So man-made global warming was a lie all along

[Flash]

I can be convinced:

1. How much of a temperature increase is caused by raising CO2 from 280 to 400PPM in a laboratory setting; and
2. How does atmospheric CO2 heat the deep ocean?

I would be happy if any of these scammers could tell me why when the earth was cooler than it is now the CO2 levels were like ten times as much? And when the earth was warmer the CO2 levels were lower?

Then explain to me why most of the historical ice core data strongly indicates that CO2 levels lags temperature rises. If CO2 was as much of a greenhouse gas as the scammers are claiming shouldn't it be the other way around?

The first thing I would like to know, however, is why did all the climate experts have to fabricate false data if the science was as convincing as they are telling us.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It took a global pandemic and worldwide slowdowns of business and industry to disprove the fallacy that gases associated with internal combustion engines and other pollutants, were creating a greenhouse effect that raised Earth's temperature.

It was a scam from the start and here it is in black and white, from the Associated Press:

Study: Pandemic's cleaner air added heat to warming planet

"Earth spiked a bit of a fever in 2020, partly because of cleaner air from the pandemic lockdown, a new study found.

For a short time, temperatures in some places in the eastern United States, Russia and China were as much as half to two-thirds of a degree (.3 to .37 degrees Celsius) warmer. That’s due to less soot and sulfate particles from car exhaust and burning coal, which normally cool the atmosphere temporarily by reflecting the sun’s heat, Tuesday’s study in the journal reported."

Study: Pandemic's cleaner air added heat to warming planet

Farming practices can also affect air quality.. Like the Dust Bowl years.

Who's farming? Didn't all those farmers go out of business because of the Trump tariffs?

The Dust Bowl was in the 1930s.

Dust Bowl - Wikipedia
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia › wiki › Dust_Bowl
View attachment 452839
The Dust Bowl was a period of severe dust storms that greatly damaged the ecology and agriculture of the American and Canadian prairies during the 1930s; severe drought and a failure to apply dryland farming methods to prevent the aeolian processes (wind erosion) caused the phenomenon. The drought came in three waves, 1934, 1936, and 1939–1940, but some …

Dusty CO2 caused the Dust Bowl?

 

[Muhammed]

I can be convinced:

1. How much of a temperature increase is caused by raising CO2 from 280 to 400PPM in a laboratory setting; and
2. How does atmospheric CO2 heat the deep ocean?

I would be happy if any of these scammers could tell me why when the earth was cooler than it is now the CO2 levels were like ten times as much? And when the earth was warmer the CO2 levels were lower?

Then explain to me why most of the historical ice core data strongly indicates that CO2 levels lags temperature rises. If CO2 was as much of a greenhouse gas as the scammers are claiming shouldn't it be the other way around?

The first thing I would like to know, however, is why did all the climate experts have to fabricate false data if the science was as convincing as they are telling us.

On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but – which means that we must include all doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climate change. To do that we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, means getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This “double ethical bind” we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both. ~quoted from infamous climategate fraudster Stephen Schneider.

In other words, they are simply lying to make themselves relevant, forward their worthless unproductive academic careers, and destroy the USA.

They are not "experts" or scientists, they're career academics desperately trying to avoid becoming productive members of society. People who refuse to become adults. Vampiric leeches.

 

[Flash]

I can be convinced:

1. How much of a temperature increase is caused by raising CO2 from 280 to 400PPM in a laboratory setting; and
2. How does atmospheric CO2 heat the deep ocean?

I would be happy if any of these scammers could tell me why when the earth was cooler than it is now the CO2 levels were like ten times as much? And when the earth was warmer the CO2 levels were lower?

Then explain to me why most of the historical ice core data strongly indicates that CO2 levels lags temperature rises. If CO2 was as much of a greenhouse gas as the scammers are claiming shouldn't it be the other way around?

The first thing I would like to know, however, is why did all the climate experts have to fabricate false data if the science was as convincing as they are telling us.

On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but – which means that we must include all doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climate change. To do that we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, means getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This “double ethical bind” we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both. ~quoted from infamous climategate fraudster Stephen Schneider.

In other words, they are simply lying to make themselves relevant, forward their worthless unproductive academic careers, and destroy the USA.

They are not "experts" or scientists, they're career academics desperately trying to avoid becoming productive members of society. People who refuse to become adults. Vampiric leeches.

