Pollution, climate change, or control?

You are a liar. The liberal hole in the ozone layer hysteria is FACT. Liberals hyperventilating about deformed frogs is FACT. Liberals using the spotted owl to destroy the timber industry and liberals pounding iron spikes into trees injuring timber workers is FACT. Go lick your wounds liberal liar.
Im breathing just fine... There may be a few wingnuts chained to trees doing what you speak of but who gives a shit about that... they don't represent the mass majority of environmentally conscious people.


Science isnt about democracy. The fabrication and skewing of temperatures is not science. Its fraud science and a black eye to real science.
I agree, anybody that has falsified scientific reports should be exposed and discredited. Any that publishes a report should be critiqued and challenged... That is the scientific method and how we improve our knowledge. But you can't find a few bad apples and say the whole bunch is ruined. There has been an overwhelming amount of studies and reports that support the threats that climate change brings. Some of the projections may have been off but analysis of causes and historical data has not.


OK, lets assume that you and the "scientists" like algore are correct. What exactly and specifically do you want humanity to do about it?

There's your problem, you think Al is a scientist.
he wasn't even a good politician.
 
you didn't address at all what the possible effects of mans pollution


As soon as there is evidence of climate shift due to reasons other than the location of land, I see no reason to "address" that which has precisely no evidence.

That is not to say the planet doesn't have problems. Overpopulation, overconsumption of fresh water etc. are real. Algore's FRAUD keeps misdiagnosing real problems and sucking money away from fixing them - for example DESALINATION.
 
Aren't we all parroting someone or something?


This is how the sub human parrots "think" = everyone must be a parrot because slade is a parrot....

NOBODY THINKS to ask questions like

WHY does one Earth polar circle have 9 times the ice of the other?

If ocean levels are really rising, why did Algore's FRAUD have to cite an island on the lip of the Pacific Ring of Fire to find one "sinking?"
Btw. Your ice at the poles question doesn't make you look smart, it makes you look confused. North Pole is in open sea. South Pole is on a continent, that's why it has more ice. It doesn't prove anything relevant to this discussion
 
And the fact that the "warmers" are claiming the Marshall Islands are sinking via rising oceans is equally laughable. Hawaii is not sinking, neither are any continental coasts. The only things sinking are right on the lip of the PROF.

This is because THERE IS NO OCEAN RISE

because THERE IS NO ONGOING NET ICE MELT

because PLANET EARTH IS NOT WARMING


The ocean floor is littered with past Hawaii islands




.
plus atlantis.
 
North Pole is in open sea. South Pole is on a continent, that's why it has more ice. It doesn't prove anything relevant to this discussion


LOL!!!!

It isn't "science" unless your beaked birdbrain can parrot it from a certified left wing liar source???

LOL!!!

97% of Earth's ice is on the two land masses closest to an Earth pole.

The one with 90%, Antarctica, cools air that passes over it 50F more than the other. AA also puts 9 times the ice into the oceans, some 46 times the molecular H2O the Mississippi River dumps in the Gulf. One Earth polar circle cools Earth a lot more than the other. The difference is land. And land moves.

but until your beaked birdbrain can parrot that from a left wing source, you will insist it proves "nothing" because you don't understand science and/or anything except parroting easily discredited left wing lies...
 
[QU


nice rant, but you are mixing two things.

Yes, everyone agrees that the climate is changing

No, not everyone agrees that man is causing it, or that man could stop, slow, or reverse it.

The Moon Bats would have a lot more credibility on the science if everybody that was saying it is man made didn't lie so much and invent data.

Everybody from the principle scientists that were exposes in Climategate I and II to the UN Commission to NOAA and NSA under Obama. All we ever get out of the yahoos that bitch about AGW are false data and false science.

It's a scam. that has become a religion for the Moon Bats.

Everything you need to know about climate change is revealled in this chart:


View attachment 124514
Misinformation About Causes

The Indo-European migrations into Europe in the third millennium BC were caused by a prehistoric Mongol invasion, which itself was caused by genetic predatory savagery and not by climate change in North Asia.

Warmalarmism is also motivated by a power struggle led by those who feel they were Born to Rule, and not by any climate data. Al Gore is an HeirHead; that's all you need to know about his politics.


So "water" is causing the Marshall Islands, the Solomon Islands, and one other chain right near New Guinea to sink, but isn't causing anything else on the planet to sink...

Brilliant.

Affirmative Action "new math," or something like that....
aside from affirmative action, what causes global warming, the sun. i don't think you are giving the sun enough credit. any changes we make to the atmosphere will be short lived, relatively speaking.

the netherlands have been dealing with this since way before gore (BG). islands rise and fall, just like small south American governments. it's ok if some islands sink.
 
So "the sun" melted NA while it froze Greenland at the same time?????

LMFAO!!!
 
North Pole is in open sea. South Pole is on a continent, that's why it has more ice. It doesn't prove anything relevant to this discussion


LOL!!!!

It isn't "science" unless your beaked birdbrain can parrot it from a certified left wing liar source???

LOL!!!

97% of Earth's ice is on the two land masses closest to an Earth pole.

The one with 90%, Antarctica, cools air that passes over it 50F more than the other. AA also puts 9 times the ice into the oceans, some 46 times the molecular H2O the Mississippi River dumps in the Gulf. One Earth polar circle cools Earth a lot more than the other. The difference is land. And land moves.

but until your beaked birdbrain can parrot that from a left wing source, you will insist it proves "nothing" because you don't understand science and/or anything except parroting easily discredited left wing lies...
Are you slow? Re Read my answer. North Pole is open sea. South Pole is on a continent. A land mass. Difference being land. It changes the ocean currents and shuts off the flow of warm water from other oceans from coming in.
 
Difference being land.


and land MOVES....


Ocean water = more or less 32F and above - slightly lower the saltier it is

Ice = the center of AA's ice is -200F per the Russians, who were drilling through it more than a decade ago, and their drill bit lubricant kept freezing...
 
Difference being land.


and land MOVES....


Ocean water = more or less 32F and above - slightly lower the saltier it is

Ice = the center of AA's ice is -200F per the Russians, who were drilling through it more than a decade ago, and their drill bit lubricant kept freezing...
So what?!? Nothing you are saying is convincing of anything. Climate change is a natural occurance. Land shifts, volcanos, fires, earthquakes all play a part. Great! There is no argument!!! The discussion is about something completely different. Mans activity and how it effects the speed and impact of the climate cycles. How we make our world a cleaner more healthy place. Etc
 
Climate change is a natural occurance. Land shifts, volcanos, fires, earthquakes all play a part.


What caused NA to thaw while Greenland froze during the past million years, all at the same time?
Your record is broken man. You keep repeating yourself. I get your point. Land moves. You don't seem to be listening to anything I'm saying. I'm not here to talk to a wall
 
You are talking about "climate" "influence" from things that affect the entire planet. NA and Greenland prove that is not the case, ruling out influences that are not continent specific.
 
You are talking about "climate" "influence" from things that affect the entire planet. NA and Greenland prove that is not the case, ruling out influences that are not continent specific.
That doesn't prove anything. You're not very scientifically minded are ya? What did you study in school? What's your profession? Just curious
 

Forum List

Back
Top