The Four Main Fails of AGW

[westwall]

Please describe the changes that occurred in CO2 in 1860 that now cause it to DRIVE temperature

You're asking me to explain your idiot conspiracy theory?

Do you grasp how insane that makes you look?

Sorry, but it's your kook theory, so it's entirely your job to back it up. Please proceed. We're all ears.

How do you reconcile CO2 LAGGING temperature for 450,000 years but now it drives temperature?

Fail

Yes, your arguments all fail the scientific method. Congrats you follow a pseudo science. Cultists do that.

 

[otto105]

Please describe the changes that occurred in CO2 in 1860 that now cause it to DRIVE temperature

You're asking me to explain your idiot conspiracy theory?

Do you grasp how insane that makes you look?

Sorry, but it's your kook theory, so it's entirely your job to back it up. Please proceed. We're all ears.

How do you reconcile CO2 LAGGING temperature for 450,000 years but now it drives temperature?

Fail

The Ice Core Data is a DENIER!!!!

Only explanation for why CO2 does NOT drive the temperature for 450,000 years prior to 1860

Fail

 

[otto105]

Please describe the changes that occurred in CO2 in 1860 that now cause it to DRIVE temperature

You're asking me to explain your idiot conspiracy theory?

Do you grasp how insane that makes you look?

Sorry, but it's your kook theory, so it's entirely your job to back it up. Please proceed. We're all ears.

How do you reconcile CO2 LAGGING temperature for 450,000 years but now it drives temperature?

Fail

Yes, your arguments all fail the scientific method. Congrats you follow a pseudo science. Cultists do that.

Can you name one scientific organization that supports your position in regard to AGW?

 

[westwall]

Please describe the changes that occurred in CO2 in 1860 that now cause it to DRIVE temperature

You're asking me to explain your idiot conspiracy theory?

Do you grasp how insane that makes you look?

Sorry, but it's your kook theory, so it's entirely your job to back it up. Please proceed. We're all ears.

How do you reconcile CO2 LAGGING temperature for 450,000 years but now it drives temperature?

Fail

Yes, your arguments all fail the scientific method. Congrats you follow a pseudo science. Cultists do that.

Can you name one scientific organization that supports your position in regard to AGW?

Can you name one scientific organization that doesn't receive loads of cash for their support?

Neither can I.

That makes your appeal to authority a logic fail.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Please describe the changes that occurred in CO2 in 1860 that now cause it to DRIVE temperature

You're asking me to explain your idiot conspiracy theory?

Do you grasp how insane that makes you look?

Sorry, but it's your kook theory, so it's entirely your job to back it up. Please proceed. We're all ears.

How do you reconcile CO2 LAGGING temperature for 450,000 years but now it drives temperature?

Fail

The Ice Core Data is a DENIER!!!!

Only explanation for why CO2 does NOT drive the temperature for 450,000 years prior to 1860

Fail

Yes. Because neither you nor cat lady mamooth can explain it means that the Fail is on your side of the ledger

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Please describe the changes that occurred in CO2 in 1860 that now cause it to DRIVE temperature

You're asking me to explain your idiot conspiracy theory?

Do you grasp how insane that makes you look?

Sorry, but it's your kook theory, so it's entirely your job to back it up. Please proceed. We're all ears.

What is different about modern CO2?

Nothing. You're just failing hilariously at basic logic and physics.

You don't see any normal person babbling that modern CO2 is magically special. That sort of stupid only comes from you.

Please describe the changes that occurred in CO2 in 1860 that now cause it to DRIVE temperature

You're asking me to explain your idiot conspiracy theory?

Do you grasp how insane that makes you look?

Sorry, but it's your kook theory, so it's entirely your job to back it up. Please proceed. We're all ears.

How do you reconcile CO2 LAGGING temperature for 450,000 years but now it drives temperature?

Fail

The Ice Core Data is a DENIER!!!!

Only explanation for why CO2 does NOT drive the temperature for 450,000 years prior to 1860

Fail

New theme song for mamooth and Otter

 

[otto105]

Please describe the changes that occurred in CO2 in 1860 that now cause it to DRIVE temperature

You're asking me to explain your idiot conspiracy theory?

Do you grasp how insane that makes you look?

Sorry, but it's your kook theory, so it's entirely your job to back it up. Please proceed. We're all ears.

How do you reconcile CO2 LAGGING temperature for 450,000 years but now it drives temperature?

Fail

Yes, your arguments all fail the scientific method. Congrats you follow a pseudo science. Cultists do that.