"to capture the public’s imagination."

Isn't that what all scammers do?

 

[DustyInfinity]

Last week I ripped a chicken enchilada MOAB between the sheets. I blamed global warming.






















































It didn't work.

I've never heard Moab used that way. Awesome. I bet you were levitating. I laugh at all this stuff now until they ban cows and we are forced to eat tree bark.

 

[Unkotare]

Last week I ripped a chicken enchilada MOAB between the sheets. I blamed global warming.






















































It didn't work.

I've never heard Moab used that way. Awesome. I bet you were levitating. I laugh at all this stuff now until they ban cows and we are forced to eat tree bark.

I spent the rest of the night on the couch.

 

[Flash]

Once again a Trumper shows us he has no reading comprehension skills.

Re-read your link and try again.

“Even without the reduction in cooling aerosols, global temperatures in 2020 already were flirting with breaking yearly heat record because of the burning of coal, oil and natural gas — ........ said top NASA climate scientist Gavin Schmidt....”

He wasn't even part of the study, and it was merely his opinion that the study confirmed other research, whatever that means

Junk science believers are always going to try to justify their junk science, even when it's disproven. Much like you're trying to do now.

I know it's hard when you've been proven to be an idiot for believing a lie, but you're going to have to get over it.

Please.. YOU linked to an article that showed that your own thread title is a lie.

The irony of it all!

I see no no irony here, except for the fact that we had global pollution reductions in 2020, and the planet actually got warmer.

Man-made global warming has been disproven. Period. End of story.

There is no doubt that we are in a post glacial warming era. The earth has been warming up ever since the end of the last ice age. Any climate trends we have seen historically reflect that warming trend.

That warming trend will probably continue until the next ice age, which is predicted to be 20-30K years from now. In the meantime we will have fluctuations up and down.

However, as you said, there is absolutely no proof that man made activity have change the global climate.

The climate scientists had to lie about the data to push their little scam.

Too bad these stupid Moon Bats are so gullible as to believe that silly horseshit.

 

[Notaradical60]

The U.S. is about to get a potent polar vortex blast (msn.com)

I want to know, that if the Earth has been warming year after year, how do we keep getting colder and colder air, each year from Polar Vortex? I mean, Come on man, the polar cap is supposed to be ice free, and ships can sail from Russia to the US, sub zero weather doesnt come from ice free zones...

That's because of global warming.

Getting hotter? Global warming.

Getting colder? Global warming.

More rain? Global warming.

Less Rain? Global warming.

More hurricanes? Global warming.

Fewer hurricanes? Global warming.

Raccoons tipped over the garbage can? Global warming.

Wife dropped her wedding ring down the sink drain? Global warming.

Wife found some womens panties in my glovebox. Global warming!!! "She had to take them off" She was Hot!

 

[Notaradical60]

We all knew AGW was a scam when the emails of the principle Climate Scientists were hacked into and we discovered that they were fabricating data. It was called Climategate. We even had a Climategate II. Then NASA and NOAA jumped on the fabrication bandwagon when Obama was President.

If Climate change is such a huge issue why would the Green President force Oil and gas to be shipped by train and truck isn't that much dirtier than a pipeline. Yes it is. However political donations must be repaid to the Teamsters and Railroad industry Players. Back to the "Status Quo" for "Quid pro quo Joe"

 

[whitehall]

If the liberal media was honest they would have pointed out that the concept of "Man Made Global Warming" was created by a failed politician with no background in either science or history. Al Gore was in it to make a buck and the media supported him because Gore was a democrat. Gore lived in a compound that used more energy than most small towns and was awarded the Nobel Prize for ....I forget.

 

[Flash]

They are predicting temperatures as low as 10 degrees in Houston Texas this week.

Global warming my ass.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Once again a Trumper shows us he has no reading comprehension skills.

Re-read your link and try again.

“Even without the reduction in cooling aerosols, global temperatures in 2020 already were flirting with breaking yearly heat record because of the burning of coal, oil and natural gas — ........ said top NASA climate scientist Gavin Schmidt....”

He wasn't even part of the study, and it was merely his opinion that the study confirmed other research, whatever that means

Junk science believers are always going to try to justify their junk science, even when it's disproven. Much like you're trying to do now.

