Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
but you have no idea what it proves.Do you ever post more than ten words you empty harassment Troll?
What are you even doing here.?
Go tweet some one liners.
My post was from the most important Science org in the country.
You're a one-line NO CONTENT Troll.
`
`
Really?but you have no idea what it proves.
So you can’t summarize what is evidence?Really?
See if you can figure it out this time:
(you want to help me bump my thread/make my point with your token/7-word/non replies? Be my guest)
Natl academy of sciences/NAS
CLIMATE CHANGE
Humans are causing global warming
CLAIM
Today’s global warming is No different from previous Warming periods in Earth’s past.
FINDING
FALSE. Natural changes in the Sun and Earth Cannot Explain Today’s Global warming. Human activities are Causing Earth to heat up in ways that are Different from warm periods in the past.
`
YES!So you can’t summarize what is evidence?
so if I simply say nope, my evidence is as good as their’s.
Again, where’s your evidence?YES!
Just did in another thread and have scores of times.
Past climate cycles were driven by Solar Forcing but not this one. It's unprecedented because the Human Industrial revolution has poured GHGs into the atmosphere at [increasingly] staggering rates.
CO2 and other GHGs typically trail and exacerbate Warming after a solar forcing/astronomical/tilting event.
NOT the case now.
They are perfectly capable of causing warming as they are now/almost uniquely.
Scientists have measured radiation-in/radiation-out.
Radiation-in has NOT changed in at least 50 years.
Radiation out back into space is being blocked by the increasingly thick GHG blanket and at the exact spectral wavelengths of those GHG gases.
That's about the best, but not only, of many reasons we now this is AGW.
MY TURN:
Can you post a paragraph summarizing your theory and why?
LOFL TROLL boy.
`
`
TROLLAgain, where’s your evidence?
Somehow what ur saying makes more sense than all I've been able to get from the AGW folks, they always seem to back off when ever we get into the nuts'n'bolts of what's heating & how do we measure it.
We got to admit that there are a lot of very nice folks who're swept into this thing, as vapid as it may be.
Great post. dinging ding's 9500th troll.And that means, exactly, what? The key is that past interglacials were driven by natural forcings (specifically and chiefly the Milankovich Cycles). The current interglacial, regardless of human activity is whatever temperature it is. The key is that:
1. We should be heading back into another glacial advance and we should be seeing cooling. But we are NOT. We are, instead, warming.
2. Anthropogenic Global Warming will be expected to have the biggest impact on our societies in general. Our agricultural infrastructure, our land-usage and our economies. Something that we didn't have in the last interglacial
Us blokes get blamed for everything these days, but I don't think global warming is down to us. Today alone, my wife has driven to the supermarket, done two loads of washing and ironing, vacuumed the whole house, made some bread and several cups of coffee for me, and washed the pots. By comparison I haven't used any energy whatsoever. It's time we recognise who's causing all the problems in the world.Great post. dinging ding's 9500th troll.
`
Us blokes get blamed for everything these days, but I don't think global warming is down to us. Today alone, my wife has driven to the supermarket, done two loads of washing and ironing, vacuumed the whole house, made some bread and several cups of coffee for me, and washed the pots. By comparison I haven't used any energy whatsoever. It's time we recognise who's causing all the problems in the world.
He was never actually in the competition.TROLL
The OP has Half a Dozen or more Excellent sources with the evidence.
But YOU ASKED for a "summary" you Dishonest little LIAR.
and I gave a summary, not pages of Evidence.
YOU LOST.
I did give that summary and the OP and thread is full of evidence of it.
YOU LOST.
Last word away you STINKING 7-word, non-conversant, no-meat, TROLL.
You post NO facts, NO Links, NOTHING but 7-word heel-nipping.
SWAT!
You could NOT post YOUR "summary" in kind I asked for.
YOU LOST.
`
still no evidence. We're still waiting. Crickster provides the comic relief in here, he spits and farts and leaves and dances with wolves I guess. Still waiting on how warm 120 PPM of CO2 is dude. You still haven't answered. This OP is nonsense, and frankly I don't give a shit how you feel about my post.He was never actually in the competition.
Be at peace in the knowledge that you are correct. The whole world realizes this except for the naysayers. Those few will always exist, like doubting Thomas, nothing's going to change them especially if they try to reinforce their thoughts with lies. Have a good day and forget these losers.YES!
Just did in another thread and have scores of times.
Past climate cycles were driven by Solar Forcing but not this one. It's unprecedented because the Human Industrial revolution has poured GHGs into the atmosphere at [increasingly] staggering rates.
