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.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Scientists Now 99.999% Sure Humans Are Causing Climate Change
Iol, a little to late for that bullshit.
Only too late if you can explain what happens the energy that rising CO2 traps. PUT UP OR SHUT UP.
Ever hear of a thing called photosynthesis?
Photosynthesis drops off rapidly as wavelengths approach the infrared range. NEXT!
The spectrum
Scientists Now 99.999% Sure Humans Are Causing Climate Change
Iol, a little to late for that bullshit.
Only too late if you can explain what happens the energy that rising CO2 traps. PUT UP OR SHUT UP.
Lol. It is incumbent on the person who makes claims to back them up. Since "science" is wrong about global warming, as shown by the evidence, it might also mean that there is no energy being trapped as suggested since if it were, it would indeed cause warming.
It's a well known fact and easily shown with a basic lab spectrophotometer that CO2 absorbs in the IR range, ergo you just admitted that CO2 does cause warming.
Scientists Now 99.999% Sure Humans Are Causing Climate Change
Iol, a little to late for that bullshit.
Only too late if you can explain what happens the energy that rising CO2 traps. PUT UP OR SHUT UP.
Ever hear of a thing called photosynthesis?
Photosynthesis drops off rapidly as wavelengths approach the infrared range. NEXT!
The spectrum
What's your point? Are you trying to say plants only absorb sunlight and don't actually use up CO2 to create sugar/carbs stored in the plants?
Ok.... the atmosphere is made up of many parts of which CO2 is a very very small part. .04% or 397 ppm to be more specific. By contrast H2O is 2.5% of the atmosphere or 25,000 ppm. H20 is also a so called greenhouse gas because it can absorb IR. Ergo water causes warming.
So here we are with two supposedly evil components of our atmosphere. CO2 that stuff we exhale, yeah the stuff plants use as food to get energy to grow, and H20 that stuff you see all over the place that makes us call this the water planet.
Hmm... should we really be afraid of common components of our atmosphere? Do you really believe the end is nigh because of a small increase in composition for one very small non-toxic portion of our atmosphere? Granted if we kill all the plants and no longer have a natural system for converting CO2 to sugars... well then we might need to stop burping.
Oh I will, Mr. C Little, I will.
Good, good, while you're doing that, ruminate about what's happening to the energy rising CO2 is trapping and tell us how it's cooling the earth.
No prob, I'm all over it !
Scientists Now 99.999% Sure Humans Are Causing Climate Change
Iol, a little to late for that bullshit.
Only too late if you can explain what happens the energy that rising CO2 traps. PUT UP OR SHUT UP.
Ever hear of a thing called photosynthesis?
Photosynthesis drops off rapidly as wavelengths approach the infrared range. NEXT!
The spectrum
What's your point? Are you trying to say plants only absorb sunlight and don't actually use up CO2 to create sugar/carbs stored in the plants?
I was talking about sunlight, if you're changing the subject, you should say so. If you want to talk CO2 and are offering photosynthesis as the means of evening it out, why isn't the atmospheric concentration going down? I'm afraid either way you're comment doesn't cut it. You're welcome to try again, however.
Temperatures have been decreasing not increasing. Your so called "positive feedback" is non-existent outside of fake hockey stick charts generated by changing the data. Look it up before posting again, so you won't look so foolish.Ok.... the atmosphere is made up of many parts of which CO2 is a very very small part. .04% or 397 ppm to be more specific. By contrast H2O is 2.5% of the atmosphere or 25,000 ppm. H20 is also a so called greenhouse gas because it can absorb IR. Ergo water causes warming.
So here we are with two supposedly evil components of our atmosphere. CO2 that stuff we exhale, yeah the stuff plants use as food to get energy to grow, and H20 that stuff you see all over the place that makes us call this the water planet.
Hmm... should we really be afraid of common components of our atmosphere? Do you really believe the end is nigh because of a small increase in composition for one very small non-toxic portion of our atmosphere? Granted if we kill all the plants and no longer have a natural system for converting CO2 to sugars... well then we might need to stop burping.
It's not the absolute value of CO2 that matters, but the percentage increase, i.e.30-40% depending on whose numbers you use. Any increase heat because of that would also increase the amount of H2O in the atmosphere, furthering increasing the warming trend. That's called a "positive feedback" in the trade. Look it up before posting again, so you won't look so foolish,.
Scientists Now 99.999% Sure Humans Are Causing Climate Change
Iol, a little to late for that bullshit.
Only too late if you can explain what happens the energy that rising CO2 traps. PUT UP OR SHUT UP.
Ever hear of a thing called photosynthesis?
Photosynthesis drops off rapidly as wavelengths approach the infrared range. NEXT!
The spectrum
What's your point? Are you trying to say plants only absorb sunlight and don't actually use up CO2 to create sugar/carbs stored in the plants?
I was talking about sunlight, if you're changing the subject, you should say so. If you want to talk CO2 and are offering photosynthesis as the means of evening it out, why isn't the atmospheric concentration going down? I'm afraid either way you're comment doesn't cut it. You're welcome to try again, however.
The subject was global warming. Not just sunlight. Who says the concentration of CO2 should go down and not just achieve some measure of equilibrium? Why are you being obtuse?
Temperatures have been decreasing not increasing. Your so called "positive feedback" is non-existent outside of fake hockey stick charts generated by changing the data. Look it up before posting again, so you won't look so foolish.Ok.... the atmosphere is made up of many parts of which CO2 is a very very small part. .04% or 397 ppm to be more specific. By contrast H2O is 2.5% of the atmosphere or 25,000 ppm. H20 is also a so called greenhouse gas because it can absorb IR. Ergo water causes warming.
