skookerasbil
Platinum Member
What Im saying is.........the people in the religion don't get that you don't go to the proctologist to remove a cancer in your forehead!!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So you have a math degree from Trump University?In 2013 the US emitted 5.8 billion tons of CO2. This is 15% of the world's 39.8 billion tons of CO2 emissions. Based on the last 12 years, the US has been decreasing their CO2 emissions by 0.03 billion tons per year. At this rate, by the year 2030, the US's CO2 emissions will fall to 5.2 billion tons of CO2 per year.
In 2013 China emitted 11 billion tons of CO2. This is 41.5% of the world's 39.8 billion tons of CO2 emissions. Based on the last 12 years, the ROW is increasing their CO2 emissions by 0.5 billion tons per year. At this rate, by the year 2030, the ROW CO2 emissions will be 21.2 billion tons of CO2 per year.
Say the US pollutes twice as much, 5.8 billion times 2 equals 11.6 billion tons of CO2. 15% times 2 equals 30%.
How is it that the US can theoretically pollute more than China and still have a lower percentage of it at the same time?
LOL.......nobody cares about your ghey math s0n!!!
ps.....Obama EIA graph displays the exact same thing......will post upon request
Of that I am certain.I see, so then you believe America is the problem, right?So you have a math degree from Trump University?In 2013 the US emitted 5.8 billion tons of CO2. This is 15% of the world's 39.8 billion tons of CO2 emissions. Based on the last 12 years, the US has been decreasing their CO2 emissions by 0.03 billion tons per year. At this rate, by the year 2030, the US's CO2 emissions will fall to 5.2 billion tons of CO2 per year.
In 2013 China emitted 11 billion tons of CO2. This is 41.5% of the world's 39.8 billion tons of CO2 emissions. Based on the last 12 years, the ROW is increasing their CO2 emissions by 0.5 billion tons per year. At this rate, by the year 2030, the ROW CO2 emissions will be 21.2 billion tons of CO2 per year.
Say the US pollutes twice as much, 5.8 billion times 2 equals 11.6 billion tons of CO2. 15% times 2 equals 30%.
How is it that the US can theoretically pollute more than China and still have a lower percentage of it at the same time?
LOL.......nobody cares about your ghey math s0n!!!
ps.....Obama EIA graph displays the exact same thing......will post upon request
Not sure what you mean?
You've still not explained your point. What do you think the US should be doing in this regard?
I can answer that just as soon as you admit that you were wrong about the geologic timing of bipolar glaciation which BTW had no effect on what I was discussing which is why you wouldn't answer what you agreed with. At this point you can't even claim intellectual dishonesty because you have no intellect.
That you believe attacking me personally is the appropriate response to such an exchange doesn't speak well for your... fill in the blank.
You know, we most likely agree on most things. But not everything. That leads to me occasionally telling you you're wrong (and vice versa). Bipolar glaciation does not exist at present.
Bipolar glaciation was rare, but still more common than you contended.
I have answered your question in this thread. The point is the US is not the problem.You've still not explained your point. What do you think the US should be doing in this regard?
You've still not explained your point. What do you think the US should be doing in this regard?
I can answer that just as soon as you admit that you were wrong about the geologic timing of bipolar glaciation which BTW had no effect on what I was discussing which is why you wouldn't answer what you agreed with. At this point you can't even claim intellectual dishonesty because you have no intellect.
You know, we most likely agree on most things. But not everything. That leads to me occasionally telling you you're wrong (and vice versa). Bipolar glaciation does not exist at present. Bipolar glaciation was rare, but still more common than you contended. That you believe attacking me personally is the appropriate response to such an exchange doesn't speak well for your... fill in the blank.
I have not attacked you personally at all. I have attacked your behaviors.
You are still rationalizing your dishonesty.
Those are two different things. Let me address your latest rationalization and then I will spell out your errors exactly; behavioral and technical.
That's right we are not in a glacial cycle.
The last one ended 12,000 years ago when the Great Lakes were formed and New York had a 1000 ft thick ice sheet on it. So what? What does that have to do with bi-polar glaciation being rare and possibly unique.There is no other instance of bipolar glaciation recorded in the geologic record.
It is a very good thing we are not in a glacial cycle right now, because it would be very very bad for us if we were. The reality is though that the conditions which led to the glacial-interglacial cycles of the last 5 million years still exists today.
