Why is climate science political?

[percysunshine]

Pig Shitz, you need to get a couple of sock puppets and go entertain the public.

Damn, you sure are a clever shithead, with all kinds of oink and doink, going on.

Wallybitch, all the CO2 going around is too much for the plants we have. Temperature is going up, with the methane and the rest.

Bobwisheshehadagnote thinks I am a sock.

Chuckle.

 

[bobgnote]

PussyShithead, what I think you are is a closet-homosexual, using an environment forum thread, as a runway, for your downlow homosexual intrigues. Since you are following Pig Shitz closely, and you never offer anything of value, you are a sock or like a sock, only queer. Which is to say, you SUCK.

Pig Shitz, you need to get a couple of sock puppets and go entertain the public.

Damn, you sure are a clever shithead, with all kinds of oink and doink, going on.

awwww... booboo is feeling left out. You know, when you enter junior high this september, assuming you're not shoved into the sped classes, you'll learn that cussing all the time is a great way to make your pointless. You're rapidly descending to a place even beneath Trolling Blunder for stupidity.

BUt for entertainment value, please... explain (between meltdowns) how my simple logical progression is flawed?

How is it that ass-idification of the oceans does not counteract the increase in atmospheric CO2 through carbon fixing? If it isn't... why not? And if it is how can the ppm be rising to beneficial levels? We'll just stick with this for now as to not **** up your chi so badly you can't do anything but scream "Pig Shitz" I mean I've heard of BOOOOOSH derangement Syndrome but never Big Fitz Derangement Syndrome. Maybe I should be honored you totally blow your ******* diode over anything I say that makes a righteous mockery of your fantasy religion.

May the frauds be with you.

How is it you are an experienced male homosexual, without getting out, to a Log Cabin Club approved forum? If you keep up the denials and the "ass" issues, you just need to get booted out, on this thread, and hey, come out gay, queen Pig Shitz!

What "beneficial levels" of CO2 release are evident, which are accelerating faster, than Permian-Triassic or PETM extinciton levels? Are you queer and stupid, or stupid and queer? Sort your "ass-idification" and queer, piggy shit, right out, right now! Carbon fixing by natural means will certainly be too inefficient, to avoid Mass Extinction Event 6, already underway. Carbon fixing will involve algae blooms, which die off and emit more CH4 and CO2, while decomposing. Do notice data, suggesting equilibria, Pig Shitz.

You are like Marie, Queen of France, who never said "Let them eat cake." You are a closet queen, which is not ruler, by birth. You are like a cartoon ostrich. Real birds never really stick their heads, into the ground, but you do that. You are like a pig, only not as smart. Pig-shit-for-brains is really more accurate, in your case, but be Pig Shitz.

What you are really like is all the dead queers, who shot speed and tricked their bad doses of HIV, all the way, through full-blown AIDS, to death. That's your style.

 

[westwall]

PussyShithead, what I think you are is a closet-homosexual, using an environment forum thread, as a runway, for your downlow homosexual intrigues. Since you are following Pig Shitz closely, and you never offer anything of value, you are a sock or like a sock, only queer. Which is to say, you SUCK.

Pig Shitz, you need to get a couple of sock puppets and go entertain the public.

Damn, you sure are a clever shithead, with all kinds of oink and doink, going on.

awwww... booboo is feeling left out. You know, when you enter junior high this september, assuming you're not shoved into the sped classes, you'll learn that cussing all the time is a great way to make your pointless. You're rapidly descending to a place even beneath Trolling Blunder for stupidity.

BUt for entertainment value, please... explain (between meltdowns) how my simple logical progression is flawed?

How is it that ass-idification of the oceans does not counteract the increase in atmospheric CO2 through carbon fixing? If it isn't... why not? And if it is how can the ppm be rising to beneficial levels? We'll just stick with this for now as to not **** up your chi so badly you can't do anything but scream "Pig Shitz" I mean I've heard of BOOOOOSH derangement Syndrome but never Big Fitz Derangement Syndrome. Maybe I should be honored you totally blow your ******* diode over anything I say that makes a righteous mockery of your fantasy religion.

May the frauds be with you.

