The Environment Forum now decidedly one sided!!

It's funny how the many will defend corporations who
1) put pfas in water for the $
2) overlook lead pipes for the $
3) condone industrial chemicals to be emitted for the $
 
What does that prove exactly?
The frequency at which each gas absorbs photons.

Your accepting the GHG effect of water vapor and denying the GHG effect of CO2 is inconsistent.
 
The frequency at which each gas absorbs photons.

Your accepting the GHG effect of water vapor and denying the GHG effect of CO2 is inconsistent.
I only disagree CO2 makes the earth warmer
 
I only disagree CO2 makes the earth warmer
Same inconsistency exists. If water vapor makes the earth warmer then CO2 must also. The only thing that is debatable is how much. But you do us no good by taking such an obvious inconsistent position.

Same thing for EMH's silly argument that there is no warming at all. It's a horribly inaccurate position which makes us look bad. It's not debatable that the planet is warming. How much is attributed to CO2 and natural warming is debatable.
 
Same inconsistency exists. If water vapor makes the earth warmer then CO2 must also. The only thing that is debatable is how much. But you do us no good by taking such an obvious inconsistent position.

Same thing for EMH's silly argument that there is no warming at all. It's a horribly inaccurate position which makes us look bad. It's not debatable that the planet is warming. How much is attributed to CO2 and natural warming is debatable.
Well, there’s a humidity temperature index, is there any for CO2?
 
Well, there’s a humidity temperature index, is there any for CO2?
Why would there be and what difference would it make if there were or were not? You're like EMH with your red herrings that have no bearing on anything.
 
Why would there be and what difference would it make if there were or were not? You're like EMH with your red herrings that have no bearing on anything.
You asked about making it warmer, humidity does that! CO2 doesn’t
 
EMH's silly argument that there is no warming at all. It's a horribly inaccurate position which makes us look bad



The truth of

NO WARMING in the ATMOSPHERE
NO WARMING in the OCEANS
NO ONGOING NET ICE MELT
NO BREAKOUT IN CANE ACTIVITY
NO OCEAN RISE
NO RISE IN SURFACE AIR PRESSURE


does make "us" (meaning taxpayer funded CO2 FRAUD "faux skeptics") look bad, since you cannot answer basic climate questions, and what you post translates into "water causes ice" which is just as pathetic as your intellectual cowardice and your total failure to refute one word of what EMH has posted on the subject of climate change, NOT ONE WORD.
 
The truth of

NO WARMING in the ATMOSPHERE
NO WARMING in the OCEANS
NO ONGOING NET ICE MELT
NO OCEAN RISE
Hurricanes and atmospheric pressure are red herrings and irrelevant.

Everything listed above is complete bullshit and makes us look bad by being so obviously wrong and being so batshit crazy.
 
Hurricanes and atmospheric pressure are red herrings and irrelevant.

Everything listed above is complete bullshit and makes us look bad by being so obviously wrong and being so batshit crazy.



that there is no increase in cane activity proves oceans are NOT WARMING

Mars proves SAP is correlated with temperature, and so is Earth, and the fact that Earth SAP isn't going up PROVES Earth is NOT WARMING and NOT EXPERIENCING an ONGOING NET ICE MELT.
 
that there is no increase in cane activity proves oceans are NOT WARMING

Mars proves SAP is correlated with temperature, and so is Earth, and the fact that Earth SAP isn't going up PROVES Earth is NOT WARMING and NOT EXPERIENCING an ONGOING NET ICE MELT.
Does jc456 agree with you on this?
 
Back
Top Bottom