Old Rocks
Diamond Member
Now who the hell is Clive Best, other than someone with a blog?
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.
Why don't you show us one that failed?
It's your stupid "Theory", show us one (1) that succeeded
Koch failed your theory at the turn of the 20th Century
The difference between the temperature of the Earth and the other planets with respect to their calculated, black body temperatures is de facto evidence of the reality of the greenhouse effect. CO2's demonstrated absorption of IR bands not absorbed by water vapor or any other GHG unequivocally identifies its 'greenhouse' status. Demonstrations of the effect are manifold and you have already seen and read of several. Your contention that you have not, Frank, is a clear and demonstrable lie.
So you can't produce a single lab experiment that controls for varying amounts of CO2?
OK. And I will remind you in a few years of how utterly stupid you were.I've made a LOT of predictions here and on the other forum over the past 8 years. All of them have either come true or they will. None have yet been wrong. Here's one I made about Global Warming a few years back that hasn't come true but count on it, it will:
Global Warming as we know is bull shit. As time goes by while we are arguing this issue, the planet will not appreciably warm. The Ice Caps will not disappear, the oceans will continue to not rise, and we will have snow in the places it normally does. after a ceretain number of years when it's obvious that AGW didn't happen, the believers will say this:
"See? It's because of our efforts that the planet did not warm or was kept from over- warming."
Take that to the bank people.
Why don't you show us one that failed?
It's your stupid "Theory", show us one (1) that succeeded
Koch failed your theory at the turn of the 20th Century
The difference between the temperature of the Earth and the other planets with respect to their calculated, black body temperatures is de facto evidence of the reality of the greenhouse effect. CO2's demonstrated absorption of IR bands not absorbed by water vapor or any other GHG unequivocally identifies its 'greenhouse' status. Demonstrations of the effect are manifold and you have already seen and read of several. Your contention that you have not, Frank, is a clear and demonstrable lie.
So you can't produce a single lab experiment that controls for varying amounts of CO2?
The "You can't prove it doesnt." argument coming in 10...9...8...
Why don't you show us one that failed?
It's your stupid "Theory", show us one (1) that succeeded
Koch failed your theory at the turn of the 20th Century
The difference between the temperature of the Earth and the other planets with respect to their calculated, black body temperatures is de facto evidence of the reality of the greenhouse effect. CO2's demonstrated absorption of IR bands not absorbed by water vapor or any other GHG unequivocally identifies its 'greenhouse' status. Demonstrations of the effect are manifold and you have already seen and read of several. Your contention that you have not, Frank, is a clear and demonstrable lie.
So you can't produce a single lab experiment that controls for varying amounts of CO2?
Is this a simple choice of yours to tell yet another lie or do you actually believe I said anything resembling that contention? That is: are you dishonest or stupid? (Or both?)
I've made a LOT of predictions here and on the other forum over the past 8 years. All of them have either come true or they will. None have yet been wrong. Here's one I made about Global Warming a few years back that hasn't come true but count on it, it will:
Global Warming as we know is bull shit. As time goes by while we are arguing this issue, the planet will not appreciably warm. The Ice Caps will not disappear, the oceans will continue to not rise, and we will have snow in the places it normally does. after a ceretain number of years when it's obvious that AGW didn't happen, the believers will say this:
"See? It's because of our efforts that the planet did not warm or was kept from over- warming."
Take that to the bank people.
Now who the hell is Clive Best, other than someone with a blog?
Why don't you show us one that failed?
It's your stupid "Theory", show us one (1) that succeeded
Koch failed your theory at the turn of the 20th Century
The difference between the temperature of the Earth and the other planets with respect to their calculated, black body temperatures is de facto evidence of the reality of the greenhouse effect. CO2's demonstrated absorption of IR bands not absorbed by water vapor or any other GHG unequivocally identifies its 'greenhouse' status. Demonstrations of the effect are manifold and you have already seen and read of several. Your contention that you have not, Frank, is a clear and demonstrable lie.
So you can't produce a single lab experiment that controls for varying amounts of CO2?
The "You can't prove it doesnt." argument coming in 10...9...8...
I've made a LOT of predictions here and on the other forum over the past 8 years.
Why don't you show us one that failed?