How is it you are an experienced male homosexual, without getting out, to a Log Cabin Club approved forum? If you keep up the denials and the "ass" issues, you just need to get booted out, on this thread, and hey, come out gay, queen Pig Shitz!

What "beneficial levels" of CO2 release are evident, which are accelerating faster, than Permian-Triassic or PETM extinciton levels? Are you queer and stupid, or stupid and queer? Sort your "ass-idification" and queer, piggy shit, right out, right now! Carbon fixing by natural means will certainly be too inefficient, to avoid Mass Extinction Event 6, already underway. Carbon fixing will involve algae blooms, which die off and emit more CH4 and CO2, while decomposing. Do notice data, suggesting equilibria, Pig Shitz.

You are like Marie, Queen of France, who never said "Let them eat cake." You are a closet queen, which is not ruler, by birth. You are like a cartoon ostrich. Real birds never really stick their heads, into the ground, but you do that. You are like a pig, only not as smart. Pig-shit-for-brains is really more accurate, in your case, but be Pig Shitz.

What you are really like is all the dead queers, who shot speed and tricked their bad doses of HIV, all the way, through full-blown AIDS, to death. That's your style.

Can you possibly be any more incoherent?

 

[Big Fitz]

PussyShithead, what I think you are is a closet-homosexual, using an environment forum thread, as a runway, for your downlow homosexual intrigues. Since you are following Pig Shitz closely, and you never offer anything of value, you are a sock or like a sock, only queer. Which is to say, you SUCK.

awwww... booboo is feeling left out. You know, when you enter junior high this september, assuming you're not shoved into the sped classes, you'll learn that cussing all the time is a great way to make your pointless. You're rapidly descending to a place even beneath Trolling Blunder for stupidity.

BUt for entertainment value, please... explain (between meltdowns) how my simple logical progression is flawed?

How is it that ass-idification of the oceans does not counteract the increase in atmospheric CO2 through carbon fixing? If it isn't... why not? And if it is how can the ppm be rising to beneficial levels? We'll just stick with this for now as to not **** up your chi so badly you can't do anything but scream "Pig Shitz" I mean I've heard of BOOOOOSH derangement Syndrome but never Big Fitz Derangement Syndrome. Maybe I should be honored you totally blow your ******* diode over anything I say that makes a righteous mockery of your fantasy religion.

May the frauds be with you.

How is it you are an experienced male homosexual, without getting out, to a Log Cabin Club approved forum? If you keep up the denials and the "ass" issues, you just need to get booted out, on this thread, and hey, come out gay, queen Pig Shitz!

What "beneficial levels" of CO2 release are evident, which are accelerating faster, than Permian-Triassic or PETM extinciton levels? Are you queer and stupid, or stupid and queer? Sort your "ass-idification" and queer, piggy shit, right out, right now! Carbon fixing by natural means will certainly be too inefficient, to avoid Mass Extinction Event 6, already underway. Carbon fixing will involve algae blooms, which die off and emit more CH4 and CO2, while decomposing. Do notice data, suggesting equilibria, Pig Shitz.

You are like Marie, Queen of France, who never said "Let them eat cake." You are a closet queen, which is not ruler, by birth. You are like a cartoon ostrich. Real birds never really stick their heads, into the ground, but you do that. You are like a pig, only not as smart. Pig-shit-for-brains is really more accurate, in your case, but be Pig Shitz.

What you are really like is all the dead queers, who shot speed and tricked their bad doses of HIV, all the way, through full-blown AIDS, to death. That's your style.

Can you possibly be any more incoherent?

Not without taking Truthiepoo's and Rdean's online course for blithering idiocy.

 

[skookerasbil]

PussyShithead, what I think you are is a closet-homosexual, using an environment forum thread, as a runway, for your downlow homosexual intrigues. Since you are following Pig Shitz closely, and you never offer anything of value, you are a sock or like a sock, only queer. Which is to say, you SUCK.

Pig Shitz, you need to get a couple of sock puppets and go entertain the public.

Damn, you sure are a clever shithead, with all kinds of oink and doink, going on.

awwww... booboo is feeling left out. You know, when you enter junior high this september, assuming you're not shoved into the sped classes, you'll learn that cussing all the time is a great way to make your pointless. You're rapidly descending to a place even beneath Trolling Blunder for stupidity.

