seven stats on climate change

[Toddsterpatriot]

The beaches were supposed to be gone decades ago. Florida was supposed to be half the size or less. Lie after lie after lie. Its like the oil crisis. Fifty years ago....We have only a few years of oil left. Experts I tell you. Experts.

If only you had any concept of how modeling works.............

If only you knew shit about oil........

If only you knew shit about oil........

We can't drill our way to lower prices, eh?

Have we???? Did we do it???

Have we????

Obama chuckled when he said it was impossible......was he lying?

You inferred he did. Backtracking much?

He didn't?

 

[RealDave]

I'll take NASA

YES. I'll take NASA,

My eyes are open

NASA called ... they want you to quit speaking for them ...

Lord almighty ... we can all go to NASA's website and read ... do YOU have anything to add ... or is it all just copy/paste for you ... without understanding ... the plain truth is that NASA never claimed CO2 emissions in 2019 was 40 billion tons ... never ... so how many of the other 6 claims you made in the OP are bullshit? ...

You got two good eyes but still don't see ...

It's a shame you have to hide in the Middle School library during lunch hour ... it's sad even the cheerleaders like beating you up ... it's your personality ... if marijuana is lawful where you live, and your parents are agreeable, may I suggest smoking large amounts all the time ... it just got to be an improvement ...

NASA called. They want you to come down & teach them about climatology since you say they are liars.


So what is your education on this? PHD in climatology?

Hey, Davey, one MORE time - Climate Change = WEATHER. Thank you.

Bluzman61 => moron.

 

[bluzman61]

I'll take NASA

YES. I'll take NASA,

My eyes are open

NASA called ... they want you to quit speaking for them ...

Lord almighty ... we can all go to NASA's website and read ... do YOU have anything to add ... or is it all just copy/paste for you ... without understanding ... the plain truth is that NASA never claimed CO2 emissions in 2019 was 40 billion tons ... never ... so how many of the other 6 claims you made in the OP are bullshit? ...

You got two good eyes but still don't see ...

It's a shame you have to hide in the Middle School library during lunch hour ... it's sad even the cheerleaders like beating you up ... it's your personality ... if marijuana is lawful where you live, and your parents are agreeable, may I suggest smoking large amounts all the time ... it just got to be an improvement ...

NASA called. They want you to come down & teach them about climatology since you say they are liars.


So what is your education on this? PHD in climatology?

Hey, Davey, one MORE time - Climate Change = WEATHER. Thank you.

Bluzman61 => moron.

Hey, Dumb Davey, once AGAIN - Climate Change = WEATHER. You're welcome.

 

[SSDD]

Wow, yet another dumbass denier.

As long as you keep your eyes closed, you can claim you've never been shown anything ...

My eyes are open.

They can identify crazy assed morons who think they are climate experts.

how...you clearly don’t read the science...you can’t provide any peer reviewed, published science which supports what you believe...you apparently have no idea what experts are publishing and reject anything that doesn’t conform to your belief.

I read NASA & other reliable sources. So go fuck yourself & your phony posts.

You keep referencing nasa....what you read at nasa isn't anything more than blogs from their public relations department...not peer reviewed, not cited, not containing evidence....just boilerplate from the alarmist community....that isn't science.

NASA has 13 data stations on the Antarctic Peninsula and all 13 of them show a cooling trend over the past 21 years...does your "nasa literature" tell you stuff like that or do they tell you that the antarctic is melting?

And I have seen nothing else from you that could rightly be construed as science and since you are only posting up what you are looking at, and material that you consider to be good, it is more than clear that you don't read the science..since you have never posted any up.

How pitiful that that was the best defense you could come up with...I answer al your questions, and you don't even attempt any sort of rebuttal...quite simply because you can't rebut them...all you can do is drag up some impotent name calling and logical fallacies.

 

[SSDD]

I see the environment. Rising temperatures caused by emissions.

No you don't...you imagine seeing an increase in a meaningless temperature metric...there is no such thing as a global average temperature. If you look in various regions around the world, you don't see "global" anything happening. In some regions you see a bit of warming...in a few more regions, you see some cooling...in most regions, you don't see much of a trend happening either towards warm or cool. The earth hasn't even warmed out of the little ice age yet. You have been hoodwinked into actually believing a bit of statistical sleight of hand and are so heavily invested in it that you can't even bring yourself to admit to the possibility.

I read & listen to the scientists who have spoken up to ward us of this growing problem.

That is a lie...You don't go to scientists...you read and listen to the opinion pieces put out by the public relations departments of government agencies...you can't point to any actual science, or published literature based on empirical evidence which supports those opinions and you reject out of hand any published literature based on empirical evidence which calls those opinions into question.

