climatelol wrote:
yeah, global warming isnt aging too well...
seems like the target or name is continually changing to fit the agenda. not a good look
If you work for an oil company, I know what you are trying to do. If you are like Brothers Johnson, living off of oil and natural gas dividend checks from their trust fund, I know what you are trying to do. How do you make your money?
Like most Americans you have no idea what is going on in the rest of the world......
the government is going to fix the weather
allman brothers wrote:
the government is going to fix the weather
back in he 90's hear is what I predicted:
1. full denial: it's not happening
2. plausible deniability: It's happening but not because of us
3. it's pointless now: it's happening but now it's too late so why bother
4. shifting blame: why didn't you tell us sooner!!!!!! All that fake news and then you just happen to right on ONE thing!! I blame libs!
we are halfway between 2 and 3 right now.
You sir seem to be ahead of the game and already on step 3. Congrats!
allman brothers wrote:
the government is going to fix the weather
i absolutely guarantee you that 30 years ago this guy was saying that the climate wasn't changing.
Where is the cold hard evidence wrote:
Paying attention` wrote:
Global warming is indeed a part of climate change.
The climate has obviously been changing due to human intervention and this has now become a very serious crises.
My problem with climate change is that we have no baseline to compare it to where climate was not changing. You can say warming has accelerated recently, whatever that means, but you can't say what the climate would be like without humans at the same time under the same conditions (minus humans).
My other problem is that the atmosphere has mass in a finite space. If there is more co2 in the air than ever, it means one of two things: 1) co2 is replacing some other gas and you're claiming co2 is more "greenhouse gassier" than whatever greenhouse gas it is replacing, for no apparent reason, or 2) if you aren't of the mind that co2 is replacing some other gas, then by releasing more co2, we are putting more mass in the same finite space, effectively compressing the atmosphere. We should not be talking about the greenhouse gas effect raising temperature; we should be battling atmospheric compression. That probably doesn't sell as many carbon credits though.
Good DOG!, could you advertise your own ignorance any more blatantly?
Tell me, what exactly is confining the atmosphere into this "finite space"? You have some big glass shield up there surrounding the Earth and making sure that the volume taken up by N2, O2, CO2, H2O, etc. does not change?
TRY NOT TO TALK ABOUT "(YOUR) PROBLEM WITH CLIMATE CHANGE" WHEN YOU ARE SO UNBELIEVABLY IGNORANT!!!
WTF^n wrote:
Good DOG!, could you advertise your own ignorance any more blatantly?
Tell me, what exactly is confining the atmosphere into this "finite space"? You have some big glass shield up there surrounding the Earth and making sure that the volume taken up by N2, O2, CO2, H2O, etc. does not change?
TRY NOT TO TALK ABOUT "(YOUR) PROBLEM WITH CLIMATE CHANGE" WHEN YOU ARE SO UNBELIEVABLY IGNORANT!!!
I actually addressed that if you knew how to read. Of course its not finite. That was tongue in cheek. So you are of the party that co2 is more "greenhouse gassier" than whatever gas it is displacing. Please tell me what gas it is replacing and why co2 contributes more toward "climate change" than any other greenhouse gas.
Can we simply switch to another air pollutant that is less "greenhouse gassier" than co2, effectively displacing the co2, and reversing "climate change"?
Discus.
Where is the cold hard evidenc wrote:
WTF^n wrote:
Good DOG!, could you advertise your own ignorance any more blatantly?
Tell me, what exactly is confining the atmosphere into this "finite space"? You have some big glass shield up there surrounding the Earth and making sure that the volume taken up by N2, O2, CO2, H2O, etc. does not change?
TRY NOT TO TALK ABOUT "(YOUR) PROBLEM WITH CLIMATE CHANGE" WHEN YOU ARE SO UNBELIEVABLY IGNORANT!!!
I actually addressed that if you knew how to read. Of course its not finite. That was tongue in cheek. So you are of the party that co2 is more "greenhouse gassier" than whatever gas it is displacing. Please tell me what gas it is replacing and why co2 contributes more toward "climate change" than any other greenhouse gas.