BUt for entertainment value, please... explain (between meltdowns) how my simple logical progression is flawed?

How is it that ass-idification of the oceans does not counteract the increase in atmospheric CO2 through carbon fixing? If it isn't... why not? And if it is how can the ppm be rising to beneficial levels? We'll just stick with this for now as to not **** up your chi so badly you can't do anything but scream "Pig Shitz" I mean I've heard of BOOOOOSH derangement Syndrome but never Big Fitz Derangement Syndrome. Maybe I should be honored you totally blow your ******* diode over anything I say that makes a righteous mockery of your fantasy religion.

May the frauds be with you.

How is it you are an experienced male homosexual, without getting out, to a Log Cabin Club approved forum? If you keep up the denials and the "ass" issues, you just need to get booted out, on this thread, and hey, come out gay, queen Pig Shitz!

What "beneficial levels" of CO2 release are evident, which are accelerating faster, than Permian-Triassic or PETM extinciton levels? Are you queer and stupid, or stupid and queer? Sort your "ass-idification" and queer, piggy shit, right out, right now! Carbon fixing by natural means will certainly be too inefficient, to avoid Mass Extinction Event 6, already underway. Carbon fixing will involve algae blooms, which die off and emit more CH4 and CO2, while decomposing. Do notice data, suggesting equilibria, Pig Shitz.

You are like Marie, Queen of France, who never said "Let them eat cake." You are a closet queen, which is not ruler, by birth. You are like a cartoon ostrich. Real birds never really stick their heads, into the ground, but you do that. You are like a pig, only not as smart. Pig-shit-for-brains is really more accurate, in your case, but be Pig Shitz.

What you are really like is all the dead queers, who shot speed and tricked their bad doses of HIV, all the way, through full-blown AIDS, to death. That's your style.

That right s0n.......we're all sure that all across America tonight, the discussion at the dinner table wlll center on algae blooms and extinction events Who cant seee that?


s0n.........nutballs like you have been screaming this alarmist shit for two decades now. Its met by the public with a collective yawn.( as Ive astutely pointed out with links here numerous times).

But knock yourself out with the science angle s0n..................

 

[bobgnote]

S0 suckassbil the tweaker c0mes over and p0sts repeatedly, at envir0nment threads, just to make s0me rant ab0ut h0w 0ther people d0n't give a shit about algae bl00ms and extincti0n events.

You sure are r0ckin,' you tweaking fucktard. At least y0u kn0w h0w t0 l0ad c0l0rs and smilies, while Wienerbitch is still trying t0 figure 0ut h0w t0 l0ad links and graphs, but he's 1 for 2 at graphs, and 0 for 1, at ph0t0-m0ntages. Eat shit and die, punks. You are less than zero, at anything you try, except for being sub-humans, ready for the sea to get up.

That piece of shit Wallyfucktard isn't even good at smilies or tweaking.

 

[Big Fitz]

S0 suckassbil the tweaker c0mes over and p0sts repeatedly, at envir0nment threads, just to make s0me rant ab0ut h0w 0ther people d0n't give a shit about algae bl00ms and extincti0n events.

You sure are r0ckin,' you tweaking fucktard. At least y0u kn0w h0w t0 l0ad c0l0rs and smilies, while Wienerbitch is still trying t0 figure 0ut h0w t0 l0ad links and graphs, but he's 1 for 2 at graphs, and 0 for 1, at ph0t0-m0ntages. Eat shit and die, punks. You are less than zero, at anything you try, except for being sub-humans, ready for the sea to get up.

That piece of shit Wallyfucktard isn't even good at smilies or tweaking.

Congrats. You're no longer worth entertaining with my attention anymore, booboo. I cast thee on the ignore pile.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How many trillions do you want us to waste on CO2 reduction?

How much is western civilization worth to you?

How much lower will the temperature be in 2080 if we follow your advice?

Unlikely enough lower to avoid a lot of expensive consequences, but hopefully enough lower to avoid the irrecoverable consequences. Most of the next century is already in the pipeline, at least as far as the changes we are likely to see in the next 50 years, we can make things worse, but due to lags in system response and the momentum the system has already been given, there isn't much we can do that will make the next half century retreat from the course we are currently influencing.