So no..you don't go to the science...that is a bald faced lie. You reject science every time it is presented to you.

The solution is obvious.

The problem isn't even obvious...the problem isn't even existent...and you believe the solution is obvious...sorry dave...but you have been tricked.

Yet nothing is done because of those who put corporate profits over the future. Fossil fuel industry are fighting action. Dumbass deniers lie.

Look around dave...you are the denier here...you are the one denying actual peer reviewed, published sceince based on empirical evidence in favor of the proclamations of the public relations departments of government agencies...You are the one denying science in favor of pseudoscience., and there is no way around it

How can you deny the problem & the cause?

What problem? You claim that warming partially out of the little ice age is a problem..and that warming completely out of it would be a catastrophe? Tell me dave, what is the ideal temperature for life on planet earth? Do you know? Of course you don't...so how can you claim a temperature problem when you have no idea what the ideal temperature is?

Are you claiming there is no climate change? Are you claiming man made emissions are not the primary cause?

The climate is always changing...at present, the climate is cooler than it has been for most of the past 10,000 years...at present, the earth has not yet warmed completely out of the little ice age...And no...man made emissions have nothing to do with it...and you have proven that you can't even provide a single shred of empirical evidence that says otherwise...

How, How can you be this fucking stupid?

Sorry dave...but you are the one playing the part of the fool here...and the sad thing is that you don't have to..

You & Rainman are two peas in a pod. Ignorant people trying to call the real scientists liars with your mumbo jumbo bullshit.

Let's see some real science, published by real scientists supported by empirical evidence which agrees with the opinion pieces you offer up as evidence to support your claims. You claim to be reading real science by real scientists....lets see it...provide some actual peer reviewed published papers supporting your beliefs...some papers that are supported by actual empirical evidence...

Q.E.D. you are a total fool.

I'll take NASA. You can take your fake crap & shove it up your ass.

" The climate is always changing therefore man can not possibly be at fault" Excuse is just plain dumber than shit.

let’s see a single piece of empirical evidence which supports the man made climate change hypothesis over natural variability. If you are going to claim that man is to blame, such evidence is the bare minimum requirement and you can’t even manage a single piece.

So, since you claim man is not a factor, what is causing the current increase in the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere. Be specific. List each source and the amount of increase in its CO2 emissions complete with empirical data verified by multiple sources.

I have already given you all the peer reviewed published data you need to know the answer to your question...you rejected it out of hand with a bald faced lie that it came from the Koch brothers...another typical response of yours to any actual science that questions your beliefs.

But tell you what...I will walk you through it all again just as soon as you provide a single piece of observed, measured evidence which establishes a coherent relationship between the absorption of infrared radiation by a gas, and warming in the atmosphere.

And once again, we both know that you won't be providing any such evidence because none exists, and the best you will be able to do is yet more impotent name calling and logical fallacy...I look forward to being right.

 

[RealDave]

I see the environment. Rising temperatures caused by emissions.

No you don't...you imagine seeing an increase in a meaningless temperature metric...there is no such thing as a global average temperature. If you look in various regions around the world, you don't see "global" anything happening. In some regions you see a bit of warming...in a few more regions, you see some cooling...in most regions, you don't see much of a trend happening either towards warm or cool. The earth hasn't even warmed out of the little ice age yet. You have been hoodwinked into actually believing a bit of statistical sleight of hand and are so heavily invested in it that you can't even bring yourself to admit to the possibility.

I read & listen to the scientists who have spoken up to ward us of this growing problem.

That is a lie...You don't go to scientists...you read and listen to the opinion pieces put out by the public relations departments of government agencies...you can't point to any actual science, or published literature based on empirical evidence which supports those opinions and you reject out of hand any published literature based on empirical evidence which calls those opinions into question.

So no..you don't go to the science...that is a bald faced lie. You reject science every time it is presented to you.

The solution is obvious.

The problem isn't even obvious...the problem isn't even existent...and you believe the solution is obvious...sorry dave...but you have been tricked.

Yet nothing is done because of those who put corporate profits over the future. Fossil fuel industry are fighting action. Dumbass deniers lie.

Look around dave...you are the denier here...you are the one denying actual peer reviewed, published sceince based on empirical evidence in favor of the proclamations of the public relations departments of government agencies...You are the one denying science in favor of pseudoscience., and there is no way around it

How can you deny the problem & the cause?

What problem? You claim that warming partially out of the little ice age is a problem..and that warming completely out of it would be a catastrophe? Tell me dave, what is the ideal temperature for life on planet earth? Do you know? Of course you don't...so how can you claim a temperature problem when you have no idea what the ideal temperature is?

