What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Four Main Fails of AGW

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
71,503
Reaction score
26,479
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
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

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2017
Messages
9,122
Reaction score
1,644
Points
170
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

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2017
Messages
9,122
Reaction score
1,644
Points
170
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

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
71,503
Reaction score
26,479
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
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.
 
OP
CrusaderFrank

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
121,652
Reaction score
36,911
Points
2,290
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
 
OP
CrusaderFrank

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
121,652
Reaction score
36,911
Points
2,290
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

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2017
Messages
9,122
Reaction score
1,644
Points
170
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

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2017
Messages
9,122
Reaction score
1,644
Points
170
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
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
71,503
Reaction score
26,479
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
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

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Messages
24,655
Reaction score
6,885
Points
290
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
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.
 
OP
CrusaderFrank

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
121,652
Reaction score
36,911
Points
2,290
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

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
60,035
Reaction score
7,792
Points
1,840
Location
Portland, Ore.
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
1622423375609.png

#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

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
98,056
Reaction score
12,285
Points
2,180
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?
 
OP
CrusaderFrank

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
121,652
Reaction score
36,911
Points
2,290
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

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
98,056
Reaction score
12,285
Points
2,180
#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?
 
OP
CrusaderFrank

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
121,652
Reaction score
36,911
Points
2,290
#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

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
98,056
Reaction score
12,285
Points
2,180
#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
 
OP
CrusaderFrank

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
121,652
Reaction score
36,911
Points
2,290
#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
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$505.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top