Official Thread for Denial of GreenHouse Effect and Radiative Physics.

[jc456]

I'm not sure where I fall.

This planet is 4.5 billion years old. This planet has been through worldwide fires, worldwide floods, bombardment by cosmic radiation, the depletion and rebuilding of the ozone layer, a total reversal of the poles, entire land masses breaking apart, major techtonic damage, the ice age, hit by countless meteors, extinction of entire species, volcanos and a lot more million and billions of years before we even showed up. I can't help but wonder if we're just going through a phase yet again. Earth is not static, it's chaotic, always changing. We have only been here in the blink of an eye and only a small portion of that has been with real science and real equipment. What is going now has happened thousands of times already.

I mean View attachment 486842

In the 70s we had scientic proof and everyone agreed we were headed into an ice age because of nuclear power being a prime problem. It was a fact we had an ice age coming.

In this day and age of everyone using anything they can as an agenda or to spin a narrative it's hard for me to take any of it serious. Climate change is a big big business with million dollar grants floating around, speeches to be made, tshirts to be printed, podcasts made on it with sponsors and so on. We all know people will do anything for money, even exploiting the climate trend.

But then again pollution could be a contributing factor but I don't believe it to be the sole one. We haven't even had heavy industry that long in the grand scheme of things.

There was never any consensus among scientists that we were heading into an ice age. There were a few individuals leaning that way and the media picked up on it.

are they smarter than you? those few individuals?

 

[ChemEngineer]

I'm not sure where I fall.

This planet is 4.5 billion years old. This planet has been through worldwide fires, worldwide floods, bombardment by cosmic radiation, the depletion and rebuilding of the ozone layer, a total reversal of the poles, entire land masses breaking apart, major techtonic damage, the ice age, hit by countless meteors, extinction of entire species, volcanos and a lot more million and billions of years before we even showed up. I can't help but wonder if we're just going through a phase yet again. Earth is not static, it's chaotic, always changing. We have only been here in the blink of an eye and only a small portion of that has been with real science and real equipment. What is going now has happened thousands of times already.

I mean View attachment 486842

In the 70s we had scientic proof and everyone agreed we were headed into an ice age because of nuclear power being a prime problem. It was a fact we had an ice age coming.

In this day and age of everyone using anything they can as an agenda or to spin a narrative it's hard for me to take any of it serious. Climate change is a big big business with million dollar grants floating around, speeches to be made, tshirts to be printed, podcasts made on it with sponsors and so on. We all know people will do anything for money, even exploiting the climate trend.

But then again pollution could be a contributing factor but I don't believe it to be the sole one. We haven't even had heavy industry that long in the grand scheme of things.

The 1977 issue is fake. I deplore mendacity.

prove it.

Don't be so lazy. Look it up yourself. Disgraceful of you.

 

[sparky]

come on man stand up and be noticed.

Stand
You've been sitting much too long
There's a partisan crease in your right and wrong

Stand
There's a denier standing tall
And the oilocracy behind them all

Stand. stand, stand
Stand. stand, stand

Stand
They will try to make you crawl
And they know what you're saying makes no sense and all

Stand
Don't you know they’d pay the fee
Where’s those flying cars that they promised me

Everybody
Stand, stand, stand

w/apologies to >>

~S~

 

[Crick]

I'm not sure where I fall.

This planet is 4.5 billion years old. This planet has been through worldwide fires, worldwide floods, bombardment by cosmic radiation, the depletion and rebuilding of the ozone layer, a total reversal of the poles, entire land masses breaking apart, major techtonic damage, the ice age, hit by countless meteors, extinction of entire species, volcanos and a lot more million and billions of years before we even showed up. I can't help but wonder if we're just going through a phase yet again. Earth is not static, it's chaotic, always changing. We have only been here in the blink of an eye and only a small portion of that has been with real science and real equipment. What is going now has happened thousands of times already.

I mean View attachment 486842

In the 70s we had scientic proof and everyone agreed we were headed into an ice age because of nuclear power being a prime problem. It was a fact we had an ice age coming.