Are you claiming there is no climate change? Are you claiming man made emissions are not the primary cause?

The climate is always changing...at present, the climate is cooler than it has been for most of the past 10,000 years...at present, the earth has not yet warmed completely out of the little ice age...And no...man made emissions have nothing to do with it...and you have proven that you can't even provide a single shred of empirical evidence that says otherwise...

How, How can you be this fucking stupid?

Sorry dave...but you are the one playing the part of the fool here...and the sad thing is that you don't have to..

You & Rainman are two peas in a pod. Ignorant people trying to call the real scientists liars with your mumbo jumbo bullshit.

Let's see some real science, published by real scientists supported by empirical evidence which agrees with the opinion pieces you offer up as evidence to support your claims. You claim to be reading real science by real scientists....lets see it...provide some actual peer reviewed published papers supporting your beliefs...some papers that are supported by actual empirical evidence...

Q.E.D. you are a total fool.

I'll take NASA. You can take your fake crap & shove it up your ass.

" The climate is always changing therefore man can not possibly be at fault" Excuse is just plain dumber than shit.

let’s see a single piece of empirical evidence which supports the man made climate change hypothesis over natural variability. If you are going to claim that man is to blame, such evidence is the bare minimum requirement and you can’t even manage a single piece.

So, since you claim man is not a factor, what is causing the current increase in the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere. Be specific. List each source and the amount of increase in its CO2 emissions complete with empirical data verified by multiple sources.

I have already given you all the peer reviewed published data you need to know the answer to your question...you rejected it out of hand with a bald faced lie that it came from the Koch brothers...another typical response of yours to any actual science that questions your beliefs.

But tell you what...I will walk you through it all again just as soon as you provide a single piece of observed, measured evidence which establishes a coherent relationship between the absorption of infrared radiation by a gas, and warming in the atmosphere.

And once again, we both know that you won't be providing any such evidence because none exists, and the best you will be able to do is yet more impotent name calling and logical fallacy...I look forward to being right.

I rejected your fake analysis.

 

[RealDave]

Wow, yet another dumbass denier.

As long as you keep your eyes closed, you can claim you've never been shown anything ...

My eyes are open.

They can identify crazy assed morons who think they are climate experts.

how...you clearly don’t read the science...you can’t provide any peer reviewed, published science which supports what you believe...you apparently have no idea what experts are publishing and reject anything that doesn’t conform to your belief.

I read NASA & other reliable sources. So go fuck yourself & your phony posts.

You keep referencing nasa....what you read at nasa isn't anything more than blogs from their public relations department...not peer reviewed, not cited, not containing evidence....just boilerplate from the alarmist community....that isn't science.

NASA has 13 data stations on the Antarctic Peninsula and all 13 of them show a cooling trend over the past 21 years...does your "nasa literature" tell you stuff like that or do they tell you that the antarctic is melting?

And I have seen nothing else from you that could rightly be construed as science and since you are only posting up what you are looking at, and material that you consider to be good, it is more than clear that you don't read the science..since you have never posted any up.

How pitiful that that was the best defense you could come up with...I answer al your questions, and you don't even attempt any sort of rebuttal...quite simply because you can't rebut them...all you can do is drag up some impotent name calling and logical fallacies.

Sorry. NASA overt a dumbass internet pretend scientist.

 

[ReinyDays]

Sorry. NASA overt a dumbass internet pretend scientist.

Still hating on NASA ... why are you picking on poor aeronautical engineers? ...

Where does NASA claim 40 billion tons emissions? ...

 

[flack]

As long as you keep your eyes closed, you can claim you've never been shown anything ...

My eyes are open.

They can identify crazy assed morons who think they are climate experts.

how...you clearly don’t read the science...you can’t provide any peer reviewed, published science which supports what you believe...you apparently have no idea what experts are publishing and reject anything that doesn’t conform to your belief.

I read NASA & other reliable sources. So go fuck yourself & your phony posts.

You keep referencing nasa....what you read at nasa isn't anything more than blogs from their public relations department...not peer reviewed, not cited, not containing evidence....just boilerplate from the alarmist community....that isn't science.

NASA has 13 data stations on the Antarctic Peninsula and all 13 of them show a cooling trend over the past 21 years...does your "nasa literature" tell you stuff like that or do they tell you that the antarctic is melting?

And I have seen nothing else from you that could rightly be construed as science and since you are only posting up what you are looking at, and material that you consider to be good, it is more than clear that you don't read the science..since you have never posted any up.