I know it's hard when you've been proven to be an idiot for believing a lie, but you're going to have to get over it.

Please.. YOU linked to an article that showed that your own thread title is a lie.

The irony of it all!

I see no no irony here, except for the fact that we had global pollution reductions in 2020, and the planet actually got warmer.

Man-made global warming has been disproven. Period. End of story.

There is no doubt that we are in a post glacial warming era. The earth has been warming up ever since the end of the last ice age. Any climate trends we have seen historically reflect that warming trend.

That warming trend will probably continue until the next ice age, which is predicted to be 20-30K years from now. In the meantime we will have fluctuations up and down.

However, as you said, there is absolutely no proof that man made activity have change the global climate.

The climate scientists had to lie about the data to push their little scam.

Too bad these stupid Moon Bats are so gullible as to believe that silly horseshit.

Actually, we have been cooling for about 10,000 years now. We are again approaching the entrance to the next glacial cycle..

 

[Sunsettommy]

Once again a Trumper shows us he has no reading comprehension skills.

Re-read your link and try again.

“Even without the reduction in cooling aerosols, global temperatures in 2020 already were flirting with breaking yearly heat record because of the burning of coal, oil and natural gas — ........ said top NASA climate scientist Gavin Schmidt....”

He lies since it has COOLED in recent years:

Added the monthly Mean:

 

[Billy_Bob]

They are predicting temperatures as low as 10 degrees in Houston Texas this week.

Global warming my ass.

My high temp today will be around -3 deg F. I concur with your ass....

 

[ding]

Yes. It's a lie.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

So man-made global warming was a lie all along

 

[JGalt]

So man-made global warming was a lie all along

View attachment 456711

That's lieutenant Obvious, sir. I haven't quite made it to Captain yet.

 

[abu afak]

I would be happy if any of these scammers could tell me why when the earth was cooler than it is now the CO2 levels were like ten times as much? And when the earth was warmer the CO2 levels were lower?

Then explain to me why most of the historical ice core data strongly indicates that CO2 levels lags temperature rises. If CO2 was as much of a greenhouse gas as the scammers are claiming shouldn't it be the other way around?

The first thing I would like to know, however, is why did all the climate experts have to fabricate false data if the science was as convincing as they are telling us.

I would be happy to straighten out your Idiotic premise error/Lie.
(which Tommy tried to help foist with a Nonindicative 3 yr graph with tiny increments, and Not addressing your "10x" as much" claim/LIE in the least.)

NOAA.gov

`

 

[ding]

I would be happy if any of these scammers could tell me why when the earth was cooler than it is now the CO2 levels were like ten times as much? And when the earth was warmer the CO2 levels were lower?

Then explain to me why most of the historical ice core data strongly indicates that CO2 levels lags temperature rises. If CO2 was as much of a greenhouse gas as the scammers are claiming shouldn't it be the other way around?

The first thing I would like to know, however, is why did all the climate experts have to fabricate false data if the science was as convincing as they are telling us.

I would be happy to straighten out your Idiotic premise error/Lie.
(which Tommy tried to help foist with a Nonindicative 3 yr graph with tiny increments, and Not addressing your "10x" as much" claim/LIE in the least.)

NOAA.gov
View attachment 456729



`

I guess it would be too much for you to recognize that CO2 lags temperature by 800 years in the graph you just posted.

 

[Sunsettommy]

I would be happy if any of these scammers could tell me why when the earth was cooler than it is now the CO2 levels were like ten times as much? And when the earth was warmer the CO2 levels were lower?

Then explain to me why most of the historical ice core data strongly indicates that CO2 levels lags temperature rises. If CO2 was as much of a greenhouse gas as the scammers are claiming shouldn't it be the other way around?

The first thing I would like to know, however, is why did all the climate experts have to fabricate false data if the science was as convincing as they are telling us.

I would be happy to straighten out your Idiotic premise error/Lie.
(which Tommy tried to help foist with a Nonindicative 3 yr graph with tiny increments, and Not addressing your "10x" as much" claim/LIE in the least.)

NOAA.gov
View attachment 456729



`

I guess it would be too much for you to recognize that CO2 lags temperature by 800 years in the graph you just posted.

His ignorance on numerous published papers showing the CO2 lags Temperature is indicative since his own chart doesn't even help him, no link and no mention of resolution shown.