. If they didn't, I will add a few others. Also, screw your formulas. You don't need formulas. You need to wake up and smell the coffee. And look at the measurements.

 

[krypto]

No. My guarantee is a guarantee. Our current population level is unsustainable. In fact, it is already too high.

Completely untrue but never let a murderous progressive actually pay attention to facts. The real facts are this. The carrying capacity of this planet is around 40 billion people. We will top out at around 9 billion and then slowly drop back to around 6 billion if we do nothing. Yet another progressive lie put forth as an excuse to commit mass murder. You scum are all the same.

If you are going to post me, I would appreciate it if you didn't sniff glue first. Let me guess, you also think that human caused global warming is a hoax. So I guess there's no point in pointing out that humans cause HCGW. Another point is that there are about 65 million people in the U.K. I have heard it estimated that if they all switched over to living an agrarian lifestyle, they could only produce enough food to feed 8 million people. So there alone, they are beyond their carrying capacity by 57 million people.

Also, what about all the environmental damage caused by humans. Then there are animals going extinct. Some even before they become known to science. And as things now stand, we are basically killing our oceans. You should check out a documentary called, "End of the line." Then, for what food is grown, there would be far less if we didn't manufacture fertalizer out of oil. Etc, etc, etc, etc.

And you think the earth could support 40 billion people!? But let's just say for argument's sake that it could. What makes you think the population would stop at 9 billion. Because when it comes to breeding, non-whites are no different from bacteria. White people used to be the same way. But the population levels of Whites isn't rising any more. Another thing is what is this magical thing that is supposed to drop the population from 9 billion to 6 billion. Whatever it is, you should use it to drop the world population of over 7 billion to 4 billion.

Yes. There is zero empirical data to support that now very failed "theory". The only people pushing that particular load of bull poo, are globalists who wish to use the supposed danger of global warming to push their socialist agenda.

If you took your blood pressure with one of those digital blood pressure monitors, would the readout it gave be a "theory?" The graphs I shoud came from actual measurements. Also, everybody want's more. Scientists are no different. But reality dissuades them. What is going on isn't a socialist agenda. It is a survival agenda.

Correlation does not equal causation is a scientific axiom that you should aquaint yourself with.

I have a couple sayings for you to aquaint yourself with. "Where there's smoke, there's fire." Also, "It's better to be safe than sorry." I have something else for you to consider. But it will probably be a little like asking a heroin addict to consider quitting. What "if" you are right. And that's a very very big "IF." What is the worst that can happen by doing something about HCGW. We start living more sustainably with the planet. And in doing so, for instance, stop making creatures go extinct.

But what "if" I am right. And that "if" is nonexistant. Because I am right. What is the worst than can happen by doing nothing about HCGW. Just most of the life on earth going extinct. Which I heard one college professor who had been studying the problem for the last 15 years, could happen in about 20 years. You tell me what is worse. Living sustainably, or destroying most of the life on earth.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Look at the graphs. They should tell you what organization created them. I have a couple more for you. If you think it will help.

Why can't you give me the formula, the ratio of CO2 to temperature?

X CO2 causes Y warming.

What is X? What is Y?

Why can't you tell me this?

If I want to know the sum of squares to find the slop in a regression analysis I can use the above formula.

You see in real science, in legitimate science, things are quantifiable, testable, verifiable, repeatable.

But then AGW, just like Astrology or parapsychology is not legitimate, not science at all.