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.
The low IQ denier trolls do the NON-qualified, NON-Climate scientist "Predictions" routine every week.
al Gore, or a Swedish 15 yr old, or a Newspaper citing mere some 'ecologist' etc are not valid.
Here is THEE most famous prediction/Climate expert from NASA.
`
LessThe hotter world that Hansen envisioned in 1988 has pretty much come true so far, more or less.
Less
Everyone who's serious takes me seriously here.It's funny how still nobody takes you seriously.
Biden does not care. He only sees this as an opportunity to grease the palms of those who kiss his backside.
The Chinese certainly don't care.
And as the EV market crashes, I don't care.
It's here....it's staying.
Suck on it.
www.usmessageboard.com
You're a moron. You and EMH are two sides of the same coin. I often wonder if you are one and the same.Everyone who's serious takes me seriously here.
I put up more meaty posts than anyone.
Of course 80-90% of the posters are RW Trolls like YOU @sshole. The bread and butter of the Sewer that is USMB.
Hiker's 'contributions' here:
Google search results
Pure NO CONTENT SCVM.
`
The GHG effect is relatively weak. From simple physics the radiative forcing of CO2 is 1C per doubling of CO2. So really it's weak and diminishing.Everyone who's serious takes me seriously here.
I put up more meaty posts than anyone.
Of course 80-90% of the posters are RW Trolls like YOU @sshole. The bread and butter of the Sewer that is USMB.
Hiker's 'contributions' here:
Google search results
Pure NO CONTENT SCVM.
`
If there is global warming its ok with me because it means a longer growing season for my gardenEveryone who's serious takes me seriously here.
I put up more meaty posts than anyone.
Of course 80-90% of the posters are RW Trolls like YOU @sshole. The bread and butter of the Sewer that is USMB.
Hiker's 'contributions' here:
Google search results
Pure NO CONTENT SCVM.
`
In fact, the sum total of all greenhouse gases in the entire atmosphere is only 44% effective at trapping its theoretical GHG effect, you climate cuck.Everyone who's serious takes me seriously here.
I put up more meaty posts than anyone.
Of course 80-90% of the posters are RW Trolls like YOU @sshole. The bread and butter of the Sewer that is USMB.
Hiker's 'contributions' here:
Google search results
Pure NO CONTENT SCVM.
`
Everyone who's serious takes me seriously here.
I put up more meaty posts than anyone.
Of course 80-90% of the posters are RW Trolls like YOU @sshole. The bread and butter of the Sewer that is USMB.
Hiker's 'contributions' here:
Google search results
Pure NO CONTENT SCVM.
`
Do you even know how the GHG effect works?Everyone who's serious takes me seriously here.
I put up more meaty posts than anyone.
Of course 80-90% of the posters are RW Trolls like YOU @sshole. The bread and butter of the Sewer that is USMB.
Hiker's 'contributions' here:
Google search results
Pure NO CONTENT SCVM.
`
The planet is still warming up from to the pre-glacial temperature. It's still got another 2C to go, dummy.Everyone who's serious takes me seriously here.
I put up more meaty posts than anyone.
Of course 80-90% of the posters are RW Trolls like YOU @sshole. The bread and butter of the Sewer that is USMB.
Hiker's 'contributions' here:
Google search results
Pure NO CONTENT SCVM.
`
More than that in actual fact.The planet is still warming up from to the pre-glacial temperature. It's still got another 2C to go, dummy.
No one with a brain takes you seriously, cupcake.
www.usmessageboard.com
Westwall is more ONE LINE RW Trash with Zero On Topic meat, ZERO.
No articles, NO charts, NO graphs, and NOT even a paragraph in his own words..
Google search results
`
Aske the climate experts. If they actually said that then it would be worth asking for an explanation. Or perhaps they've been misquoted?What say you Donald H ? Does it make sense that the all the greenhouse gases in the entire atmosphere is only 44% effective at trapping its theoretical GHG effect at the surface and an incremental 280 ppm of CO2 would be 450% effective?
I certainly do need an expert to comment with an answer. It's very unlikely that 99% of climate scientists would say something that isn't true.Does that sound reasonable to you? Or are you going to climate-science-cuck-out and claim you need someone else do your job for you?
Thank you for proving my point. You like to watch climate scientists do your dirty work because you are science impotent.Aske the climate experts. If they actually said that then it would be worth asking for an explanation. Or perhaps they've been misquoted?
I certainly do need an expert to comment with an answer. It's very unlikely that 99% of climate scientists would say something that isn't true.
Then if you can be trusted with telling the truth, then I would accept it as being true.Thank you for proving my point. You like to watch climate scientists do your dirty work because you are science impotent.
100% of them say the atmosphere is only 44% effective at trapping its theoretical GHG effect at the surface because it's true. They knew it back in 1964. It's not new news.