Can you name one scientific organization that supports your position in regard to AGW?

Can you name one scientific organization that doesn't receive loads of cash for their support?

Neither can I.

That makes your appeal to authority a logic fail.

Can you can you not name a scientific organization which supports your position on AGW?

 

[otto105]

Please describe the changes that occurred in CO2 in 1860 that now cause it to DRIVE temperature

You're asking me to explain your idiot conspiracy theory?

Do you grasp how insane that makes you look?

Sorry, but it's your kook theory, so it's entirely your job to back it up. Please proceed. We're all ears.

How do you reconcile CO2 LAGGING temperature for 450,000 years but now it drives temperature?

Fail

The Ice Core Data is a DENIER!!!!

Only explanation for why CO2 does NOT drive the temperature for 450,000 years prior to 1860

Fail

Yes. Because neither you nor cat lady mamooth can explain it means that the Fail is on your side of the ledger

fail

 

[jc456]

fail

your entire posting trail.

 

[westwall]

Please describe the changes that occurred in CO2 in 1860 that now cause it to DRIVE temperature

You're asking me to explain your idiot conspiracy theory?

Do you grasp how insane that makes you look?

Sorry, but it's your kook theory, so it's entirely your job to back it up. Please proceed. We're all ears.

How do you reconcile CO2 LAGGING temperature for 450,000 years but now it drives temperature?

Fail

Yes, your arguments all fail the scientific method. Congrats you follow a pseudo science. Cultists do that.

Can you name one scientific organization that supports your position in regard to AGW?

Can you name one scientific organization that doesn't receive loads of cash for their support?

Neither can I.

That makes your appeal to authority a logic fail.

Can you can you not name a scientific organization which supports your position on AGW?

Can you not name a single organization receiving no money that does?

Me neither.

 

[mamooth]

Yes. Because neither you nor cat lady mamooth can explain it means that the Fail is on your side of the ledger

Frank, you're like a flat-earther telling the round-earthers that they can't explain round-earth theory.

But then, you probably are a flat-earther now. Many deniers are. Flat-earth belief is a trendy thing for deniers. Those who fall for one idiot conspiracy theory tend to fall for bunches of them.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yes. Because neither you nor cat lady mamooth can explain it means that the Fail is on your side of the ledger

Frank, you're like a flat-earther telling the round-earthers that they can't explain round-earth theory.

But then, you probably are a flat-earther now. Many deniers are. Flat-earth belief is a trendy thing for deniers. Those who fall for one idiot conspiracy theory tend to fall for bunches of them.

Instead of calling me a "denier" (Not a word you find in science) Post a number that describes the increase in temperature from increasing CO2 from 260 to 400PPM. 0 is a number, so start there

 

[Old Rocks]

Here are the 4 main reasons why AGW fails:

1. There are no experiments. The central pillar is that an increase in a negligible atmospheric gas is generating heat that will soon end all life on Earth. Well, how much additional heat does the 120 ppm of CO2 generate? Why is there never a non-imaginary number provided by the lab work?

2. This additional planet killing atmospheric heat in 1 above is somehow also heating the oceans down 700m deep? Yet, it takes far more energy to heat water than air. Where is that missing energy?

3. So many failed predictions! Any real scientist would have had to discard the flawed theory and moved on, AGW is impervious to its graphic, public misses

4. The AGW Cult; yes, it's a Cult, because it's religion, not science, is oblivious to the fact that China generates more of this imaginary planet killing gas than all industrial nations combined and double the output of the USA. If this really was science and an existential threat, all the efforts would be on dialing back Chinese output. Instead, the AGW Cult excuses the ChiComs for being allowed to continue spewing this imaginary planet killing gas for 20 years beyond the latest alleged tipping point.

#1 Tyndall,, 1859
#2 Silly ass, you stated exactly where that heat is in your sentence.
#3

#4 So says someone in the cult devoted to kissing the ass of a treasonous fat senile old orange clown. Yes, the Chinese are emitting more GHGs than we are. They are also leading the world in the installation of wind and solar. They are playing catch up to the 21st century in energy for their population. However, when you consider the total GHGs put into the atmosphere, the US and EU still have put far more into the atmosphere since the industrial revolution than has China and India combined.

