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.
like what? what has been presented that has ever been accurate? please, share with the class.Before accepting your claim that there is NO climate concern to worry about, YOU need to present a great deal of evidence refuting that which is already on hand,
Can you explain how atmospheric CO2 heats the deep oceans?like what? what has been presented that has ever been accurate? please, share with the class.Before accepting your claim that there is NO climate concern to worry about, YOU need to present a great deal of evidence refuting that which is already on hand,
AR5 will do just fine. It and its surrounding milieu have convinced the vast majority of the people on this planet actually capable of understanding and judging the evidence. AR6 is in production and shows the situation is worse than the conclusions of its predecessors.
You could consider the possibility that I wasn't addressing people with your mindset, jc, and thus, wasn't addressing you at all.
Then who are you addressing? ... certainly not anyone with rudimentary knowledge of the subject material ... flaws in your logic abound, starting with the logarithmic relationship between temperature and carbon dioxide ... evidence is emerging that we've already reached saturation, AGW will be quickly diminishing and disappear within 100 years ... which the IPCC predicts in their most recent report ... why do you take a few economists word over actual climatologists? ...
I'm sorry, most the costs of climate change has already been spent ... every one of the predictions of catastrophe require violations of the Laws of Physics ... not to mention the complete absence of these events in the historical records ...
You've put your trust into statistics ... not science ... there is a difference ...
AR5 and the upcoming AR6so in other words, you don't have any evidence from actual scientists.Then why you quoting economists?
Just like we've been telling you deniers for the last ten years.
ten yrs my ass,,
you fucks have been howling for almost 50 yrs about this subject,, and youve been wrong 100% of the time,,
That's not what reality tells the world's scientists. To what have you been listening?
You could consider the possibility that I wasn't addressing people with your mindset, jc, and thus, wasn't addressing you at all.
New Cities in more optimal locations!
Just like we've been telling you deniers for the last ten years.
Just like we've been telling you deniers for the last ten years.
It's not as probable as long as we keep increasing CO2 emissions like we have been, right?Ask them what the cost would be for a several thousand feet thick ice sheet over parts of North America, Europe and Asia?
Why? Do you think that a real possibility in the next century or two?
But we don't fully understand the trigger mechanisms so who is to say it isn't possible given the existing background conditions which are favorable for northern hemisphere glaciation. When it comes to climate we are dealing with probabilities and not certainties. That works both ways. A point that seems to have been lost in the insanity. The reality though is that the earth is uniquely configured for cooling and not warming. And the consequences of a drastic cooling - which is exactly what the data shows would happen - versus a gradual warming are much more severe. Which is another point that seems to have been lost in all of the insanity.
In what way do you believe the Earth is "configured for cooling and not warming", particularly when it has been warming at an unprecedented rate for the last century and a half? What data indicate your cooling would be "drastic" and what do you actually mean by the term?
Remember, "denier!"Can you explain how atmospheric CO2 heats the deep oceans?like what? what has been presented that has ever been accurate? please, share with the class.Before accepting your claim that there is NO climate concern to worry about, YOU need to present a great deal of evidence refuting that which is already on hand,
AR5 will do just fine. It and its surrounding milieu have convinced the vast majority of the people on this planet actually capable of understanding and judging the evidence. AR6 is in production and shows the situation is worse than the conclusions of its predecessors.
Remember, "denier!"Can you explain how atmospheric CO2 heats the deep oceans?like what? what has been presented that has ever been accurate? please, share with the class.Before accepting your claim that there is NO climate concern to worry about, YOU need to present a great deal of evidence refuting that which is already on hand,
AR5 will do just fine. It and its surrounding milieu have convinced the vast majority of the people on this planet actually capable of understanding and judging the evidence. AR6 is in production and shows the situation is worse than the conclusions of its predecessors.
It's not as probable as long as we keep increasing CO2 emissions like we have been, right?Ask them what the cost would be for a several thousand feet thick ice sheet over parts of North America, Europe and Asia?
Why? Do you think that a real possibility in the next century or two?
But we don't fully understand the trigger mechanisms so who is to say it isn't possible given the existing background conditions which are favorable for northern hemisphere glaciation. When it comes to climate we are dealing with probabilities and not certainties. That works both ways. A point that seems to have been lost in the insanity. The reality though is that the earth is uniquely configured for cooling and not warming. And the consequences of a drastic cooling - which is exactly what the data shows would happen - versus a gradual warming are much more severe. Which is another point that seems to have been lost in all of the insanity.
In what way do you believe the Earth is "configured for cooling and not warming", particularly when it has been warming at an unprecedented rate for the last century and a half? What data indicate your cooling would be "drastic" and what do you actually mean by the term?
particularly when it has been warming at an unprecedented rate for the last century and a half?
What is the proper rate for a century and a half?
How many century and a half periods can you show?
The proper rate would have been ZERO.
The proper rate would have been ZERO.
How many 150 year periods over the last 150,000 years have had zero warming?
View attachment 477067The proper rate would have been ZERO.
How many 150 year periods over the last 150,000 years have had zero warming?
I don't lieView attachment 477067The proper rate would have been ZERO.
How many 150 year periods over the last 150,000 years have had zero warming?
You could have just said none.
I didn't say that, Tin Man. I said surveys and polls do not overlap real science.
You never once posted the lab work showing how increasing CO2 from 280 to 400 raises temperature. That said, how do you know lowering CO2 will have any effect?
It's almost astounding, but I see, Frank, that you don't seem to have learned anything over the last few years.
A poll or survey of scientists tells us what is and is not accepted science. There is no other way to do so. That increasing atmospheric CO2 levels will increase global temperatures is a proven fact Frank. Sputter and whine all you want, but claiming otherwise simply marks you as a liar or a fool.
Remember, "denier!"Can you explain how atmospheric CO2 heats the deep oceans?like what? what has been presented that has ever been accurate? please, share with the class.Before accepting your claim that there is NO climate concern to worry about, YOU need to present a great deal of evidence refuting that which is already on hand,
AR5 will do just fine. It and its surrounding milieu have convinced the vast majority of the people on this planet actually capable of understanding and judging the evidence. AR6 is in production and shows the situation is worse than the conclusions of its predecessors.
Yes, but not for you Frank.
View attachment 477067The proper rate would have been ZERO.
How many 150 year periods over the last 150,000 years have had zero warming?
View attachment 477068
I suspect I could find hundreds of 1.5C periods with change of less than 1C.
I don't lieView attachment 477067The proper rate would have been ZERO.
How many 150 year periods over the last 150,000 years have had zero warming?
You could have just said none.