Western civilization is worth a lot, that's why I'd prefer we not waste trillions on this stupidity.

"Unlikely enough lower to avoid a lot of expensive consequences"

So we'd be better off saving our trillions to pay for the consequences.
So why will they all be negative?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yeah, it's a good thing popularity does't affect the laws of physics. It's still true that Nuclear Power put to it's full potential could make electricity so cheap only the rich would burn candles. As for lighting, they're darn near right. It can only get better if we get the scaredy cats out of the way. If we get rid of subsidies and stick to only what the market says is most profitable, and make RATIONAL protections from poisons put in our environment from them (CO2 is not one of them), and not try to be hypochondriac clean this issue sorts itself out.

But the point remains this is not about doing what's bigger better faster cheaper. It's about power of men over other men and profiting at the expense of others. The very issue you've denied since post 1.

Right - because profit motive is never an issue in the coal, oil or nuclear industries. And neither have ever received ubsidies.

I have to say man - I just cringe when you post things like that. It's just so ridiculously one sided that it amazes me that you don't see it yourself.

Popularity is a valid point to make here, because we live in democracies. Governments should work to provide energy from sources people largely respect and prefer - providing to do so almost makes good use of tax payer dollars.

I do look forward to seeing your overview on coal.

btw - In the last 4 elections I voted for 4 different parties. I'm not left wing, so don't portray me as such.

Governments should work to provide energy from sources people largely respect and prefer

That's what California has been doing. Doesn't work so well when it gets hot.

 

[signelect]

It is not political it is about money, woops I forgot polticis is about money. Sorry, carry on

 

[Big Fitz]

Yeah, it's a good thing popularity does't affect the laws of physics. It's still true that Nuclear Power put to it's full potential could make electricity so cheap only the rich would burn candles. As for lighting, they're darn near right. It can only get better if we get the scaredy cats out of the way. If we get rid of subsidies and stick to only what the market says is most profitable, and make RATIONAL protections from poisons put in our environment from them (CO2 is not one of them), and not try to be hypochondriac clean this issue sorts itself out.

But the point remains this is not about doing what's bigger better faster cheaper. It's about power of men over other men and profiting at the expense of others. The very issue you've denied since post 1.

Right - because profit motive is never an issue in the coal, oil or nuclear industries. And neither have ever received ubsidies.

I have to say man - I just cringe when you post things like that. It's just so ridiculously one sided that it amazes me that you don't see it yourself.

Popularity is a valid point to make here, because we live in democracies. Governments should work to provide energy from sources people largely respect and prefer - providing to do so almost makes good use of tax payer dollars.

I do look forward to seeing your overview on coal.

btw - In the last 4 elections I voted for 4 different parties. I'm not left wing, so don't portray me as such.

Governments should work to provide energy from sources people largely respect and prefer

That's what California has been doing. Doesn't work so well when it gets hot.

Respect and prefer?

yeah, sounds nice till you realize that respect doesn't feed the bulldog. It doesn't matter how well respected some form of energy is, if it's inefficient, overpriced, and unsustainable, it's going to lose.

This is the same form of thinking that gives us 'critically acclaimed' TV shows that are collossal commercial failures.

 

[bobgnote]

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/images/c/c1/2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

LOL!!!!!!!!! Code, you are really full of it. You are stating that chart backs up your assertation that warming is occuring at present at the same rate it has been occurring for the last 400 years? From 1600 to 1800 that graph is about flat, from 1800 to 1900, a little warming, from 1900 to present, a rapidly increasing warmth, the graph is going straight up.

How the hell did you arrive at your interpretation of that graph?

Ahhhh yes the hockey shtick graph. Proven fake but you religious fanatics will never go against dogma.

I'll be darned, it's a hockey stick. Next thing you know, re-pubescent wingpunks will have use for their puckey, to have some real fun, with each other; note how Wienerbitch is trying to bullshit Ian about energy transfer, over at the other thread.

