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.
To compliment deniers' good work in confirming the OP. It's the least we can do.Then why post?
It's more a matter of pointing fingers and laughing. Give us a break.So, why waste your time in endless attempts to persuade when you clearly believe it's pointless.
As I just proved, they don't know and don't care...They supposedly have real, hard and fast numbers (y'know "settled science") to prove their case, but have nothing when you ask what comes next...They're all about the political power...Period, full stop.At what rate is temperature change "catastrophic"? Has temperature changed catastrophically before? Prior to Man, or Man's industrialization?
Doesn't prove causality and Hadley has shown that they'll deliberately use faked numbers.
The temperature change you see from the far left to the middle is a typical, natural warming post glacial warming cycle. This diagram is Marocotte and Shakun's work on the Holocene with Hadley and then a model running the A1B scenario tacked on at the right. Thus, that vertical stripe you see at the far right shows the rate at which temperature has been increasing since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.
The former is acceptable. The latter is not.
Conservatives will remain willfully ignorant on the subject, not understanding the difference between climate and weather.
As I've already said, none of us have the power to stop you. If you want to waste your time, have fun.
Again, what is a wasted to you may not be a waste to others. You, like most liberal/progressive think you know it all. Well MMGW is a hoax, and scam, and less, and less people believe in it every day. And that IS a FACT.
If it were so important, the President would have mentioned it out of purely political reasons if for only to appease people. NOT on most people radar screen AT ALL. Totally irrelevant no matter how much the Left pushes the scam.
I suggest you read Public opinion on global warming - Wikipedia. The number of people who accept AGW as valid and believe it a threat that needs to be dealt with is growing, not shrinking. The number of scientists who accept it has grown very close to 100%
Do you know what an interglacial cycle is, Einstein?We will never convince the deniers. Giant world wide conspiracy theories are fun and exciting to think about. Slowly changing climates, where the action happens over years or even decades, just can't compete with that for entertainment value.
Then there is the feeling of belonging these socially handicapped tRumpkins get from high-fiving each other every time they think they've scored some sort of point. For instance the 2 dozen or so threads that were started about the polar vortex disruptions last week.
And finally there's the way these things are presented to them, as if they are some kinda privileged information that only a chosen few get to know. It makes them feel (falsely) superior to everyone else, even if only for a few minutes, and that can be a powerful thing if you suffer from low self esteem like the vast majority of these nut-bars do.
Is your point that you don’t know anything and you can intelligently discuss even less?I want you folks who are proving my point over and over to know i appreciate your help.
Keep up the good work!!
Absolutely nothing to do with this thread.Do you know what an interglacial cycle is, Einstein?We will never convince the deniers. Giant world wide conspiracy theories are fun and exciting to think about. Slowly changing climates, where the action happens over years or even decades, just can't compete with that for entertainment value.
Then there is the feeling of belonging these socially handicapped tRumpkins get from high-fiving each other every time they think they've scored some sort of point. For instance the 2 dozen or so threads that were started about the polar vortex disruptions last week.
And finally there's the way these things are presented to them, as if they are some kinda privileged information that only a chosen few get to know. It makes them feel (falsely) superior to everyone else, even if only for a few minutes, and that can be a powerful thing if you suffer from low self esteem like the vast majority of these nut-bars do.
But it does. Interglacial and glacial cycles are literally climate changes. So do you know what an interglacial cycle is?Absolutely nothing to do with this thread.Do you know what an interglacial cycle is, Einstein?We will never convince the deniers. Giant world wide conspiracy theories are fun and exciting to think about. Slowly changing climates, where the action happens over years or even decades, just can't compete with that for entertainment value.
Then there is the feeling of belonging these socially handicapped tRumpkins get from high-fiving each other every time they think they've scored some sort of point. For instance the 2 dozen or so threads that were started about the polar vortex disruptions last week.
And finally there's the way these things are presented to them, as if they are some kinda privileged information that only a chosen few get to know. It makes them feel (falsely) superior to everyone else, even if only for a few minutes, and that can be a powerful thing if you suffer from low self esteem like the vast majority of these nut-bars do.
As I just proved, they don't know and don't care...They supposedly have real, hard and fast numbers (y'know "settled science") to prove their case, but have nothing when you ask what comes next...They're all about the political power...Period, full stop.
The sheer ignorance of this statement -both economic and political- is breathtaking.What political power does anyone gain by initiating some form of tax to coerce people away from fossil fuels.
You exhale these alleged GHGs, Dudley....I'd say "think about that" but it would be making a leap I don't believe can be made.What economic control does anyone gain by moving to reduce GHG emissions?
I'm also against that, and he's YOUR president too....Any more foolhardy strawman arguments you want to trot out?The income redistribution advocated by some liberals would not send money to people that own large companies. That's YOUR aim and that of YOUR president.
What political power does anyone gain by initiating some form of tax to coerce people away from fossil fuels.
What economic control does anyone gain by moving to reduce GHG emissions?
The income redistribution advocated by some liberals would not send money to people that own large companies. That's YOUR aim and that of YOUR president.