Can we simply switch to another air pollutant that is less "greenhouse gassier" than co2, effectively displacing the co2, and reversing "climate change"?
Discus.
Holy crap, you just doubled down on stupid!
If the volume of the atmosphere is not finite, then there is no need for any displacement. No gas would have to be replaced.
Further, there is absolutely no logical reason to think that the climate impacts of CO2 depend on "Co2 contribut(ing) more toward 'climate change' than any other greenhouse gas."
Please tell me you are trolling. You can't possibly be that stupid - can you?
ohmyohmy wrote:
Like most Americans you have no idea what is going on in the rest of the world......
https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/january-2019-was-australias-hottest-month-ever-recorded/news-story/fb87ee6a9840fc2d403776712a58905e
hottest since when? do you have the temp data from January 800BC?
WTF^n wrote:
Holy crap, you just doubled down on stupid!
If the volume of the atmosphere is not finite, then there is no need for any displacement. No gas would have to be replaced.
Further, there is absolutely no logical reason to think that the climate impacts of CO2 depend on "Co2 contribut(ing) more toward 'climate change' than any other greenhouse gas."
Please tell me you are trolling. You can't possibly be that stupid - can you?
I am not sure why you think that the earth's atmosphere (attached to a fixed object which impact gravity and bound by space) is not a finite space. There is no element in the atmosphere that has no mass. But you're saying that we can pack as much mass as we want in it without compression of the atmosphere. That just is factually inaccurate.
If the atmosphere is infinite and we are off-gassing some gas in to space in order to replace it with co2, what exactly are we off-gassing? This shouldn't really be a hard answer since you've clearly researched this and use a lot of capital letters.
It’s all just one big brain washing exercise. If you fall for this or the plastic nonsense you’re less of a human.
Where is the cold hard evidence wrote:
WTF^n wrote:
Holy crap, you just doubled down on stupid!
If the volume of the atmosphere is not finite, then there is no need for any displacement. No gas would have to be replaced.
Further, there is absolutely no logical reason to think that the climate impacts of CO2 depend on "Co2 contribut(ing) more toward 'climate change' than any other greenhouse gas."
Please tell me you are trolling. You can't possibly be that stupid - can you?
I am not sure why you think that the earth's atmosphere (attached to a fixed object which impact gravity and bound by space) is not a finite space. There is no element in the atmosphere that has no mass. But you're saying that we can pack as much mass as we want in it without compression of the atmosphere. That just is factually inaccurate.
If the atmosphere is infinite and we are off-gassing some gas in to space in order to replace it with co2, what exactly are we off-gassing? This shouldn't really be a hard answer since you've clearly researched this and use a lot of capital letters.
OK, so I will have to go to the IQ scale. Below, for each of your comments, I attach the maximum possible IQ that one could possibly have while believing in the validity and relevance of the comment.
"I am not sure why you think that the earth's atmosphere (attached to a fixed object which impact gravity and bound by space) is not a finite space." Max IQ = 45
Nobody ever said anything about the Earth's atmosphere being "not a finite space". Also, extra credit for the meaningless parenthetical remark.
"There is no element in the atmosphere that has no mass." Max IQ = 60
Really? Wow, whoda thunk it?
"But you're saying that we can pack as much mass as we want in it without compression of the atmosphere." Max IQ = 45
Nope, never said anything of the kind. Do you understand the English language?
"That just is factually inaccurate." Max IQ = 60
Nothing that I have said or implied is "factually inaccurate."
"If the atmosphere is infinite and we are off-gassing some gas in to space in order to replace it with co2, what exactly are we off-gassing?" Max IQ = 35
The atmosphere is not infinite. "Off-gassing" does not mean what you think it means. The fact that the atmosphere does not occupy a fixed volume renders your mental construct here absurd. Additional CO2 actually does correlate with reduced O2 simply because the added CO2 is formed by carbon from fossil fuels combining with O2 from the atmosphere - but that has nothing to do with displacement or "off-gassing."
