strollingbones
Diamond Member
- Sep 19, 2008
- 95,444
- 29,060
trump supporters....stupid anti science people then toss in the fundies who are hoping trump is the new savior and will bring on the end of the world.....
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.
trump supporters....stupid anti science people then toss in the fundies who are hoping trump is the new savior and will bring on the end of the world.....
and where did i say ....it was only man made? i didnt
Arguing against climate change, is as stupid as arguing gravity plays no role in plane crashes.I didn't as for evidence that the warming is "only" man made. I asked for a single piece of evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...feel free to provide a single piece of observed, measured, quantified evidence that supports the claim that man is even a statistically significant contributor to the global climate...you won't find any actual evidence that supports that claim either. We are so far from the boundaries of natural variability that there isn't even a trace of a human fingerprint in the global climate.
Arguing against climate change, is as stupid as arguing gravity plays no role in plane crashes.I didn't as for evidence that the warming is "only" man made. I asked for a single piece of evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...feel free to provide a single piece of observed, measured, quantified evidence that supports the claim that man is even a statistically significant contributor to the global climate...you won't find any actual evidence that supports that claim either. We are so far from the boundaries of natural variability that there isn't even a trace of a human fingerprint in the global climate.
Poisoning a hundred thousand people is a "nothing burger"?Hurricanes and Trump/Russia collusion.
Today's most important story is tomorrow's fish wrapper.
And people quickly tire of the latest nothing-burger scandal.
Poisoning a hundred thousand people is a "nothing burger"?Hurricanes and Trump/Russia collusion.
Today's most important story is tomorrow's fish wrapper.
And people quickly tire of the latest nothing-burger scandal.
Well, I guess to people who want to take away healthcare for over 30 million, you're probably white, er, right.
Poisoning a hundred thousand people
Arguing against climate change, is as stupid as arguing gravity plays no role in plane crashes.I didn't as for evidence that the warming is "only" man made. I asked for a single piece of evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...feel free to provide a single piece of observed, measured, quantified evidence that supports the claim that man is even a statistically significant contributor to the global climate...you won't find any actual evidence that supports that claim either. We are so far from the boundaries of natural variability that there isn't even a trace of a human fingerprint in the global climate.
Home school did you no favors. You're a dumbass! And you're definitely with stupid. However, you're not winning. Idiots don't win.Unless you are one of tens of millions who knows its a hoax s0n. I'm with the stoopids...........and winning btw. Not to mention, anybody who actually thinks there is anything the fuck we can do about it needs a beer and a plan.
Of coarse it does. NOAA has been monitoring sea levels and temperatures for years. We also have scientific instruments that measure the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. And thanks to ice core samples, we can see the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere going back 2000 years.Who is arguing against climate change...the climate is always changing....I am arguing against man's role in the natural process....maybe you can provide a single piece of observed, measured, quantified evidence that supports the man made climate change hypothesis over natural variability...more likely you can't...because no such evidence exists.
Of coarse it does. NOAA has been monitoring sea levels and temperatures for years.
We also have scientific instruments that measure the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. And thanks to ice core samples, we can see the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere going back 2000 years.
You look at that data and no wonder we get hurricane Harvey and Irma.
I didn't say that.You think the rate of sea level rise and temperature of the oceans have been static since the earth formed?
Until you combine it with other evidence.Evidence of change is not evidence of the cause of change.
And that climate has changed dramatically in the last 70 years.And through those proxy studies, we can see that CO2 follows temperature. Increased or decreased atmospheric CO2 is the result of temperature changes, not the cause. When the present ice age began, CO2 levels in the atmosphere were close to 1000ppm.
You have only managed to show evidence that the climate changes...that is not even close to providing evidence as to why.
That makes no sense.No..you look at the news and don't wonder why we get harry and irma...
Global warming doesn't stop at US borders. There have been hurricanes during that period of time.I wonder why there have been no hurricanes hitting the US for over a decade...
Are you calling Irma and Harvey minor storms?I wonder why such importance is placed on a minor storm when there have been much stronger, more destructive storms in the past.
It's a little hard having an intelligent conversation on a complex issue with someone who uses cartoons as proof.Part of the warmer's problem is that you tend to only look at very short periods of time...and cry...look what's happening all the while having no idea what is really going on in the long term.
Here, have a little bit of a longer look. In the graphic below, the Muir and Riggs glaciers can be found in the upper quadrant slightly to the right of center. Your photos from 1941 and 2004 create quite the image of incredible ice loss and if that were all you ever saw, you may go on believing the impression those photos deliberately created...a false impression, but one that you would believe none the less.
Your photos approximate the change from 1948 to 2004...but look on down....see the orange line representing the position of the glacier in 1907...more ice was lost between 1907 and 1948 than has been lost from 1941 to 2004. Then look on down to 1892...as much ice was lost between 1892 and 1907...a period of 15 years as was lost between 1941 and 2004...a period of 60 years. Now look on down the graphic at historical dates and ice lost...
The fact is, that when you look at the actual history of those glaciers, you see that the ice is retreating now at a rate considerably slower than it was back in the 1700's and 1800's and early 1900's when CO2 was in the "safe" zone...and when you look at the history of the ice retreat in that area, the idea that we are causing the ice to retreat now is simply silly. You got your panties in a knot over a couple of photos...which was exactly the intent of whoever provided them to you...