I wonder when Pig Shitz or T-tard will try put up something, worth cross-checking? Meanwhile, pub fucktards have been busy, politicking:

Virginia Republicans Declare War On ‘Liberal’ Words | Addicting Info

Republicans have declared war on everything from women to health care to unions to voting. But a war on the dictionary? That war seems to have started in Virginia.

Republican state Representative Chris Stolle has a problem with words. To be specific, he has a problem with science words. Stolle is the sponsor of a $50,000 state study that is supposed to figure out how climate change is affecting the Virginia coastline. There’s only one problem. Republicans like Stolle refuse to allow the study to move forward unless some words they object to are omitted or changed.

Stolle and his Republican colleagues object to terms like “global warming,” “climate change,” and “sea level rise,” because he says they are terms that liberals use. Forget the fact that the scientific community uses these terms all the time, because liberals use them, they must be bad. So in place of these harmless terms, Stolle has replaced them with terms like “recurrent flooding” and “coastal resiliency.”

Stolle says these scientific terms are “liberal code words” that inflame conservatives so his solution is to use words conservatives don’t associate with liberals, hence the new language. The legislation then sailed through the general assembly and was signed into law.

------------------

Virginia Republican forces scientists to stop using ‘climate change’ terminology | The Raw Story

In a legislative dust-up earlier this year, according to reporter Scott Harper, writing for The Virginian-Pilot, Stolle told Virginia State Senator Ralph Northam (D) that the terms “climate change” and “sea-level rise” are “liberal code words” that must be excised from a study request, or risk having that request shelved.

Shockingly enough: Even though Republicans control the state’s general assembly and hold the tie-breaking vote in the Virginia Senate, they voted to approve $138,000 to fund the study after Northam allowed the term “sea-level rise” to be swapped out for “recurrent flooding.”

While prior administrations in Virginia, namely that of Gov. Tim Kaine (D), were quite proactive about studying climate change, Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) has said in public that he does not believe human activity is influencing the earth’s climate. His administration also shuttered Gov. Kaine’s climate change commission, which had produced numerous reports on the threats posed to the state by sea-level rise and warmer temperatures.

Ever since then, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality has been pushed by the legislature to stop using the scientific terms “climate change” or “sea-level rise,” swapping them for “coastal resilience,” Laura McKay, director of coastal zone management programs, told the Pilot.

McDonnell’s attorney general, Ken Cuccinelli, also embarked on a witch hunt for research errors at the University of Virginia by attempting to force University president Teresa A. Sullivan to turn over scientists’ records and internal communications. The state’s Supreme Court ultimately sided with Sullivan earlier this year, but she’s since announced plans to resign due to an unspecified “philosophical difference of opinion.”

------------------

Obama seems to love the pubs; he copied the Meat Romney healthcare model, eschewed energy policy, killed more people with drones and busted more pot clubs in four years, than GW Bush did, in eight years, and it is obvious, Obama likes to bask, in his cult of personality, without leading his DDs to good media.

The result of this is a red-state tide washes over the land, with red-state retards getting over, ranting, and preventing any good policy, from evolving or from passing, as legislation. Thanks DDs, of both tard-parties, for another win, for suckassbil.

Looks like Wally went to the beach, today, but T-tard and Pig Shitz are here, again. So the stupidity quotient is intact.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Taking your last point first, you say that we are ten years away from isolating a man-made cause and accurately measuring the impact of man on that cause. Without knowing the cause, the contribution by man to that cause or the scientific justification for any line of action, you are electing to act immediately.

Yes. Because at this stage I think we can say that we KNOW that human acitivity is influencing the climate.

What we don't know is the extent of that influence. I'm sure experts can put parameters on that, but I haven't seen them.

So it is essential that we act - and also because acting benefits us all in other ways. It makes sense to conserve energy for other reasons - one of which is reducing costs for households and businesses.

I'll ignore all the Al Gore games - climate change science was known a century before Al Gore, and his influence was never anything to write home about outside the US anyway. Why do Americans obsess about the guy?

So it is essential that we act -

What if global warming is beneficial?
Is it still essential to act?

 

[theHawk]

I don't see science as being a political issue.

Good governance should be about acting on accurate scientific data - not about distorting the truth, hiding from it, or pretending the facts are not what they are.