How pitiful that that was the best defense you could come up with...I answer al your questions, and you don't even attempt any sort of rebuttal...quite simply because you can't rebut them...all you can do is drag up some impotent name calling and logical fallacies.

Sorry. NASA overt a dumbass internet pretend scientist.

Same old Dave!

 

[RealDave]

Sorry. NASA overt a dumbass internet pretend scientist.

Still hating on NASA ... why are you picking on poor aeronautical engineers? ...

Where does NASA claim 40 billion tons emissions? ...

I do not know what NASA says on this.

Are you denying the number?

 

[RealDave]

My eyes are open.

They can identify crazy assed morons who think they are climate experts.

how...you clearly don’t read the science...you can’t provide any peer reviewed, published science which supports what you believe...you apparently have no idea what experts are publishing and reject anything that doesn’t conform to your belief.

I read NASA & other reliable sources. So go fuck yourself & your phony posts.

You keep referencing nasa....what you read at nasa isn't anything more than blogs from their public relations department...not peer reviewed, not cited, not containing evidence....just boilerplate from the alarmist community....that isn't science.

NASA has 13 data stations on the Antarctic Peninsula and all 13 of them show a cooling trend over the past 21 years...does your "nasa literature" tell you stuff like that or do they tell you that the antarctic is melting?

And I have seen nothing else from you that could rightly be construed as science and since you are only posting up what you are looking at, and material that you consider to be good, it is more than clear that you don't read the science..since you have never posted any up.

How pitiful that that was the best defense you could come up with...I answer al your questions, and you don't even attempt any sort of rebuttal...quite simply because you can't rebut them...all you can do is drag up some impotent name calling and logical fallacies.

Sorry. NASA overt a dumbass internet pretend scientist.

Same old Dave!

Still fighting for truth, Justice and the American way.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

As long as you keep your eyes closed, you can claim you've never been shown anything ...

My eyes are open.

They can identify crazy assed morons who think they are climate experts.

The beaches were supposed to be gone decades ago. Florida was supposed to be half the size or less. Lie after lie after lie. Its like the oil crisis. Fifty years ago....We have only a few years of oil left. Experts I tell you. Experts.

If only you had any concept of how modeling works.............

If only you knew shit about oil........

If only you knew shit about oil........

We can't drill our way to lower prices, eh?

Have we???? Did we do it???

Obama chuckled when he said it was impossible......was he lying?

 

[ReinyDays]

Where does NASA claim 40 billion tons emissions? ...

I do not know what NASA says on this.
Are you denying the number?

This is a claim you made in the OP ... and throughout these 670 posts, you've claimed NASA backs your claims ... now you're admitting you don't know what NASA says about this ...

Hell yeah I'm deny that number ... 8th grade math ...

40 billion tons = 40 x 10^12 kg ... mass of the atmosphere = 5.1 x 10^18 kg ... simply dividing gives 7.8 x 10^-6 = 7.8 ppmm ... CO2 is 1.5 times denser than air ... so again we divide to get 5.2 ppmv ... what we actually measure is 2.3 ppmv ... ha ha ha ha ha ha ... you have an issue with the Law of Conservation of Mass ...

Dude ... this is really simple ... shocked you didn't know this or even bother to check ... NASA did, anybody can, why haven't you? ...

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...

 

[ReinyDays]

Next up:

Where does NASA claim 15% loss of Arctic sea ice is "dire"? ... and please include how NASA administratively defines "dire" ... because that's not a science (or engineering) word ... strictly philosophical ...

 

[RealDave]

Where does NASA claim 40 billion tons emissions? ...

I do not know what NASA says on this.
Are you denying the number?

This is a claim you made in the OP ... and throughout these 670 posts, you've claimed NASA backs your claims ... now you're admitting you don't know what NASA says about this ...

Hell yeah I'm deny that number ... 8th grade math ...

40 billion tons = 40 x 10^12 kg ... mass of the atmosphere = 5.1 x 10^18 kg ... simply dividing gives 7.8 x 10^-6 = 7.8 ppmm ... CO2 is 1.5 times denser than air ... so again we divide to get 5.2 ppmv ... what we actually measure is 2.3 ppmv ... ha ha ha ha ha ha ... you have an issue with the Law of Conservation of Mass ...

Dude ... this is really simple ... shocked you didn't know this or even bother to check ... NASA did, anybody can, why haven't you? ...

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...

Look asshole, I posted an article. I never said it was a NASA article. That article said the tonnage. I never said NASA said that this was the amount of CO2 emissions.

I said I believe NASA when NASA claims that climate change is real & than man is primarily responsible.

Quit blaming me because your puny, uninformed, uneducated mind can't keep this straight.

