Why Science Accepts Anthropogenic Global Warming and Tells Us We Need to Act

There might be a third option, which is that he believes everything he says as do many so-called educated experts. They get hundreds of millions in government grants and tax free contributions from saps, which money they dearly want to keep raking in.

Psychological experiments have repeatedly demonstrated a powerful desire by humans to be "part of the crowd" so they are not ostracized or laughed at.
Calling such people a "denier" is enough to trigger them into believing anything and regurgitating it forever. Same effect with calling them a "bigot" if they do not genuflect to homosexuals and transgenders, as they ruin countless lives of innocent, impressionable children. That is why the Boy Scouts of America went bankrupt after the courts ordered them to accept queers - the "Q" in LGBTQ. After more than 80,000 Boy Scouts were molested by queer scoutmasters, they won judgments totaling more than $2.4 billion, bankrupting the BSA. But hey, at least there's no "bigotry" - just tens of thousands of lives shattered. The world is being financially shattered and divided by the "denier" name-callers. It doesn't take much to set them off.

___________________________________________
Do you believe what you say here? I bet you do. Then why would you suggest that my believing what I am telling you is somehow suspect?

Would you like to talk about the basic science behind it all? Let's figure out where our opinions differ.

Let's keep this simple. Do you accept the greenhouse effect?

If so, do you accept that CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

Do you accept that humans burning fossil fuels are responsible for the increase in atmospheric CO2 from 280ppm to 420ppm?
 
Last edited:
Hilarious…..Explain what the gop has done from the 80s till now about pollution
Hilarious, explain what the dnc has done from the 80s till now about pollution.
 
Hilarious, explain what the dnc has done from the 80s till now about pollution.
You were obviously asleep……50% reduction in key air pollutants thanks to democrat congress and president.
The clean air act…..then there is a plethora of others….while you were sleeping…are you tired of being obliviously unaware ?
 
Do you believe what you say here? I bet you do. Then why would you suggest that my believing what I am telling you is somehow suspect?

Would you like to talk about the basic science behind it all? Let's figure out where our opinions differ.

Let's keep this simple. Do you accept the greenhouse effect?

If so, do you accept that CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

Do you accept that humans burning fossil fuels are responsible for the increase in atmospheric CO2 from 280ppm to 420ppm?
Still waiting for a response of some sort from Chem Engineer

Do you accept the greenhouse effect?

If so, do you accept that CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

Do you accept that humans burning fossil fuels are responsible for the increase in atmospheric CO2 from 280 ppm to 420 ppm?
 
You were obviously asleep……50% reduction in key air pollutants thanks to democrat congress and president.
The clean air act…..then there is a plethora of others….while you were sleeping…are you tired of being obliviously unaware ?
keep lying. Your reputation suffers.
 
Still waiting for a response of some sort from Chem Engineer

Do you accept the greenhouse effect?

If so, do you accept that CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

Do you accept that humans burning fossil fuels are responsible for the increase in atmospheric CO2 from 280 ppm to 420 ppm?
Fraud Chem engineer seldom responds to questions. He just cuts and pastes garbage,
 
Do you accept the greenhouse effect?

If so, do you accept that CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

Do you accept that humans burning fossil fuels are responsible for the increase in atmospheric CO2 from 280ppm to 420ppm?
Yes. Yes. Yes.

And the most a 140 ppm of incremental atmospheric CO2 could be responsible for is 0.22C to 0.5C.

The rest of the warming is due to natural causes of an interglacial period where the northern hemisphere is deglaciating. :)
 
You have no reputation.
Why then to you boldly keep telling the forum I have a bad reputation. It is you with the stupid claims made by just you.
 
Yes. Yes. Yes.

And the most a 140 ppm of incremental atmospheric CO2 could be responsible for is 0.22C to 0.5C.

The rest of the warming is due to natural causes of an interglacial period where the northern hemisphere is deglaciating. :)

And how much of the 140PPM is due to human activity?
 
Hard to say. The ocean should be releasing CO2 as well on a net basis.
They want to tell us how we are in danger from rather puny amounts of CO2 and no experiments confirm the danger at all.
 
Yes. Yes. Yes.

And the most a 140 ppm of incremental atmospheric CO2 could be responsible for is 0.22C to 0.5C.

The rest of the warming is due to natural causes of an interglacial period where the northern hemisphere is deglaciating. :)


Proof Ding is a paid member of the Co2 FRAUD
 
Back
Top Bottom