It's still going up boys and girls

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
8,897
Reaction score
6,365
Points
2,050
Everyone who has not been played for fools by the fossil fuel companies knows that carbon emissions are responsible for climate change and that those emissions must be slowed to prevent catastrophe.


The usual lies gets thrown on about "fossil fuels" companies who didn't hide their position from day one. It is an old accusation that ran out of steam a few years ago.

You have new dumb irrelevant lies to offer?
 

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
8,897
Reaction score
6,365
Points
2,050
Surely you have noticed the numbers of posters here arguing that localized regions in the US are experiencing cold weather and thus global warming must be false. Are you one of them?
Yeah, global warming is definitely false. I wish you leftist global warming types would focus on where the problem REALLY is instead of all this fake stuff!! Overpopulation, the hockey-stick increase from 1 billion to more than 7 billion in a couple hundred years.

You chose the wrong, wrong cause if you want to Save the Earth.

Cross over to fighting overpopulation. That might actually help.
Fighting overpopulation IS a worthy cause with many, many benefits, one of which would be a reduction in GHG production. But I think it would be far easier to reduce our CO2 output than to lower our population. Besides, you are peddling a false dichotomy: Nothing prevents us from working on both problems simultaneously.
Ooooh false dichotomy such uberelitist edumacation on display here.
I see no point in attempting to discuss anything with you. Your posts are valueless. Buh-bye
Many here are laughing at your insane infatuation over the bogeyman molecule that doesn't have demonstrated warm forcing increase danger to the planet. Heck you have no idea what the fuck AGW really is since even most warmists scientists knows that CO2 (the bogeyman) itself doesn't generate dangerous warming possibilities, it is the POSITIVE feedback that is postulated to do that, and that has never been showing up as projected from 20 years ago.


1617855527322.png

Diagram showing observed linear decadal temperature change at surface, 300 hPa and 200 hPa, between 20oN and 20oS, since January 1979. Data source: HadAT and HadCRUT4. Click here to compare with modelled altitudinal temperature change pattern for doubling atmospheric CO2. Last month included in analysis: December 2012. Last diagram update: 4 May 2013.

LINK

That is why you are getting mocked here.

It is warming, oh my god!

:cuckoo:
 
Last edited:

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
8,897
Reaction score
6,365
Points
2,050

Attachments

Last edited:

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
8,897
Reaction score
6,365
Points
2,050
Everyone who has not been played for fools by the fossil fuel companies knows that carbon emissions are responsible for climate change and that those emissions must be slowed to prevent catastrophe.


^
FAKE NEWS ALERT!!!
Really? Fake? Then you must have the REAL news. What does IT say?
Nothing at all.

:cool:
 

Batcat

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
607
Reaction score
687
Points
498
Oh no Auntie Em, Auntie Em!!! As I am running away from the melty glaciers and the zombie virus attackers I am getting warmer and warmer oh Auntie Em, Auntie Em!!!
Surely you have noticed the numbers of posters here arguing that localized regions in the US are experiencing cold weather and thus global warming must be false. Are you one of them?
Yes, I have noticed that some people confuse local weather with global climate change.

I have also noticed that over the years the Global Warming advocates have made a lot of predictions which were laughable. Snow was supposed to be a rare event today, costal cities would be flooding and there would be hardly any ice left at the North Pole.

People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. At a minimum they should stop crying. “Wolf.”


 
OP
Crick

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
15,367
Reaction score
1,559
Points
290
Location
N/A
Oh no Auntie Em, Auntie Em!!! As I am running away from the melty glaciers and the zombie virus attackers I am getting warmer and warmer oh Auntie Em, Auntie Em!!!
Surely you have noticed the numbers of posters here arguing that localized regions in the US are experiencing cold weather and thus global warming must be false. Are you one of them?
Yes, I have noticed that some people confuse local weather with global climate change.

I have also noticed that over the years the Global Warming advocates have made a lot of predictions which were laughable. Snow was supposed to be a rare event today, costal cities would be flooding and there would be hardly any ice left at the North Pole.

People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. At a minimum they should stop crying. “Wolf.”


I hate to point this out to you, but cities are flooding and there is very little ice left at the North Pole on a summer's day. We are not crying "wolf", we are attempting to convince the last few holdouts that AGW is a valid description of the behavior of our climate and represents a serious threat to humanity's well being over the next century.
 
OP
Crick

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
15,367
Reaction score
1,559
Points
290
Location
N/A
Fighting overpopulation IS a worthy cause with many, many benefits, one of which would be a reduction in GHG production. But I think it would be far easier to reduce our CO2 output than to lower our population. Besides, you are peddling a false dichotomy: Nothing prevents us from working on both problems simultaneously.
I'm not "peddling a false dichotomy" --- I'm saying your global warming nonsense is all bogus.