Furthermore, you ignore the amount of CO2 that is naturally removed from the atmosphere.

 

[RealDave]

In this link, there are seven statistics that demonstrate that we are already experiencing effects from AGW.

7 Numbers Show How Dire Climate Change Got This Decade | HuffPost

Too bad our President & his followers are too stupid to acknowledge its existence let alone take action.

Republicans are sacrificing their children's future to bow down to their orange god.

I bet my savings there is no mention of the earths tilt or its wobble or the fact that it goes through a cyclical cycle over and over. How bout volcanism? Sun spots? Solar flares? Shifts in the magnetic field? Pole flips? Etc...

Did you know the Sahara desert used to be tropical?

The stuff it lists are either lies or bogus measurements of global warming, like the number of wild fires in California, which is the result of making it illegal for homeowners to clear brush near their homes, and the cost of hurricanes, which goes up because the value of real estate in FL goes up every year.

Thanks, I hadn't bothered to go to the link...knowing that they are using lies like the California wildfires just shows how dishonest they are...it is their policies that create the out of control nature of those fires........

Because the FEDERALLY managed forests were not raked.

Yep, we heard that one already.

 

[RealDave]

No....the "other side" simply claims that man isn't to blame for climate change.......the sun and other factors change the climate, not man. We are too small and insignificant to do that....

While I agree we are not responsible for it, we are not too small and insignificant to not have an effect at all.

we have local effects.......put a lot of people in one place and they generate smog and pollution....but, freedom and capitalism have helped fix those problems...as our transition from the 1970s pollution to our 2019 cleaner environment shows.....

So it had nothing to do with the Clear Air Act. Wow, you assfucks get dumber every day.

 

[flack]

how...you clearly don’t read the science...you can’t provide any peer reviewed, published science which supports what you believe...you apparently have no idea what experts are publishing and reject anything that doesn’t conform to your belief.

I read NASA & other reliable sources. So go fuck yourself & your phony posts.

You keep referencing nasa....what you read at nasa isn't anything more than blogs from their public relations department...not peer reviewed, not cited, not containing evidence....just boilerplate from the alarmist community....that isn't science.

NASA has 13 data stations on the Antarctic Peninsula and all 13 of them show a cooling trend over the past 21 years...does your "nasa literature" tell you stuff like that or do they tell you that the antarctic is melting?

And I have seen nothing else from you that could rightly be construed as science and since you are only posting up what you are looking at, and material that you consider to be good, it is more than clear that you don't read the science..since you have never posted any up.

How pitiful that that was the best defense you could come up with...I answer al your questions, and you don't even attempt any sort of rebuttal...quite simply because you can't rebut them...all you can do is drag up some impotent name calling and logical fallacies.

Sorry. NASA overt a dumbass internet pretend scientist.

Same old Dave!

Still fighting for truth, Justice and the American way.

Yes I am.

 

[RealDave]

I read NASA & other reliable sources. So go fuck yourself & your phony posts.

You keep referencing nasa....what you read at nasa isn't anything more than blogs from their public relations department...not peer reviewed, not cited, not containing evidence....just boilerplate from the alarmist community....that isn't science.

NASA has 13 data stations on the Antarctic Peninsula and all 13 of them show a cooling trend over the past 21 years...does your "nasa literature" tell you stuff like that or do they tell you that the antarctic is melting?

And I have seen nothing else from you that could rightly be construed as science and since you are only posting up what you are looking at, and material that you consider to be good, it is more than clear that you don't read the science..since you have never posted any up.

How pitiful that that was the best defense you could come up with...I answer al your questions, and you don't even attempt any sort of rebuttal...quite simply because you can't rebut them...all you can do is drag up some impotent name calling and logical fallacies.

Sorry. NASA overt a dumbass internet pretend scientist.

Same old Dave!

Still fighting for truth, Justice and the American way.

Yes I am.

Here I thought you were a Trump supporter.

 

[ReinyDays]

Look asshole, I posted an article. I never said it was a NASA article. That article said the tonnage. I never said NASA said that this was the amount of CO2 emissions.
I said I believe NASA when NASA claims that climate change is real & than man is primarily responsible.
Quit blaming me because your puny, uninformed, uneducated mind can't keep this straight.
Furthermore, you ignore the amount of CO2 that is naturally removed from the atmosphere.

Yes ... you did post that article ... and the article is lying ... why are you posting lies and then claim NASA's got your back ...

Yes ... aeronautical engineers are the right people to ask about climate ... look at the cool rockets they use ...

Yes ... over half human's CO2 emissions just disappear into nature ... nice, what's to worry about? ...