- Banned
- #441
So "Environmental Engineer", not a climate expert. For your edification.. here ya go, sonny:So you "passion"ately believe Anthropomorphic Global Polluting to be a serious problem when it comes to plastic in the oceans.. but greenhouse gases "Wrong"..
Okay, whatever, weirdo.
I am an Environmental Engineer. I have an advanced degree and I worked in the field for 30 years.
I understand the difference between pollution and climate change. I sometimes teach a college class in Environmental Science and we discuss those terms. Sign up for one of my classes sometime and I will educate you on the difference.
Carbon dioxide contributes to air pollution in its role in the greenhouse effect. Carbon dioxide traps radiation at ground level, creating ground-level ozone. This atmospheric layer prevents the earth from cooling at night. One result is a warming of ocean waters. Oceans absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. However, higher water temperatures compromise the oceans' ability to absorb carbon dioxide. Over time, the effects of carbon dioxide are compounded.
Pollution?
Denier response?
- Boyan's plastics✔
- Greta's anthropomorphic CO2✔
Surprising?
- Wave dick✔
- Deny own hypocrisy✔
- Not in the least✔
There is no evidence that man made CO2 has altered the climate.
CO2 is a naturally occurring atmospheric gas. The CO2 load to the atmosphere is overwhelming caused by nature.
Pollution is defined by its effects on the environment.
For instance, I live a few miles from Tampa Bay. All the drainage in my part of the state flows into Tampa Bay. If I go outside an pee in my yard I have introduced a chemical into the environment. However it does no harm to the environment so it is not really a pollutant. On the other hand if the two million people around Tampa would all go out to the water and pee in the Bay then it would definitely would be a pollutant because it would cause toxicity.
There is no credible evidence that the amount of CO2 by man made sources has caused a toxicity or green house effect to the atmosphere so it is not really a pollutant.
The evidence that we do have is at one time the CO2 level in the atmosphere was ten times the level it is are now and the earth was considerably cooler. There has also been times when the the CO2 levels were lower than it is now but the earth was warmer. In fact all the non altered data shows that CO2 levels lags temperature changes.
If there was credible evidence that CO2 produces a significant green house effect then the idiots wouldn't have to fabricate data to prove their point. We would also see some of their prediction come true but we never do.
For instance, ten years ago the Environmental Wackos said we would burning up by now. However, September, October and November of this year has produced some of the coldest temperatures ever recorded in several parts of the world including the US.
This AGW bullshit is nothing but a scam and you are an idiot if you fall for the scam. Shame on you!
Only stupid Moon Bats like you, that are confused about the difference between pollution and Climate Science.
If I were you I would worry a lot more about the solar minimum that we are entering than about somebody's SUV causing the earth to burn up.