But overpopulation is wow, is it ever not bogus!!

I understand that it is a problem for white leftists to deal with, since whites are depopulating rapidly, but the blacks and browns and yellows are grossly overpopulating --- and migrating as fast as they can to replace us, since we're depopulating. But it doesn't sound too leftie to say, all you colored people should stop reproducing, like us! Not tactful.

I think it could be dealt with ------ China did, after all, and people continue to have small families there, mostly males, which continues to be a drag on their overpopulation. I just looked up China again: their population is fully five times that of the U.S.A.

Ah well, I suppose you are right, it's hopeless. We'll have to let the Reverend Malthus solve it. And he will.
I did not use the term "peddling", but to suggest that we can not work on BOTH overpopulation and global warming at the same time is a false dichotomy. And it would be VERY tactless to suggest "colored people" should stop reproducing. It is, in fact, pure racism. But you knew that, didn't you.
 
OP
Crick

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
15,367
Reaction score
1,559
Points
290
Location
N/A
Interesting that the graph shot up shortly after MMGW guru Al Gore lost the election. I wonder if he is still pulling the strings.
Unlikely, since he never did.
 
OP
Crick

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
15,367
Reaction score
1,559
Points
290
Location
N/A
No one paid attention to the anomalies in the election. Why is this different?
There were no anomalies in the election to which attention may be paid, unless you were gullible enough to buy into the blatant lies of Trump and his minions in THEIR attempt to steal the election. What you are commenting on is a graph of global temperature histories compiled by several different organizations. What is notable is how closely they all align. The point is to suggest that those insisting global warming is a complete charade and the world is NOT getting warmer do not have a leg to stand on.
 
OP
Crick

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
15,367
Reaction score
1,559
Points
290
Location
N/A
I hate to point this out to you, but cities are flooding
Which ones?

Did you ever post how AGW is falsifiable?
Miami is flooding. I did post a lengthy comment on how it could be falsified, but that was many months ago. On a short list, you could disprove the greenhouse effect by showing that CO2 doesn't absorb IR. You could prove that the level of CO2 in the atmosphere has not risen or that the additional CO2 is not the result of fossil fuel combustion. You could prove that combusting fossil fuels doesn't produce CO2. You could show that satellite IR emission data are incorrect or that solar irradiance is responsible for all the observed warming. You could find that all the observed warming is due to poor thermometer placement or a grand conspiracy. Sadly, all of these have been tried and none of them have succeeded. I guess you're stuck. Todd, you're too smart to buy into some of these things. AGW is valid.
 

Lastamender

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
11,431
Reaction score
6,456
Points
1,050
No one paid attention to the anomalies in the election. Why is this different?
There were no anomalies in the election to which attention may be paid, unless you were gullible enough to buy into the blatant lies of Trump and his minions in THEIR attempt to steal the election. What you are commenting on is a graph of global temperature histories compiled by several different organizations. What is notable is how closely they all align. The point is to suggest that those insisting global warming is a complete charade and the world is NOT getting warmer do not have a leg to stand on.
1617909390829.png

Plenty of anomalies worth paying attention.
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
65,535
Reaction score
13,559
Points
2,180
Location
Chicago
I hate to point this out to you, but cities are flooding
Which ones?

Did you ever post how AGW is falsifiable?
Miami is flooding. I did post a lengthy comment on how it could be falsified, but that was many months ago. On a short list, you could disprove the greenhouse effect by showing that CO2 doesn't absorb IR. You could prove that the level of CO2 in the atmosphere has not risen or that the additional CO2 is not the result of fossil fuel combustion. You could prove that combusting fossil fuels doesn't produce CO2. You could show that satellite IR emission data are incorrect or that solar irradiance is responsible for all the observed warming. You could find that all the observed warming is due to poor thermometer placement or a grand conspiracy. Sadly, all of these have been tried and none of them have succeeded. I guess you're stuck. Todd, you're too smart to buy into some of these things. AGW is valid.
Miami is flooding.

That's awful!!!

How much is because of AGW and how much is because of pumping/subsidence?

On a short list,

I don't see too much/not enough precipitation.
Are both evidence of AGW?

You could show that satellite IR emission data are incorrect

Or that data from the 1930s (and earlier) was wrong.....
oh, wait, changing old data is what warmers do.
 

RoshawnMarkwees

Assimilationist
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
25,983
Reaction score
7,193
Points
280
Location
Middle class, suburban ghetto.
I care and we should all care. Not because warming is any kind of threat but that it will continue to be used to perpetuate the threat from democrats destroying the economy. All to gain Marxist control.
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
119,978
Reaction score
34,714
Points
2,220
We must spend $78 trillion which may or may not lower CO2 which lowering may or may not have any effect on temperature, weather or climate!

Who's with me?
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
119,978
Reaction score
34,714
Points
2,220

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top