Who wants to live in a polluted wasteland?

According to the "scumbags" at NASA 2015 was the hottest year on record.

NASA, NOAA Analyses Reveal Record-Shattering Global Temperatures

Yes the planet gets warmer, big deal.

Nothing other than a dead planet in less than a 100 years.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

image.png
 
Economies of scale are the answer to making products cheaply. Small towns cannot support operations the size of an automobile plant.

No one builds vehicles in a single city any more. Small towns frequently are suppliers of components.

If a plant requires 5000 people to staff it, how is a "small community" going to provide that amount of labor? You also have to add in the personnel to staff all the grocery stores, gas stations, clothing stores, restaurants, etc. Furthermore, you can't have things like shopping malls unless you have a certain minimum population, and you certainly can't have football stadiums.

A lot of people prefer to live in large cities. Who are you to tell them they can't?
 
So who wants to live in the civilization in the top picture?

Two-Trips.jpg


I don't care if I am called a hippie! I don't want to breathe toxic chemicals!

I thought we were already in the 21st Century

Maybe you missed the millennium.
 
CO2 isn't a pollutant, numskull. Plants need it to survive.

Plants also need sulfur and magnesium, so? What's a little death, amiright?
Sulfur and magnesium don't do jack to you if it's in the ground. Americans consume millions of tons of both substances every year with no ill effect.

Salt can kill you if you consume too much of it, but without a certain minimum amount you will die. The same goes for Sulfur and Magnesium.


You're boneheaded point was that CO2 can't possibly be a bad thing because plants need it. I merely pointed out that magnesium and sulfur are also important to plants and too much of it can kill. Thus, your point is worthless.

My point wasn't that it couldn't possibly be a bad thing. That's your straw man characterization of my argument. My point was that it's not pollution because it's not toxic in anything approaching its current quantity. It would have to be at least 100 times more concentrated before it even starts to become toxic. Anyone who calls CO2 "pollution" is automatically a scumbag who's trying to deceive people.

I guess the epa who knows more than you are a bunch of scumbags. Not like it hasn't been drilled into your head that the epa is some fascist organization preventing you from licking lead based paint (obviously they failed).

So, scientists consider co2 a pollutant and in the grand scheme of things whatever you classify co2 as is irrelevant.


The EPA doesn't control what manufacturers are allowed to put into paint, numskull. The EPA isn't a fascist organization. It's a communist organization. Wiping out capitalism is the goal of most of the people on its staff.

Only bogus scientists consider CO2 to be a pollutant. Pollutants are toxic to the human body. CO2 doesn't qualify in that regard.
 
According to the "scumbags" at NASA 2015 was the hottest year on record.

NASA, NOAA Analyses Reveal Record-Shattering Global Temperatures

Yeah well.. When all those WARMEST RECORD YEARS since 2000 are all within HUNDREDTHS or even 1/10th of a degree of one another.. That doesn't indicate a balls out "warming trend" now does it??

Why would you expect the intervals year over year so far to be larger? Kind of a silly statement.
 
According to the "scumbags" at NASA 2015 was the hottest year on record.

NASA, NOAA Analyses Reveal Record-Shattering Global Temperatures

Yeah well.. When all those WARMEST RECORD YEARS since 2000 are all within HUNDREDTHS or even 1/10th of a degree of one another.. That doesn't indicate a balls out "warming trend" now does it??

Why would you expect the intervals year over year so far to be larger? Kind of a silly statement.

Because the intervals of the "records" don't even come close to the PROJECTED rates of warming that were modeled in the late 80s or early 90s. Even at 1.3degC/century (0.13degC/decade) -- this would not be a crisis.

And the satellite data with much better uniformity and coverage don't show these to be even close to the manufactured "records"..

Certainly no indication of the central THeorry of GW -- which is an ACCELERATED and irreversible warming that would forever destroy the habitable climate of the Earth.. Without evidence of that ACCELERATION -- there is no settled science -- just a busload of failed model predictions.
 
The nuts keep finding a way into this forum and posting up fringe crap.............

What a fucking dummy...:spinner::spinner:.....everybody hates pollution. Its just some people wont give up obsessing on stooped shit until there is 0 pollution, which of course is something only a nut worries about.:up:


These people need to go out and get some real responsibilities in life so they are not sitting around worrying about stoopid shit.

Look at how laughable global warming is on this poll...........its because real people with real responsibilities in life have ALOT more to worry about than theory based upon computer models!!


[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/pew-priorities.jpg.html][/URL]


BTW.....this poll just came out a few days ago and Im still laughing so hard my nut sack hurts!!:2up:
 

Forum List

Back
Top