Asclepias
Diamond Member
So why isnt anyone thriving in the Sahara now? Its really warm.Actually I said that civilization thrives during warm periods and suffers during cold periods. And it's 100% true.
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 why isnt anyone thriving in the Sahara now? Its really warm.Actually I said that civilization thrives during warm periods and suffers during cold periods. And it's 100% true.
One of my daughters is a scientist you nitwit. She has explained to me that people like you are fucking idiots.And you've obviously been brainwashed by the multi-billion dollar global warming doomsday cult propaganda campaign meant to scare the shit out of people like you who are ignorant of science.
This LIE was already explained to you when you first posted it, and then ran away from the truth.So please explain where the following simple arithmetic is wrong.
3,040,000,000,000 trees each absorbing 48 lbs of C02 is hmmm...
72,960,000,000 tons of CO2 per year! 72.9 Billion tons absorbed.
Now...hmmm ...
how much CO2 in the world...let's see what experts say:
In 2019, about 43.1 billion tons of CO2 from human activities were emitted into the atmosphere.
We are not having a warm period like we did during the Holocene climatic optimum.So why isnt anyone thriving in the Sahara now? Its really warm.
So let's see, when you subtract 43.1 billion tons CO2 emitted /year from 72.96 billion tons absorbed,This LIE was already explained to you when you first posted it, and then ran away from the truth.
You dishonestly left out a critical piece of information, again LYING by the half-truth/whole Lie method. You deliberately left out the FACT that the leaves shed each year decay releasing CO2 and H2O.
Oh so are you saying humans only thrived during the Holocene climatic optimum? You need to make up your mind. You sound confused.We are not having a warm period like the Holocene climatic optimum.
I said nothing of the sort, moron. Obviously, you're the one who is very confused.Oh so are you saying humans only thrived during the Holocene climatic optimum? You need to make up your mind. You sound confused.
The Earth's climate is still below the optimum temperature for the Sahara to thrive again.
And of course you are wrong again, as usual.The Sahara was a desert during the Holocene climatic optimum. You're obviously confused or you just dont know what you are talking about.
You didn't get the point, dumbass. You lack the capacity to commit logic.How many humans were around then? You do realize that humans were not there for a reason right?
Wrong, The Sahara was quite moist in that era.The Sahara was a desert during the Holocene climatic optimum. You're obviously confused or you just dont know what you are talking about.
So Global Moving? What is Al Gore going to do to stop that?It was already explained to you, but you ignored it so you could continue to LIE!
PLATE TECTONICS!
The land mass at the poles were not at the pols 50 million years ago. The plates they sit on have moved, and are still moving, look it up.
We are thinking that you are plant life. You are about as dumb as a turnip.Humans are not plant life you idiot. During those warm periods other forms of life flourished. Your argument that humans cant be causing climate change now because it was caused by different reasons in the past is undereducated speculation.
The Climate Change Gods have spoken and they have declared you to be a Useful Idiot.The Sahara was a desert during the Holocene climatic optimum. You're obviously confused or you just dont know what you are talking about.
Norway tends to bully Denmark.Norwegian? Wouldn't they be Danish considering Greenland belongs to Denmark?
You do realize that humans were not there for a reason right?
Already proved to you with a link, the last time you posted this LIE, that trees are carbon neutral when you add in the decay cycle, so your claim of 72.9 billion tons of CO2 absorbed is still a proven lie because it is only HALF the carbon cycle of trees, in a full cycle CO2 absorbed is ZERO, but you knew that already as you learned when you first posted your LIE!!!!!So let's see, when you subtract 43.1 billion tons CO2 emitted /year from 72.96 billion tons absorbed,
that leaves 29 billion tons to cover the CO2 emitted due to decaying leaves, etc.
Now it is UP to YOU to prove that 29 billion tons of CO2 emitted by decaying leaves is wrong!
AGAIN... If 72.9 billion tons of CO2 is absorbed by 3+ trillion trees and the world emits 43.1 billion tons... WHERE did the other
29 billion tons of absorbed CO2 was not absorbed? In other words maybe 29 billion tons of DECaYING leaves, etc were absorbed!
Prove me wrong!
Ignore useless IDIOTS like you.So Global Moving? What is Al Gore going to do to stop that?