While I think the use of nuclear vs renewables is a political issue around the world, only in the US (and to a lesser extent, Australia) does climate change seem to be political.

The Conservative parties of the UK, France, Germany, Finland, Denmark, New Zealand and host of others ALL accept that human acitivty may be playing a role in climate change, and have developed policies to suit.

In many cases, this means nuclear.

But why do some Americans seem to think climate change is left wing conspiracy, when most conservatives around the world are saying the opposite?

The science shows us that the planet has been changing since its creation.

The warmer movement wants us all to believe that mankind is soley responsible for the Earth warming up since the 19th century. Yet it is scientific fact that its already been warming since the end of the last ice age. They want you to feel guilty that glaciers are receding, even though they've been doing that for ten thousand years. They want you to believe that the world will come to an end if tempatures go up, yet there have been times in Earth's history where it already was warmer and there were no polar ice caps.

All the political solutions like "carbon credits" are designed to tax the shit out of the US.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Al Gore's strategic problems are caused by his usual refusal to go all the way, to prove the trends....

Pretty hard to prove anything when you're a demonstrated serial liar.

Turdball! You and Shitz are fecophiles, who visit shit-links. I don't go there.

The reason I don't much care for Gore is he doesn't do good enough work, to completely back you skeptic-shitheads way off the ball. Got issues? Have a look. CO2 and heat are both on the way, up, in the latest hockey stick graph:

Here comes the heat, up 4 C, in a lifetime:

Climate change scientists warn of 4C global temperature rise | Environment | The Guardian

2011 was the ninth-warmest year, in the modern record:

NASA - NASA Finds 2011 Ninth-Warmest Year on Record

The global average surface temperature in 2011 was the ninth warmest since 1880, according to NASA scientists. The finding continues a trend in which nine of the 10 warmest years in the modern meteorological record have occurred since the year 2000.

NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York, which monitors global surface temperatures on an ongoing basis, released an updated analysis that shows temperatures around the globe in 2011 compared to the average global temperature from the mid-20th century. The comparison shows how Earth continues to experience warmer temperatures than several decades ago. The average temperature around the globe in 2011 was 0.92 degrees F (0.51 C) warmer than the mid-20th century baseline.

-------------------------------

Want to discuss global warming or acidification, with me? You guys eat shit. Don't paste it up, here, if you don't want to discuss issues.

How many thermometers did they use to calculate global temperature?

 

[bobgnote]

I don't see science as being a political issue.

Good governance should be about acting on accurate scientific data - not about distorting the truth, hiding from it, or pretending the facts are not what they are.

While I think the use of nuclear vs renewables is a political issue around the world, only in the US (and to a lesser extent, Australia) does climate change seem to be political.

The Conservative parties of the UK, France, Germany, Finland, Denmark, New Zealand and host of others ALL accept that human acitivty may be playing a role in climate change, and have developed policies to suit.

In many cases, this means nuclear.

But why do some Americans seem to think climate change is left wing conspiracy, when most conservatives around the world are saying the opposite?

The science shows us that the planet has been changing since its creation.

The warmer movement wants us all to believe that mankind is soley responsible for the Earth warming up since the 19th century. Yet it is scientific fact that its already been warming since the end of the last ice age. They want you to feel guilty that glaciers are receding, even though they've been doing that for ten thousand years. They want you to believe that the world will come to an end if tempatures go up, yet there have been times in Earth's history where it already was warmer and there were no polar ice caps.

All the political solutions like "carbon credits" are designed to tax the shit out of the US.

The planet has been changing, for 4.5 billion years, would you think? If nuclear power OR petroleum idiots keep having their way, the human habitat could blink out, after only a few thousand years, of human significance.

The skeptic idiots have warmer assholes, from lying. This is the "liar, liar, pants-on-fire" syndrome. It appears Mr.Hawk has wandered over to this thread, without reading any of the posts, on the other 200+ pages, ballooned up, from wingpunk fucktards doing a lot of quote in quote in quote, lol, smilies, rant about liberals, from head up butt position. At least 200 of these thread pages are taken up, with hassling this.