You should be asking yourself why they provided those photos to you and not the graphic below which calls into question the claims based on those photos of yours. If you are honest with yourself, you will realize that you were duped...you were used...you have played the part of useful idiot because you didn't bother to look at the longer picture to compare more time to the short period of time you were concentrating on. Anyone who thinks that this is not natural is the one who has been duped.
The fact is that nothing that is happening in the climate today is even approaching the outermost fringes of natural variability...which is why I can confidently continue to ask you for a single piece of observed, measured, quantified evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability and be sure that you will never be able to provide it...because it simply doesn't exist.
Your belief in man made climate change is a result of smoke and mirrors...belief, and a bought and paid for consensus...and not the first shred of actual observed, measured, quantified evidence.
I didn't say that.
Until you combine it with other evidence.
And that climate has changed dramatically in the last 70 years.
That makes no sense.
Global warming doesn't stop at US borders. There have been hurricanes during that period of time.
“Extratropical cyclones cause much of the high impact weather over the mid-latitudes. With increasing greenhouse gases, enhanced high-latitude warming will lead to weaker cyclone activity. Here we show that between 1979 and 2014, the number of strong cyclones in Northern Hemisphere in summer has decreased at a rate of 4% per decade, with even larger decrease found near northeastern North America. Climate models project a decrease in summer cyclone activity, but the observed decreasing rate is near the fastest projected. Decrease in summer cyclone activity will lead to decrease in cloud cover, giving rise to higher maximum temperature, potentially enhancing the increase in maximum temperature by 0.5 K or more over some regions. We also show that climate models may have biases in simulating the positive relationship between cyclone activity and cloud cover, potentially under-estimating the impacts of cyclone decrease on accentuating the future increase in maximum temperature.”
More tropical cyclones in a cooler climate?
“Recent review papers reported that many high-resolution global climate models consistently projected a reduction of global tropical cyclone (TC) frequency in a future warmer climate, although the mechanism of the reduction is not yet fully understood. Here we present a result of 4K-cooler climate experiment. The global TC frequency significantly increases in the 4K-cooler climate compared to the present climate. This is consistent with a significant decrease in TC frequency in the 4K-warmer climate.”
Are you calling Irma and Harvey minor storms?
It's a little hard having an intelligent conversation on a complex issue with someone who uses cartoons as proof.
Oh grow up.You mean the chemicals Obama left there of r 8 years? LOL!At Least 10 Houston Area Chemical Facilities and Oil and Gas Refineries Have Already Reported Problems With Dozens More Threatened
-------------------------------------
- The Arkema chemical plant in Crosby, Texas is at risk of explosion due to refrigerators keeping them at stable temperatures losing power.
- The floating roof on one of the tanks at Baytown partially sank at the ExxonMobil refinery in Baytown, causing more than 12,000 pounds of benzene and toluene, two carcinogens, and volatile organic compounds to be released.
- There were reports of gas leaking from a transmission pipeline in Ingleside.
- In La Porte, a 14-inch pipeline reportedly spewed anhydrous hydrogen chloride, a toxic gas, for several hours.
- The external floating roof at the Shell Oil Deer Park refinery had material on it, requiring the company to place foam on material to lower emissions.
- The cooling water pump at the Chevron Phillips Chemical Cedar Bayou Plant reported and unexpected issue, despite the company having performed a controlled shutdown of the refinery.
- Benzene and unspeciated volatile organic compounds got on top of an external floating roof and into a dike firewall at a Valero facility.
- At another facility, Chevron Phillips reported it had sent more than 766,000 pounds of chemicals to its flare for burning, releasing dangerous toxins into the air.
- A tank at Kinder Morgan’s Pasadena Terminal has tilted, releasing 279,500 pounds of chemicals into a containment dike. The company announced that a fire retardant foam had been placed over the exposed liquid, and that it was emptying the liquid from the tank and containment dike.
How long before people being poisoned make it into the news again? Remember, Trump dismissed half the EPA board.
Invisible Killer in Katrina Victims' Trailers
Remember when Republicans passed out toxic and carcinogenic trailers after Katrina? Who would do something so awful to unsuspecting disaster victims. Well, I guess we already know.
What can Obama do about Texas state laws? You can't blame right wing Republican filth on Obama. Those days are gone.
You really are ignorant of history and facts..Of coarse it does. NOAA has been monitoring sea levels and temperatures for years. We also have scientific instruments that measure the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. And thanks to ice core samples, we can see the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere going back 2000 years.Who is arguing against climate change...the climate is always changing....I am arguing against man's role in the natural process....maybe you can provide a single piece of observed, measured, quantified evidence that supports the man made climate change hypothesis over natural variability...more likely you can't...because no such evidence exists.
You look at that data and no wonder we get hurricane Harvey and Irma.
Then you have glaciers that have been around for 2000 years and all of a sudden, they disappear within the last 60 years.
Anyone who thinks that is natural, is fucking whack!
Yea, Russia.The debate over toxic filth is just getting started. Like what the GOP did in Flint. Only this is way, way bigger
Yes ... we see Flint in the news everyday and most Americans see it as their most worrisome problem. How could I not see how electrifying this issue will be and turn the electorate towards electing a much more suitable president.
Lying cocksuck. BP used a backflow preventer that they knew was faulty. The person that made that decision should have been imprisoned for life. Instead, he probably got a higher position in the corporate hierarchy.EPA was in full power when that oil well in the gulf blew a few years back , think it was during 'gwb' . I forget details but some oil rig GREASY 'mechanics' [roughnecks i think] stopped the flow of oil into the gulf . Some floating oil was scooped up and the rest sank to the bottom of the gulf . Feck the 'epa' Dean .