Is Anthropogenic (Human-Caused) Global Warming/AGW Falsifiable?

No it isn’t. Natural gas is a fossil fuel.
You won’t look it up…so here it is.
“Natural gas is a fossil fuel that is formed when layers of organic matter (primarily marine microorganisms) [ 5 ] decompose under anaerobic conditions and are subjected to intense heat and pressure underground over millions of years.”

“Natural gas is a fossil fuel that is formed when layers of organic matter (primarily marine microorganisms) [ 5 ] decompose under anaerobic conditions and are subjected to intense heat and pressure underground over millions of years.”

And that is the only way it ever forms in the entire universe.

DURR
 
“Natural gas is a fossil fuel that is formed when layers of organic matter (primarily marine microorganisms) [ 5 ] decompose under anaerobic conditions and are subjected to intense heat and pressure underground over millions of years.”

And that is the only way it ever forms in the entire universe.

DURR
That's how it forms naturally. True. We (humans) raise tons of cows, for example. They all fart, producing more methane (a greenhouse gas) than all the cars in the world. Then we milk them and eat their calves. We do that, not Mother Nature. Here's more information than you ever wanted to know about what comprises "natural gas":
See, we even screw with "natural gas" bigtime before allowing any into our cars or kitchens.
 
That's how it forms naturally. True. We (humans) raise tons of cows, for example. They all fart, producing more methane (a greenhouse gas) than all the cars in the world. Then we milk them and eat their calves. We do that, not Mother Nature. Here's more information than you ever wanted to know about what comprises "natural gas":
See, we even screw with "natural gas" bigtime before allowing any into our cars or kitchens.

That's how it forms naturally.

Is that how it formed on Titan and Jupiter?
 
That's how it forms naturally.

Is that how it formed on Titan and Jupiter?
Google AI Overview

Methane on Titan and Jupiter is believed to form primarily through chemical reactions within their atmospheres, with the primary source on Titan likely being released from the moon's interior through cryovolcanic eruptions, essentially "ice volcanoes" that spew methane gas into the atmosphere, while on Jupiter, methane is produced through chemical processing of the primordial solar nebula material in its hydrogen-rich atmosphere; both planets experience further methane production from the interaction of solar radiation with other atmospheric compounds.
 
Google AI Overview

Methane on Titan and Jupiter is believed to form primarily through chemical reactions within their atmospheres, with the primary source on Titan likely being released from the moon's interior through cryovolcanic eruptions, essentially "ice volcanoes" that spew methane gas into the atmosphere, while on Jupiter, methane is produced through chemical processing of the primordial solar nebula material in its hydrogen-rich atmosphere; both planets experience further methane production from the interaction of solar radiation with other atmospheric compounds.

It's possible to form methane from non-biological sources?

Shhh....people will think you're crazy.
 

You and Mr Melville misquoted Kerry. You left out "scientists predict" from Kerry's statement. That makes the two of you just another pair of fucking liars.
 
You and Mr Melville misquoted Kerry. You left out "scientists predict" from Kerry's statement. That makes the two of you just another pair of fucking liars.

Does Kerry quote the scientists he disagrees with?
 
Does Kerry quote the scientists he disagrees with?
I don't have a complete record of everything John Kerry has ever said. He could easily quote them to illustrate why he disagrees with them. However, since Kerry is not a scientist, I imagine he depends on the majority opinions of scientists. Everything I have heard or read from him tells me that he ascribes to the conclusions of the IPCC. What is your point? Do you think it was okay for Ringo to modify that quote?
 
I don't have a complete record of everything John Kerry has ever said. He could easily quote them to illustrate why he disagrees with them. However, since Kerry is not a scientist, I imagine he depends on the majority opinions of scientists. Everything I have heard or read from him tells me that he ascribes to the conclusions of the IPCC. What is your point? Do you think it was okay for Ringo to modify that quote?

Kerry quotes scientists he agrees with. Those scientists were wrong.
Ringo's modification didn't change Kerry's agreement with the error.
 
I asked you a valid question: are volcanos renewable or continuous? simple question. What is your reply?
You’re confused……You asked the wrong question, again.
Why can’t you read it ?
 
This relates active and inactive volcanoes and geothermal energy:
Long story short, active volcanoes ("continuous") are too dangerous to attempt extracting energy from. But less than continuous appears to have proven worth the risk.
 
Exactly who said volcanoes were renewable ? You brought it up, not me.
you said thermal power was renewable, not me. Do you even understand what the word renewable means? it means you use something up and then more is created. Water is not renewable, hydro from rivers and dams is continuous, not renewable. I know we are nitpicking words, but it's necessary in order to have an intelligent conversation.
 
you said thermal power was renewable, not me. Do you even understand what the word renewable means? it means you use something up and then more is created. Water is not renewable, hydro from rivers and dams is continuous, not renewable. I know we are nitpicking words, but it's necessary in order to have an intelligent conversation.
A volcano is not mentioned as a renewable even though it’s a break in thermal energy. . It’s no more renewable than a hurricane when compared to wind. ….Obviously, you’re not reading what renewable energy is. Do you need it repeated ?
Water isn’t necessarily a renewable while moving water can be or water stored as potential energy can be. Water is matter. You are confused again…..obviously. You need to know the difference between kinetic and potential energy…..look it up and, read it. We’re not nitpicking words but we need to use them correctly if you’re going to question renewable energy.
Now, reread what renewables are…..do you see the word “ volcano “ mentioned ?
Obviously, you’re not going to read mine. So read Wikipedia
 
Last edited:
This relates active and inactive volcanoes and geothermal energy:
Long story short, active volcanoes ("continuous") are too dangerous to attempt extracting energy from. But less than continuous appears to have proven worth the risk.
Yup.
Renewable energy is available on a human scale scale Hurricanes , volcanoes etc are neither predictable or available to be used as energy……what are we going to do, build a plant next to inactive volcanoes and wait ?
 
Last edited:
you said thermal power was renewable, not me. Do you even understand what the word renewable means? it means you use something up and then more is created. Water is not renewable, hydro from rivers and dams is continuous, not renewable. I know we are nitpicking words, but it's necessary in order to have an intelligent conversation.
Yes, let's nitpick. Notice it's "energy" (not "power" or "electric") that modifies "renewable." The sources of that energy may be anything that's continuous or reliably periodic ("naturally replenished") enough for us to use . Obviously, what we use a type of "renewable energy" for is not what it is (other than perhaps geothermal use for direct heating):

What Is Renewable Energy?

Renewable energy comes from unlimited, naturally replenished resources, such as the sun, tides, and wind. Renewable energy can be used for electricity generation, space and water heating and cooling, and transportation.
Non-renewable energy, in contrast, comes from finite sources, such as coal, natural gas, and oil.
 
Yes, let's nitpick. Notice it's "energy" (not "power" or "electric") that modifies "renewable." The sources of that energy may be anything that's continuous or reliably periodic ("naturally replenished") enough for us to use . Obviously, what we use a type of "renewable energy" for is not what it is (other than perhaps geothermal use for direct heating):
For sure. His original comment included volcanos being renewable. I never recalled volcanoes being a renewable energy source. They are outlets for lava, which I’m sure could be a source for energy…..but volcanos ? They are just a hole in the ground….
Now, if he’d bother to do a little research on renewables….
 
Back
Top Bottom