 

[jc456]

Frank, you're like a flat-earther telling the round-earthers that they can't explain round-earth theory

That’s what a person with no answer says. Do your fingers stink like poop now?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Here are the 4 main reasons why AGW fails:

1. There are no experiments. The central pillar is that an increase in a negligible atmospheric gas is generating heat that will soon end all life on Earth. Well, how much additional heat does the 120 ppm of CO2 generate? Why is there never a non-imaginary number provided by the lab work?

2. This additional planet killing atmospheric heat in 1 above is somehow also heating the oceans down 700m deep? Yet, it takes far more energy to heat water than air. Where is that missing energy?

3. So many failed predictions! Any real scientist would have had to discard the flawed theory and moved on, AGW is impervious to its graphic, public misses

4. The AGW Cult; yes, it's a Cult, because it's religion, not science, is oblivious to the fact that China generates more of this imaginary planet killing gas than all industrial nations combined and double the output of the USA. If this really was science and an existential threat, all the efforts would be on dialing back Chinese output. Instead, the AGW Cult excuses the ChiComs for being allowed to continue spewing this imaginary planet killing gas for 20 years beyond the latest alleged tipping point.

#1 Tyndall,, 1859
#2 Silly ass, you stated exactly where that heat is in your sentence.
#3 View attachment 495644
#4 So says someone in the cult devoted to kissing the ass of a treasonous fat senile old orange clown. Yes, the Chinese are emitting more GHGs than we are. They are also leading the world in the installation of wind and solar. They are playing catch up to the 21st century in energy for their population. However, when you consider the total GHGs put into the atmosphere, the US and EU still have put far more into the atmosphere since the industrial revolution than has China and India combined.

Tyndallolololol. The reason that you can never provide a non-imaginary number to the question of temperature increase from the 120ppm increase in CO2 is because it is 0, nada, nothing, zip, there is no demonstrable increase. 0. None. No increase. Tyndalolololol

2. Lolol you are funny! There's no heat in 1. so how can it warm the deep ocean. Lolololol you suck at science.

3. Madoff accounting fiction. There's no temperature increase from CO2, which LAGS temperature in any event

4. You belong to a Cult

 

[jc456]

#4 So says someone in the cult devoted to kissing the ass of a treasonous fat senile old orange clown. Yes, the Chinese are emitting more GHGs than we are. They are also leading the world in the installation of wind and solar. They are playing catch up to the 21st century in energy for their population. However, when you consider the total GHGs put into the atmosphere, the US and EU still have put far more into the atmosphere since the industrial revolution than has China and India combined

So no answer to the four points?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

#4 So says someone in the cult devoted to kissing the ass of a treasonous fat senile old orange clown. Yes, the Chinese are emitting more GHGs than we are. They are also leading the world in the installation of wind and solar. They are playing catch up to the 21st century in energy for their population. However, when you consider the total GHGs put into the atmosphere, the US and EU still have put far more into the atmosphere since the industrial revolution than has China and India combined

So no answer to the four points?

It's not like we've been asking for decades. Er, wait, we have been asking for decades

 

[jc456]

#4 So says someone in the cult devoted to kissing the ass of a treasonous fat senile old orange clown. Yes, the Chinese are emitting more GHGs than we are. They are also leading the world in the installation of wind and solar. They are playing catch up to the 21st century in energy for their population. However, when you consider the total GHGs put into the atmosphere, the US and EU still have put far more into the atmosphere since the industrial revolution than has China and India combined

So no answer to the four points?

It's not like we've been asking for decades. Er, wait, we have been asking for decades

And still crickets

 

[CrusaderFrank]

#4 So says someone in the cult devoted to kissing the ass of a treasonous fat senile old orange clown. Yes, the Chinese are emitting more GHGs than we are. They are also leading the world in the installation of wind and solar. They are playing catch up to the 21st century in energy for their population. However, when you consider the total GHGs put into the atmosphere, the US and EU still have put far more into the atmosphere since the industrial revolution than has China and India combined

So no answer to the four points?

It's not like we've been asking for decades. Er, wait, we have been asking for decades

And still crickets

Relativity was first proposed in 1905 and has been subject to rigorous laboratory testing ever since; Tyndalolololololol mentioned GHG in 1859 and the AGW Cult has done NOTHING to test the planet killing properties of an additional 120PPM of CO2 since then.

BTW, 120PPM of CO2 has NO EFFECT on Earth temperature, none, zip, nada, goose egg, naught, nil, nothing, o, oh, zilch, bupkis

0.0

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Adding another major indisputable Fail.

The Mauna Loa CO2 readings during the global shutdown conclusively prove human activity has no impact whatsoever on global CO2.