Let's see if Mr.Hawk can read a simple graph, used by both sides of the warming controversy. I picked this 400,000 year plot of CO2 and temperatures up, from wattsupwiththat.org, a skeptic site. It's all over the environment threads, since a skeptic named Fatass loaded it, without a link, but I went out and dug it up:

See the convenient red line, for CO2 concentrations, which always bottoms at 180 ppm, and then forces temperatures up, like a rocket, then tops out, at 280 ppm, and a gradual cooling develops, over 80K-100K years?

At the FAR RIGHT of the graph, the red line goes way UP, toward 400 ppm, where CO2 is, today. Since Mr.Hawk should have eyes, he should be able to shake his red-state ignorance, and notice that happened in the same, geologic instant, as the human emissions and defoliation, done since the industrial revolution started.

That wasn't just wingpunk farts or Al Gore shits or cow burps, dewd. That was humans cooking the planet, by BOTH emitting CO2 and cutting CO2 conversion media, for year after year after year, but that line goes way UP, since humans were working fast.

Is there some problem, with your Hawk-eyes, or is it your brain? No? Warming will follow emissions of GHGs, which is at a rate 10x the PETM event, and look at the environment threads or search, since you are totally DDD about science, when you wander to the end of a thread like this, without reading half of it.

Warming will skyrocket temperatures. First the oceans acidify, then life on land gets tough, then the oceans get anoxic, and life on land is hell. Humans aren't going to keep too much of 7 billion souls, on board.

Don't like science? Watch baseball. See Cain pitching to 27? See 10-0? See how the Giants won the Series in 2010, warmest year, in the instrument record? See 10 warmest years in the instrument record happened, since 1998? See high, hard gas? If you are a gamer-babe, see that rise-ball? Well, now. If you are worth a shit at baseball, you should be able to see, when that G-gas comes to town, it's BYE-BYE, BABY, vis-a-vis Mass Extinction Event 6.

So don't get excited, and fly into a windmill.

 

[skookerasbil]

S0 suckassbil the tweaker c0mes over and p0sts repeatedly, at envir0nment threads, just to make s0me rant ab0ut h0w 0ther people d0n't give a shit about algae bl00ms and extincti0n events.

You sure are r0ckin,' you tweaking fucktard. At least y0u kn0w h0w t0 l0ad c0l0rs and smilies, while Wienerbitch is still trying t0 figure 0ut h0w t0 l0ad links and graphs, but he's 1 for 2 at graphs, and 0 for 1, at ph0t0-m0ntages. Eat shit and die, punks. You are less than zero, at anything you try, except for being sub-humans, ready for the sea to get up.

That piece of shit Wallyfucktard isn't even good at smilies or tweaking.

Subhumans FTMFW s0n!!!


You and all the k00ks know you're losing........thats why you and all the other k00ks on here go mental a dozen times/day. In fact, everything is good my way..........4 1/2 more months of this lefty bullshit and it gets mothballed for two generations and fracking is going to dominate the energy landscape for the next decade. Solar companies are taking a crap and closing every day all over America. Meanwhile........Cap and Trade is not even part of the English language anymore in 2012.


All the science.................and nothing to show for it asshole!!!

And what are the radical environmentalists doing these days besides losing? Out in their backyards building their emergency arks for the coming floods..................

And cheesedicks like Rolling Thunder and Bobg sit home and salivate about the prospect of every American going to work on a two wheel scooter......................and belive the whole country is about to embrace it!!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Oh.....by the way.........if anyone is interested...............here is a recent shot of Bobg about to take his emergency ark for the maiden voyage.............shit even has a motor

Get back to us on how it went s0n!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

As I posted up about a year ago.........Rolling Thunders maiden voyage of said emergency ark didnt go real well................

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is no question at all that the graph shows a dramatic rise from around halfway through the 20th century.

Are you seriously claiming that it does not exist?

The FACT remains that mankind is INCAPABLE of doing more than what nature itself does.

How can an additional 0.0024% of atmospheric composition do all these incredible things?

Answer? it can't. It is a faith designed to subjugate man to ecofascism and the caprice of petty small minded men concerned for their own wealth and power.