Your latest argument is that because we are not in a glacial cycle today, then my point that bi-polar glaciation being rare and possibly unique doesn't matter.
That is the stupidest thing I have heard today.
The reality is the best way to understand future climate change is to study past climate change. So, yes, it really does matter.
Now, on to your intellectual dishonesty, I made several statements that you did not challenge. When I asked you if you agreed with them, you refused to agree or disagree. Why? Because you were behaving dishonestly. That's why.
When I presented your error on what the link YOU posted was actually stating, instead of admitting your mistake, you doubled down on stupid and were dishonest. This could have all been avoided if you had just admitted your mistake and apologized for being a jerk. I even gave you an opportunity to do so, but you chose poorly.
I have answered your question in this thread. The point is the US is not the problem.
And why does it require you wait for me? Seems like a stall. Why have you still not answered this simple question?
Really? Look up six lines. "At this point you can't even claim intellectual dishonesty because you have no intellect". So now you've chosen to lie.
I would like you to identify, specifically, where you believe I have lied. If you cannot, I would like a retraction and an apology.
We do live in an icehouse world and we do have bipolar glaciation. I've been to them. Google northern hemisphere glaciers. Your ignorance proves that you are incompetent on climate change. You still cannot seem to grasp the difference between extensive glaciation, glaciation and episodic ice sheets.Then the very first line in your very first post that said "The world we live in today is an icehouse world. It is characterized by bipolar glaciation"... was that an error or a lie? How about the fourth line that begins "The icehouse world we live in today..."? Did you learn something between writing that and this? Or did you know that was incorrect when you put it down?
Well, you're the only one that knows what you've heard today. And if you want to show us that the rarity of bipolar glaciation matters, you need to explain why. You have a bit of a habit of presenting a point as if it had some huge significance on some contemporary issue without ever identifying the issue or explaining the significance. I'm sorry but I get the impression that you leave these things unsaid because you think you're audience will be more impressed with you if you skip over those clay-filled steps necessary to make that last logical leap as if they were so obvious as to be beneath your obligation to discuss. I'm not impressed because I think there are gaps those leaps won't cross.
Of course. We're in an interglacial of the Quaternary or Pleistocene ice age.
It has value, but that value is NOT setting limits on what is happening today. That human GHG emissions caused no greenhouse warming prior to the Industrial Revolution has ZERO bearing on the question of whether or not it is responsible for warming today. Zero.
So my not challenging you and not answering constitutes a lie? You owe all of us an apology. That's pathetic.
I posted the entire abstract of that paper (see post #6). Reposting the same text doesn't show me to have made a mistake. I never challenged those statements. There was no dishonesty on my part but for someone to say they have not attacked me personally and then to turn around and call me a jerk seems more than a little dishonest to me.
The question is what do you believe is the significance of your observation and what do you believe the US should do. You have answered neither of those questions.
I wondered if you would double down on stupid and now I know.Your grasp of reality - ie what you and I have actually said and done here - is seriously flawed. You may take your 'discussion' and put it where the sun doesn't shine.
I already addressed this. I did not make a personal attack. You did all of those things.I refer to your accusations that I have lied and your contention that you have not attacked me personally.
You owe me an apology.
So you have a math degree from Trump University?In 2013 the US emitted 5.8 billion tons of CO2. This is 15% of the world's 39.8 billion tons of CO2 emissions. Based on the last 12 years, the US has been decreasing their CO2 emissions by 0.03 billion tons per year. At this rate, by the year 2030, the US's CO2 emissions will fall to 5.2 billion tons of CO2 per year.
In 2013 China emitted 11 billion tons of CO2. This is 41.5% of the world's 39.8 billion tons of CO2 emissions. Based on the last 12 years, the ROW is increasing their CO2 emissions by 0.5 billion tons per year. At this rate, by the year 2030, the ROW CO2 emissions will be 21.2 billion tons of CO2 per year.
Say the US pollutes twice as much, 5.8 billion times 2 equals 11.6 billion tons of CO2. 15% times 2 equals 30%.
How is it that the US can theoretically pollute more than China and still have a lower percentage of it at the same time?
LOL.......nobody cares about your ghey math s0n!!!
ps.....Obama EIA graph displays the exact same thing......will post upon request
I already addressed this. I did not make a personal attack. You did all of those things.I refer to your accusations that I have lied and your contention that you have not attacked me personally.
You owe me an apology.