In this day and age of everyone using anything they can as an agenda or to spin a narrative it's hard for me to take any of it serious. Climate change is a big big business with million dollar grants floating around, speeches to be made, tshirts to be printed, podcasts made on it with sponsors and so on. We all know people will do anything for money, even exploiting the climate trend.

But then again pollution could be a contributing factor but I don't believe it to be the sole one. We haven't even had heavy industry that long in the grand scheme of things.

The 1977 issue is fake. I deplore mendacity.

prove it.

Don't be so lazy. Look it up yourself. Disgraceful of you.

WHAT is "the 1977 issue"?

 

[jc456]

Don't be so lazy. Look it up yourself. Disgraceful of you.

you claimed it as fake, prove it. I owe no effort. post the link that says it's fake.

 

[mamooth]

you claimed it as fake, prove it. I owe no effort. post the link that says it's fake.

It's a well-known hoax. Well, at least it's well-known to anyone who isn't a brainwashed cult imbecile.

1977 "coming ice age" Time magazine cover is a fake

This meme utilizes a widely circulated fake image purporting to show a 1977 Time magazine story titled "How To Survive The Coming Ice Age". The cover is actually from 2007, for a story titled "The Global Warming Survival Guide". While a claim of global cooling did appear a couple times in the...

climatefeedback.org

It's not surpirsing that you fell so hard for the hoax, given your track record of falling hard for every conspiracy hoax.

 

[jc456]

It's a well-known hoax. Well, at least it's well-known to anyone who isn't a brainwashed cult imbecile.

1977 "coming ice age" Time magazine cover is a fake

This meme utilizes a widely circulated fake image purporting to show a 1977 Time magazine story titled "How To Survive The Coming Ice Age". The cover is actually from 2007, for a story titled "The Global Warming Survival Guide". While a claim of global cooling did appear a couple times in the...

climatefeedback.org

It's not surpirsing that you fell so hard for the hoax, given your track record of falling hard for every conspiracy hoax.

that proves nothing.

 

[miketx]

It's a well-known hoax. Well, at least it's well-known to anyone who isn't a brainwashed cult imbecile.

1977 "coming ice age" Time magazine cover is a fake

This meme utilizes a widely circulated fake image purporting to show a 1977 Time magazine story titled "How To Survive The Coming Ice Age". The cover is actually from 2007, for a story titled "The Global Warming Survival Guide". While a claim of global cooling did appear a couple times in the...

climatefeedback.org

It's not surpirsing that you fell so hard for the hoax, given your track record of falling hard for every conspiracy hoax.

fake like all of you.

 

[ChemEngineer]

The oceans are blue. The sky is blue. These facts have been known for thousands of years but only in the last century or so has man learned WHY they are blue. It is because the water in the ocean, and in the atmosphere (~1,500 ppmv) absorb infrared light, leaving the blue light to disperse everywhere. Not only does atmospheric water vapor represent about 40 times the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide, but it also absorbs infrared wavelengths far more effectively than does CO2.

So keep panicking, you Leftists. Keep riding the bus while your handlers ride their Lear Jets, limousines, and yachts. YOU "cut back." Barack Obama, the Clintons, the Gores, Richard Branson, Leftists everywhere - hell no.

theglobalwarmingfraud

TheGlobalWarmingFraud.wordpress.com

 

[Crick]

You might want to consider 1) the average lifespan of a water molecule in the atmosphere and 2) what changes global humidity levels have undergone in the last 150 years and why.

Try:

Trends in continental temperature and humidity directly linked to ocean warming

Changes in surface temperature and humidity over land are important for climate-change impacts on humans and ecosystems. Here, we show how trends in land humidity and temperature in recent decades are linked to ocean warming. While changes in temperature and humidity have been different over...

www.pnas.org

and

Recent Climatology, Variability, and Trends in Global Surface Humidity

Abstract In situ observations of surface air and dewpoint temperatures and air pressure from over 15 000 weather stations and from ships are used to calculate surface specific (q) and relative (RH) humidity over the globe (60°S–75°N) from December 1975 to spring 2005. Seasonal and interannual...

journals.ametsoc.org

for scholarly articles explaining, among other things, that increasing surface temperatures are driving increasing surface specific and absolute humidity, not vice versa. Humidity is the largest global warming feedback, not its cause.