It's your stupid "Theory", show us one (1) that succeeded
Koch failed your theory at the turn of the 20th Century
The difference between the temperature of the Earth and the other planets with respect to their calculated, black body temperatures is de facto evidence of the reality of the greenhouse effect. CO2's demonstrated absorption of IR bands not absorbed by water vapor or any other GHG unequivocally identifies its 'greenhouse' status. Demonstrations of the effect are manifold and you have already seen and read of several. Your contention that you have not, Frank, is a clear and demonstrable lie.
So you can't produce a single lab experiment that controls for varying amounts of CO2?
Is this a simple choice of yours to tell yet another lie or do you actually believe I said anything resembling that contention? That is: are you dishonest or stupid? (Or both?)
Call me a lair all day and night, that's OK. All we know for certain is your 0 for your lifetime in posting any lab experiment that shows a temperature increase from CO2
And that's the truth
and he calls me a liar too
Global Warming as we know is bull shit. As time goes by while we are arguing this issue, the planet will not appreciably warm. The Ice Caps will not disappear, the oceans will continue to not rise, and we will have snow in the places it normally does. after a ceretain number of years when it's obvious that AGW didn't happen, the believers will say this:
and he calls me a liar too
Only when you lie, Frank, only when you lie.
Why don't you show us one that failed?
It's your stupid "Theory", show us one (1) that succeeded
Koch failed your theory at the turn of the 20th Century
The difference between the temperature of the Earth and the other planets with respect to their calculated, black body temperatures is de facto evidence of the reality of the greenhouse effect. CO2's demonstrated absorption of IR bands not absorbed by water vapor or any other GHG unequivocally identifies its 'greenhouse' status. Demonstrations of the effect are manifold and you have already seen and read of several. Your contention that you have not, Frank, is a clear and demonstrable lie.
So you can't produce a single lab experiment that controls for varying amounts of CO2?
Is this a simple choice of yours to tell yet another lie or do you actually believe I said anything resembling that contention? That is: are you dishonest or stupid? (Or both?)
Call me a lair all day and night, that's OK. All we know for certain is your 0 for your lifetime in posting any lab experiment that shows a temperature increase from CO2
And that's the truth
I get a clear image of Lily Tomlin' Edith Ann on R&M and SNL. Is that who you're channeling?
1) Show us documentation of a CO2 warming experiment that failed.
2) Explain the difference between the Earth's and other planet's calculated black body temperatures and their actual temperatures without making use of the greenhouse effect.
3) Explain how CO2 can absorb IR but not get warmer.
or
3) Explain why so many scientists have measured CO2 absorbing IR if it, in fact, does not.
4) Explain the warming of the 20th century without making use of the greenhouse effect?
5) Show us where I said I could not produce an experiment that "controls for varying amounts of CO2".
PS: I never called you a "lair".
I gave you six questions by which, were your shit in one sock, you could have shot me down to the ground. Did you make the slightest attempt to answer ANY of them? No. I have to wonder why.
Why don't you show us one that failed?
It's your stupid "Theory", show us one (1) that succeeded
Koch failed your theory at the turn of the 20th Century
The difference between the temperature of the Earth and the other planets with respect to their calculated, black body temperatures is de facto evidence of the reality of the greenhouse effect. CO2's demonstrated absorption of IR bands not absorbed by water vapor or any other GHG unequivocally identifies its 'greenhouse' status. Demonstrations of the effect are manifold and you have already seen and read of several. Your contention that you have not, Frank, is a clear and demonstrable lie.
So you can't produce a single lab experiment that controls for varying amounts of CO2?
The "You can't prove it doesnt." argument coming in 10...9...8...
Who were you expecting to make such an argument and what would the "it" have been?
I've made a LOT of predictions here and on the other forum over the past 8 years. All of them have either come true or they will. None have yet been wrong. Here's one I made about Global Warming a few years back that hasn't come true but count on it, it will:
Global Warming as we know is bull shit. As time goes by while we are arguing this issue, the planet will not appreciably warm. The Ice Caps will not disappear, the oceans will continue to not rise, and we will have snow in the places it normally does. after a ceretain number of years when it's obvious that AGW didn't happen, the believers will say this:
"See? It's because of our efforts that the planet did not warm or was kept from over- warming."
Take that to the bank people.
"All of them" (not a single one named, repeated or identified) "have either come true or they will".
Wow... that's some impeccable logic, ain't it?