CO2 and other GHGs typically trail and exacerbate Warming after a solar forcing/astronomical/tilting event.
NOT the case now.
They are perfectly capable of causing warming as they are now/almost uniquely.
Scientists have measured radiation-in/radiation-out.
Radiation-in has NOT changed in at least 50 years.
Radiation out back into space is being blocked by the increasingly thick GHG blanket and at the exact spectral wavelengths of those GHG gases.
That's about the best, but not only, of many reasons we now this is AGW.
MY TURN:
Can you post a paragraph summarizing your Contrasting theory and why?
LOFL TROLL boy.
`
`
especially when.......................you got nothing like you got. Amazing!!! How hot is 120PPM of CO2 since you have the answers.Be at peace in the knowledge that you are correct. The whole world realizes this except for the naysayers. Those few will always exist, like doubting Thomas, nothing's going to change them especially if they try to reinforce their thoughts with lies. Have a good day and forget these losers.
I'm not playing your silly little games. The debate was over in 1992 when 197 nations in the world signed the United Nations framework for climate change. It was definitely over when in 2006 the American association for the advancement of science declared the scientific evidence is clear global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now and it is a growing threat to society. This is not something new, we've had well over 100 years to change our ways and prepare for a future without fossil fuels but big oil blocked move that was attempted now we are in a sad situation because of them. The industrial revolution started in the approximately 1850. By 1896 the swedish scientists Svante Arrhenius figured it all out. He simply said; " As humanity burned fossil fuels such as coal, which add CO2 gas to the Earth's atmosphere we would have arrived in the planet's average temperature." The rest is history. You must be a trumper, you believe like him that you are correct and everyone else is wrong. I'm sorry but the real world doesn't work like that and I'm not playing your sick little games. It's over. Try to have a nice day, I plan on it.especially when.......................you got nothing like you got. Amazing!!! How hot is 120PPM of CO2 since you have the answers.
You can't believe any garbage you want. The bottom line is most people on the planet know climate change is a real threat and they want to curtail it as much as possible. We ( collectively ) caused this and we, at least most of us, want to leave our children and grandchildren with a planet as wonderful as the one we had.How do we know humanity is causing climate change?
I think we have to distinguish between THE cause and A cause, or even the primary cause. People can spout off about this study or that research and that may have some value but too often it is the product of somebody's politics rather than objective truth. [Money talks very loudly.] There are too many natural causes that shift in time in terms of cause and effect, and much of that cannot be accurately measured. Clearly there have been stretches of time where the various measurements used to describe climate change have risen and fallen, sometimes significantly and unexplainably. I do not believe there is any doubt that mankind has polluted the air and water and that did/does have an effect, but to what extent relative to natural causes remains unknown.
Which does not mean we should do nothing about it, but the programs and policies we adopt ought to be smart and cost-effective without undue negative impact on the people who can afford it least. So much of the climate change politics is based on money, who gets it vs how much good it'll do. It has become a hot-button political issue where no one can really know how much difference a given policy or program will make. Instead, we are rewarding political donors and supporters with huge sums that have not produced results that were worthy of the expenditures. These days truth is in the eye of the beholder, and it is very elusive.
Which ought to inform the argument. AGW deniers are, seemingly, concerned primarily about money. People that accept the conclusions of mainstream science on this topic realize AGW is a threat to our children and theirs. Thus a large disparity in the strength of our two motivations should surprise no one. The idiots on this forum are a very real threat to our children and their futures.You can't believe any garbage you want. The bottom line is most people on the planet know climate change is a real threat and they want to curtail it as much as possible. We ( collectively ) caused this and we, at least most of us, want to leave our children and grandchildren with a planet as wonderful as the one we had.
well how about you first tell us how hot all that added CO2 added to the atmosphere? Go ahead, remove the humidity and what you got?I'm not playing your silly little games. The debate was over in 1992 when 197 nations in the world signed the United Nations framework for climate change. It was definitely over when in 2006 the American association for the advancement of science declared the scientific evidence is clear global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now and it is a growing threat to society. This is not something new, we've had well over 100 years to change our ways and prepare for a future without fossil fuels but big oil blocked move that was attempted now we are in a sad situation because of them. The industrial revolution started in the approximately 1850. By 1896 the swedish scientists Svante Arrhenius figured it all out. He simply said; " As humanity burned fossil fuels such as coal, which add CO2 gas to the Earth's atmosphere we would have arrived in the planet's average temperature." The rest is history. You must be a trumper, you believe like him that you are correct and everyone else is wrong. I'm sorry but the real world doesn't work like that and I'm not playing your sick little games. It's over. Try to have a nice day, I plan on it.