"This shouldn't really be a hard answer since you've clearly researched this and use a lot of capital letters." Max IQ = 10
My previous post contained a grand total of zero extraneous capital letters.
I am done with you. You are either a troll (in which case, good job, 7/10) or stupid beyond belief. In either case, you are not worth any additional time.
You are dismissed.
ohmyohmy wrote:
Like most Americans you have no idea what is going on in the rest of the world......
https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/january-2019-was-australias-hottest-month-ever-recorded/news-story/fb87ee6a9840fc2d403776712a58905e
This is my favorite quote:
"The warming trend which has seen Australian temperatures increase by more than 1 degree in the last 100 years also contributed to the unusually warm conditions."
He calls a 1 degree increase over 100 years a trend... you people have lost your minds.
To everyone on this thread:
"Global warming," has cooled off the past two winters? That does not account for all the activity since the 1960s. Pay attention bub and keep recycling. Not everything is about you or me.
WTF^n wrote:
Max IQ = 35
Additional CO2 actually does correlate with reduced O2 simply because the added CO2 is formed by carbon from fossil fuels combining with O2 from the atmosphere.
You should totes use this for your next anti-fossil fuel hysteria once your"climate change" thing doesn't work out. Stop burning fossil fuels we'll run out of oxygen.
Kickapoo wrote:
To everyone on this thread:
"Global warming," has cooled off the past two winters? That does not account for all the activity since the 1960s. Pay attention bub and keep recycling. Not everything is about you or me.
90% of feel good recycling material ends up in a big pile overseas or the ocean. China has stopped buying it from us because it's such a low quality raw material. The only reason Americans don't realize this is because it's out of sight and out of mind and it "feels good." When curb-side recycling can't sell the material because the price is too low they just take it directly to the dump. Yay Earth.
Kickapoo wrote:
To everyone on this thread:
"Global warming," has cooled off the past two winters? That does not account for all the activity since the 1960s. Pay attention bub and keep recycling. Not everything is about you or me.
Please retype your thoughts. Please type a paragraph which makes sense.
well actually wrote:
Faith Not Required wrote:
Every really intelligent and educated person who has looked into it thoroughly enough has confirmed that climate change is happening.
Either something is brainwashing them or they are correct.
These are experts who understand it in a way I do not. They are very smart people, much smarter than me, who have dedicated a great deal of time to studying it.
I am going to stick to my own limited field of expertise and assume they are right for now.
What was the motive for scientist in the 70s to say the earth was cooling?
Uh, that didn’t actually happen. You’re just repeating things you heard climate change deniers say.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1Just an observation wrote:
ohmyohmy wrote:
Like most Americans you have no idea what is going on in the rest of the world......
https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/january-2019-was-australias-hottest-month-ever-recorded/news-story/fb87ee6a9840fc2d403776712a58905eThis is my favorite quote:
"The warming trend which has seen Australian temperatures increase by more than 1 degree in the last 100 years also contributed to the unusually warm conditions."
He calls a 1 degree increase over 100 years a trend... you people have lost your minds.
If you don't think a 1 degree Celcius increase is significant then I suggest you start doing some research or sit out the next election. What a shame that your vote counts just as much as people who actually bother to research their opinions.
What would you consider significant? 10 degrees C? You are aware of how much of a catastrophe that would be, right?
Honestly, I want to hear your answer. How much of a rise would it have to be for you to consider it a trend that is a viable concern and worth acting on?
https://realclimatescience.com/climate-scientists-rewriting-the-past/Actually, Actually wrote:
well actually wrote:
What was the motive for scientist in the 70s to say the earth was cooling?
Uh, that didn’t actually happen. You’re just repeating things you heard climate change deniers say.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
Great interview with Steve Cram - says Jakob has no chance of WRs this year
I’m a D2 female runner. Our coach explicitly told us not to visit LetsRun forums.
Guys between age of 45 and 55 do you think about death or does it seem far away
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
adizero Road to Records with Yomif Kejelcha, Agnes Ngetich, Hobbs Kessler & many more is Saturday