So here we are with two supposedly evil components of our atmosphere. CO2 that stuff we exhale, yeah the stuff plants use as food to get energy to grow, and H20 that stuff you see all over the place that makes us call this the water planet.
Hmm... should we really be afraid of common components of our atmosphere? Do you really believe the end is nigh because of a small increase in composition for one very small non-toxic portion of our atmosphere? Granted if we kill all the plants and no longer have a natural system for converting CO2 to sugars... well then we might need to stop burping.
It's not the absolute value of CO2 that matters, but the percentage increase, i.e.30-40% depending on whose numbers you use. Any increase heat because of that would also increase the amount of H2O in the atmosphere, furthering increasing the warming trend. That's called a "positive feedback" in the trade. Look it up before posting again, so you won't look so foolish,.
You AGW duped partisans love to ruminate like you're so smart by referring to gov subsidized charts, etc. But there are plenty of non-gov-subsidized studies for us honest laymen to know that the more the emphasis is on proving instead of studying a hypothesis (especially when driven by gov grant money) the less likely it is to be accurate.Oh I will, Mr. C Little, I will.
Good, good, while you're doing that, ruminate about what's happening to the energy rising CO2 is trapping and tell us how it's cooling the earth.
You AGW duped partisans love to ruminate like you're so smart by referring to gov subsidized charts, etc. But there are plenty of non-gov-subsidized studies for us honest laymen to know that the more the emphasis is on proving instead of studying a hypothesis (especially when driven by gov grant money) the less likely it is to be accurate.Oh I will, Mr. C Little, I will.
Good, good, while you're doing that, ruminate about what's happening to the energy rising CO2 is trapping and tell us how it's cooling the earth.
I want you AGW partisan alarmists to explain to me how fossil fuel farming contributes to your AGW theory.
I want you AGW partisan alarmists to explain to me how fossil fuel farming contributes to your AGW theory.
First give us an outline as to what fossil fuel farming is.,
You AGW duped partisans love to ruminate like you're so smart by referring to gov subsidized charts, etc. But there are plenty of non-gov-subsidized studies for us honest laymen to know that the more the emphasis is on proving instead of studying a hypothesis (especially when driven by gov grant money) the less likely it is to be accurate.Oh I will, Mr. C Little, I will.
Good, good, while you're doing that, ruminate about what's happening to the energy rising CO2 is trapping and tell us how it's cooling the earth.
Well since CO2 is a very very negligible percentage of the atmosphere, and since it has been proven time and again that all of the models about global warming were 100% wrong, and since I just happen to know that 50% of 100% is a 50% reduction over what would have happened if the CO2 did not initially absorb said IR.... I'm gonna take an wild guess that the amount of change the increase in C02 has caused probably can't be measured with any certainty.Temperatures have been decreasing not increasing. Your so called "positive feedback" is non-existent outside of fake hockey stick charts generated by changing the data. Look it up before posting again, so you won't look so foolish.Ok.... the atmosphere is made up of many parts of which CO2 is a very very small part. .04% or 397 ppm to be more specific. By contrast H2O is 2.5% of the atmosphere or 25,000 ppm. H20 is also a so called greenhouse gas because it can absorb IR. Ergo water causes warming.
So here we are with two supposedly evil components of our atmosphere. CO2 that stuff we exhale, yeah the stuff plants use as food to get energy to grow, and H20 that stuff you see all over the place that makes us call this the water planet.
Hmm... should we really be afraid of common components of our atmosphere? Do you really believe the end is nigh because of a small increase in composition for one very small non-toxic portion of our atmosphere? Granted if we kill all the plants and no longer have a natural system for converting CO2 to sugars... well then we might need to stop burping.
It's not the absolute value of CO2 that matters, but the percentage increase, i.e.30-40% depending on whose numbers you use. Any increase heat because of that would also increase the amount of H2O in the atmosphere, furthering increasing the warming trend. That's called a "positive feedback" in the trade. Look it up before posting again, so you won't look so foolish,.
I don't care about your declaration of what temps are doing. If CO2 is going up, more and more IR radiation will be absorbed and given statistical probabilities 50% will be emitted back towards earth. What do you think the effect of that is?
This study showed that not only did heat escaping into space not decrease it in fact increased.You AGW duped partisans love to ruminate like you're so smart by referring to gov subsidized charts, etc. But there are plenty of non-gov-subsidized studies for us honest laymen to know that the more the emphasis is on proving instead of studying a hypothesis (especially when driven by gov grant money) the less likely it is to be accurate.Oh I will, Mr. C Little, I will.
Good, good, while you're doing that, ruminate about what's happening to the energy rising CO2 is trapping and tell us how it's cooling the earth.
Then you have studies that shows what's happening to the energy trapped by the increase in CO2? PUT UP OR SHUT UP.
CO2 is not a pollutant.You AGW duped partisans love to ruminate like you're so smart by referring to gov subsidized charts, etc. But there are plenty of non-gov-subsidized studies for us honest laymen to know that the more the emphasis is on proving instead of studying a hypothesis (especially when driven by gov grant money) the less likely it is to be accurate.Oh I will, Mr. C Little, I will.
Good, good, while you're doing that, ruminate about what's happening to the energy rising CO2 is trapping and tell us how it's cooling the earth.
Do you like breathing in pollution? I don't. That stuff is bad for you.
Harvesting fossil fuel resources from out of the ground. Like oil and coal. How does that contribute to AGW theory?I want you AGW partisan alarmists to explain to me how fossil fuel farming contributes to your AGW theory.
First give us an outline as to what fossil fuel farming is.,