 

[ChemEngineer]

The oceans are blue. The sky is blue. These facts have been known for thousands of years but only in the last century or so has man learned WHY they are blue. It is because the water in the ocean, and in the atmosphere (~1,500 ppmv) absorb infrared light, leaving the blue light to disperse everywhere. Not only does atmospheric water vapor represent about 40 times the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide, but it also absorbs infrared wavelengths far more effectively than does CO2.

View attachment 524909

So keep panicking, you Leftists. Keep riding the bus while your handlers ride their Lear Jets, limousines, and yachts. YOU "cut back." Barack Obama, the Clintons, the Gores, Richard Branson, Leftists everywhere - hell no.

theglobalwarmingfraud

TheGlobalWarmingFraud.wordpress.com

Shareprofit doesn't care for science. It conflicts with his need for fear and coloring books.

 

[abu afak]

There's a sliding scale on what is considered to be "GWarming denial".. It's an abusive, term meant to stoke discord and polarization.. But in reality, "denial" ranges from "I accept GW -- I just don't accept the CATASTROPHIC predictions that have been pounded by media/politicians based on MISREPRESENTATION of the actual science" ----- to the folks that will be using this thread that fall into to "I not only reject GWarming totally and IN ADDITION I don't believe in the physics and chemistry behind how the basic GreenHouse theory works"....

No, there are many worse kinds of GW denial.
In Reality, many on this board believe there is no warming, GW or AGW. (The largest and longest running thread on this msg board)
There are many other "It's cold this week/somewhere so it can't be warming" threads to that effect.
They think it's not warming.

Many more that there is No AGW. All natural cycle GW.

The reason you think/spin 'denial' is 'abusive' is you failed to define the Actual width/irrationality of at least that position which IS denial.

I'm a "denier" of the first kind". Relatively not an extremist on the topic. THIS thread is for the folks in that latter category who are just fillibustering EVERY GW thread with their "alternative science".... It's OK TO HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS.. But they have to contained to threads where THAT IS the actual topic...

You of course claim your position is not 'extremist.'
But what does that mean?
Do you believe AGW?
Do you believe a rise in Sea Level of 1-7 feet by 2050 or 2100 or 2200 is coming?
At what point is it "catastrophic"?
Do you believe we should do anything at all to stop warming?
(if you believe in AGW at all)

You have taken no position except claiming you're reasonable.

`

EDIT: No one answered this post a few pages back either:

Official Thread for Denial of GreenHouse Effect and Radiative Physics.

I have (I think) a rather unique take on the whole "global warming" debate. Based on the most basic principles of physics, man (mankind) has to have an affect on our environment. "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." Mankind has undeniably altered the planet with not...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Just because I refuted your claim and made you look stupid doesn't mean you have to be a whiney twat about it.

Not only is the planet undergoing one of the largest climate changes in the past 65 million years, scientists report that it's occurring at a rate 10 times faster than any change in that period.

Really?

Post the 10 fastest changes over an equivalent period of time.

Thanks!!!

Not only is the planet undergoing one of the largest climate changes in the past 65 million years, scientists report that it's occurring at a rate 10 times faster than any change in that period.

Really?

Post the 10 fastest changes over an equivalent period of time.

Thanks!!!

 

[westwall]

Not only is the planet undergoing one of the largest climate changes in the past 65 million years, scientists report that it's occurring at a rate 10 times faster than any change in that period.

Really?

Post the 10 fastest changes over an equivalent period of time.

Thanks!!!

Ooooooh. They are going to have a hard time manufacturing that little tale. Just believe their BS.

 

[abu afak]

Ooooooh. They are going to have a hard time manufacturing that little tale. Just believe their BS.

The usual, dislike with no response to my meaty post... and then a ONE line partisan high-five.
You are Trash.
You PhD is a Do.Pe and you deface/degrade this serious thread with your non-topical team play post.

I repeat: you are a disgrace to this mb and they were justified in Demoting you from mod to Demented trash can.

`

 

[the other mike]

Climate change occurring ten times faster than at any time in past 65 million years


`

Your timeline is wrong.