Pig Shitz, mankind gets to own up, to the last 200 years, of deforestation and industry, which did a lot of cumulative damage. If you are too stupid to factor any of that, hey, you are too ******* stupid!

You didn't reference or link to your intriguingly queer percentage. So why jump a line and pretend to answer your own non-question? I guess that's how the Shitz family taught you to think, since if you can't dazzle 'em, baffle 'em with hypocritical bullshit, even if you are shitty PIG, named Pig Shitz.

Let's have a look at the graph, below. Notice the red line, at the far right, of the graph. You can wingpunk your way over, to the far right, can't you Piggy Poo? The red line represents CO2 cocentrations, and it jumps up to 375 or so ppm, since that was the global average CO2, at the time the UK people who made this graph entered the data.

Naturally, Fatass loaded this and tried to sell me, on how CO2 is somehow not a forcer, never mind how the graph is calibrated, to show how CO2 levels, at peaks or troughs, after temperature passes it, on every major slope. CO2 goes up, it gets caught, halts, pulls temps down. CO2 goes down, it gets caught, levels, then forces temps back up. SS, DD:

(wattsupwiththat.org used to carry this, but they dumped it, know why? It's scientific!)

Yeah, I saw the thread. You proved beyond any doubt that you fail to understand the science. And again, neither CO2 nor carbonic acid has any affinity for cold water. Neither CO2 nor carbonic acid seeks out cold water or bypasses warm water in favor of cold water which is what the word affinity suggests. Words have meanings and it always helps to know and understand those meanings if you want to avoid looking like a rube.



And again I found that you fail to understand the science. The cold water upwelling from the deep ocean has absolutely nothing to do with man and his burning of fossil fuel.

And again, I like the way you show how intimidated you are with your incessant and completely impotent name calling. I note that you can't talk to anyone on the topic without falsely fortifying yourself with a dose of name calling. Mental masturbation is what it is and it only makes you look like the idiot that you clearly are. But do keep it up because it is very entertaining. It is always good to know that one's opponent is intimidated and routine name calling is such a clear psychological tell.

But Wienerbitch, again you are being oppositional, in the face of science, and you assert your own previous oppositionality, and you are like the queers which shot speed and tricked their HIV all the way through full-blown AIDS, to die and kill others, which means you are a selfish shit-piece that gets called "*****."

Ocean acidification - another effect of global warming | Time for change

Marine calcifiers face a second challenge: their calcium carbonate shells dissolve in environments that are too acidic. In fact, some deep, cold ocean waters are naturally too acidic for marine calcifiers to survive, meaning that these organisms only exist above a certain depth known as the "saturation horizon." With ocean acidification, the saturation horizon is expected to shift closer to the surface by 50 to 200 meters relative to its position during the 1800s (Doney, 2006). The Southern and Arctic oceans, which are colder and therefore naturally more acidic, may become entirely inhospitable for organisms with shells made from aragonite--one of the weaker mineral forms of calcium carbonate--by the end of this century (EUR-OCEANS, 2007).

Don't forget to eat lots of your own shit, and swallow it, since you put your foot in your mouth, your head up your asshole, and you don't chew and swallow your own shit or your own foot, but rather, you pull your head out of your ass, for moments, and show people your shit-eating grin. You type shit, for USMB readers. This will prove to be a mistake. Chew and wallow your own shit. Don't pony it over to USMB.

Here is Fatass' swell graph, again, since from thread-to-thread, you keep Wienerbitching around, ignoring Fatass' graph and its implications, which are CO2 flattens out, at 280 ppm, at peak warming, to fall, forcing cooling, which trend is consistent, for 430,000 years, until we get to the present, when CO2 shoots all the way to 400 ppm, today, following the industrial age, when humans multiplied, emitted GHGs, and defoliated, egregiously. And now for telling a *****, just how it is . . .

Fatass' graph is following you around, Wienerbitch. Maybe you should have a look at the ******! Even really stupid people can read graphs, Wiener. Go for it. This one shows what happens, with CO2, without too much methane, CH4. When the methane gets out, up go temperatures. When the cold water wells up, water-creatures get dead. It's rather simple, but you are worse than simple, you are a fucktard.

OMG! The planet has never had more than 375 PPM of CO2 before. We're doomed!