Scientists have recorded five significant ice ages throughout the Earth’s history: the Huronian (2.4-2.1 billion years ago), Cryogenian (850-635 million years ago), Andean-Saharan (460-430 mya), Karoo (360-260 mya) and Quaternary (2.6 mya-present). Approximately a dozen major glaciations have occurred over the past 1 million years, the largest of which peaked 650,000 years ago and lasted for 50,000 years. The most recent glaciation period, often known simply as the “Ice Age,” reached peak conditions some 18,000 years ago before giving way to the interglacial Holocene epoch 11,700 years ago.

Ice Age ‑ Definition & Timeline

An ice age is a period of colder global temperatures and recurring glacial expansion capable of lasting hundreds of millions of years.

www.history.com

Timeline of glaciation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[westwall]

The usual, dislike with no response to my meaty post... and then a ONE line partisan high-five.
You are Trash.
You PhD is a Do.Pe and you deface/degrade this serious thread with your non-topical team play post.

I repeat: you are a disgrace to this mb and they were justified in Demoting you from mod to Demented trash can.

`

"Meaty"? If you mean in a vegan, fake meat sort of way, ok. But we only deal with facts, not false claims. To date you have never posted one thing that supports the idea that mankind causes globull warming.

Not one. We, on the other hand, have posted THOUSANDS of links that prove the theory is wrong.

 

[abu afak]

Your timeline is wrong.

Scientists have recorded five significant ice ages throughout the Earth’s history: the Huronian (2.4-2.1 billion years ago), Cryogenian (850-635 million years ago), Andean-Saharan (460-430 mya), Karoo (360-260 mya) and Quaternary (2.6 mya-present). Approximately a dozen major glaciations have occurred over the past 1 million years, the largest of which peaked 650,000 years ago and lasted for 50,000 years. The most recent glaciation period, often known simply as the “Ice Age,” reached peak conditions some 18,000 years ago before giving way to the interglacial Holocene epoch 11,700 years ago.

Ice Age ‑ Definition & Timeline

An ice age is a period of colder global temperatures and recurring glacial expansion capable of lasting hundreds of millions of years.

www.history.com

Timeline of glaciation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You're very confused 'the other dick.'
They are talking about the CURRENT post-Industrial Revolution warming/AGW, really 1880-2020 and most of it Forward changes.

""Stanford climate scientists warn that the likely rate of change OVER THE NEXT CENTURY will be at least 10 times quicker than any climate shift in the past 65 million years.""​

They are talking Now and forward based on temp and emission projections.
You IDIOT.

Anytime you get a like from Demented Westwall, you know you're wrong.

`

"Meaty"? If you mean in a vegan, fake meat sort of way, ok. But we only deal with facts, not false claims. To date you have never posted one thing that supports the idea that mankind causes globull warming.

Not one. We, on the other hand, have posted THOUSANDS of links that prove the theory is wrong.

Most of my thread starts are in DETAILED support of AGW and I have discussed and defended them in detail.

You, OTOH, can't write more than ONE topical sentence, nor a paragraph, and have NEVER started a thread in Science or Environment.
You are functional Illiterate on any and all topics.
Resign before you lose your last 5%.

`

 

[westwall]

You're very confused 'the other dick.'
They are talking about the CURRENT post-Industrial Revolution warming/AGW, really 1880-2020 and most of it Forward changes.

""Stanford climate scientists warn that the likely rate of change OVER THE NEXT CENTURY will be at least 10 times quicker than any climate shift in the past 65 million years.""​

They are talking Now and forward based on temp and emission projections.
You IDIOT.

Anytime you get a like from Demented Westwall, you know you're wrong.

`



Most of my thread starts are in DETAILED support of AGW and I have discussed and defended them in detail.

You, OTOH, can't write more than ONE topical sentence, cannot write a paragraph, and have NEVER started a thread in Science or Environment.
You are functional Illiterate on any and all topics.
Resign before you lose your last 5%.

`

No, your threads contain opinion, and falsified data.

This has been PROVEN to you multiple times.

All you do is laugh like a loon, and hurl insults.

 

[the other mike]

You're very confused 'the other dick.'


`

Whatever, Abdulla the Dumfuk