Originally Posted by Guest

1. We talk about North Atlantic hurricanes because they are the ones that impact us most.

Global warming is GLOBAL....

Originally Posted by Guest

2. No one equated the number of deaths with the ferocity of the storm. In fact, the Galveston storm of 1900 had so many deaths because the hurricane was unexpected, and preparations (evacuation) were not made

.
Actually, you did.

Originally Posted by Guest

3. The records of recorded history are a mere speck in time of the life of the Earth. "Computer Models" are often created to "prove" the pre-conceptions of the "scientists" that create them. It has become very ho-hum to hear "scientific conclusions."

.
Ice core samples from glaciers are not computer models. Those cores have been used to equate levels of C02 and the various temperature cycles.

Originally Posted by Guest

4. Until you have a world dictatorship that can compel every nation to do things your way, there will never be world wide compliance with "clean air standards."

.
Interesting how all of the nations with, now, the EXCEPTION of the United States have agreed to limit their production of greenhouse gasses. Both China and India have aggressive projects underway to limit their gas production and Europe is showing just how easy it is to use solar and wind production to augment their power production and limit fossil fuel combustion.

Originally Posted by Guest

Otherwise you are just spitting into the wind.

Guess who is spitting in the wind....
Yes, climate change made Harvey and Irma worse - CNN in Tampa

.[/QUOTE]

The divine wind. They did not have to worry about rising sea levels as well as the Mongols as far as I know. Nor did the English with the Spanish Armada. Mongol invasions of Japan - Wikipedia

Originally Posted by Guest

wjboyer1


Ice core samples from glaciers are not computer models. Those cores have been used to equate levels of C02 and the various temperature cycles.


Interesting how all of the nations with, now, the EXCEPTION of the United States have agreed to limit their production of greenhouse gasses. Both China and India have aggressive projects underway to limit their gas production and Europe is showing just how easy it is to use solar and wind production to augment their power production and limit fossil fuel combustion.

And it is demonstrated that the CO2 levels fluctuated WITHOUT HUMAN ACTIVITY. Hummmm.

Your faith in China and India's "aggressive projects" to limit their gas production coming to fruition in 30 years or so are touching, but naive. All those nations that agreed to the Paris accord benefited from payments from the United States, while strangling productivity in the United States.

No deal.

Carl in Tampa

.

Originally Posted by Guest

And it is demonstrated that the CO2 levels fluctuated WITHOUT HUMAN ACTIVITY. Hummmm.

That is until the last 50 years......I get my facts from: Climate Change: Climate Resource Center - Graphic: The relentless rise of carbon dioxide

Where do you get your facts?

Originally Posted by Guest

Your faith in China and India's "aggressive projects" to limit their gas production coming to fruition in 30 years or so are touching, but naive. All those nations that agreed to the Paris accord benefited from payments from the United States, while strangling productivity in the United States.

Trump's administration just re-entered the Paris accord. Targets are just that: targets, but at least it is a start
BETTER WORLD CARTOON.png

Sciencewhetherornotyoubelieve.jpg



No deal.

Carl in Tampa

.[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Guest

That is until the last 50 years......I get my facts from: Climate Change: Climate Resource Center - Graphic: The relentless rise of carbon dioxide

Where do you get your facts?



Trump's administration just re-entered the Paris accord. Targets are just that: targets, but at least it is a start
Attachment 71473

Attachment 71474



No deal.

Carl in Tampa

.

[/QUOTE]

OMG...CO2 went from 0.03% to 0.04%

We're ALL going to die!

OMG...CO2 went from 0.03% to 0.04%

We're ALL going to die![/QUOTE]

here, educate yourself: http://400.350.org/#what-this-means

Originally Posted by Guest

[B]

here, educate yourself: http://400.350.org/#what-this-means

It MEANS nothing. CO2 going from 0.03% to 0.04% is NOTHING. CO2 is NOT CAUSING the earth to warm.

These people MAKE MONEY from the CO2 bullsh!t.

They CREATE a problem and then ask for money to "fix" it.

Originally Posted by Guest

It MEANS nothing. CO2 going from 0.03% to 0.04% is NOTHING. CO2 is NOT CAUSING the earth to warm.

These people MAKE MONEY from the CO2 bullsh!t.

They CREATE a problem and then ask for money to "fix" it.

Please inform me of your degree in climatology, atmospheric geology, and understanding of your apparent dismissal of climate change.

Originally Posted by Guest

Please inform me of your degree in climatology, atmospheric geology, and understanding of your apparent dismissal of climate change.

Give me YOUR degree in "climatology, atmospheric geology"

What kind of word is "atmospheric geology"? You just made that up...like the people who CLAIM that CO2 going from 0.03% to 0.04% will destroy the planet.

Have you ever grown anything indoors? Under controlled conditions? They PUMP IN CO2 to make the plants grow FASTER and BIGGER. Plants LOVE CO2. And even they find CO2 going from 0.03% to 0.04% minimal.

"The benefits of carbon dioxide supplementation on plant growth and production within the greenhouse environment have been well understood for many years."

"The logic is straightforward: Plants need atmospheric carbon dioxide to produce food, and by emitting more CO2 into the air, our cars and factories create new sources of plant nutrition that will cause some crops and trees to grow bigger and faster."

"Additionally, there are benefits to raising the CO2 level higher than the global average, up to 1500 ppm. With CO2 maintained at this level, yields can be increased by as much as 30%"

Increased CO2 ISN'T bad...and it's NOT raising the atmospheres temperature...not significantly.

Originally Posted by Guest

Give me YOUR degree in "climatology, atmospheric geology"

What kind of word is "atmospheric geology"? You just made that up...like the people who CLAIM that CO2 going from 0.03% to 0.04% will destroy the planet.

Have you ever grown anything indoors? Under controlled conditions? They PUMP IN CO2 to make the plants grow FASTER and BIGGER. Plants LOVE CO2. And even they find CO2 going from 0.03% to 0.04% minimal.

"The benefits of carbon dioxide supplementation on plant growth and production within the greenhouse environment have been well understood for many years."

"The logic is straightforward: Plants need atmospheric carbon dioxide to produce food, and by emitting more CO2 into the air, our cars and factories create new sources of plant nutrition that will cause some crops and trees to grow bigger and faster."

"Additionally, there are benefits to raising the CO2 level higher than the global average, up to 1500 ppm. With CO2 maintained at this level, yields can be increased by as much as 30%"

Increased CO2 ISN'T bad...and it's NOT raising the atmospheres temperature...not significantly.

you are such a dolt. natural levels are normally around 280ppm, we are now measuring it at over 400ppm. Read the link I sent you about educating yourself. It is designed that a 3rd grader would understand it, so, I am confident that you would be able to handle it...but, perhaps not....

This subject is beyond the pay grade of all involved. Give it the fvck up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Guest

This subject is beyond the pay grade of all involved. Give it the fvck up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Definitely above both of your intelligence grades....

Originally Posted by Guest

you are such a dolt. natural levels are normally around 280ppm, we are now measuring it at over 400ppm. Read the link I sent you about educating yourself. It is designed that a 3rd grader would understand it, so, I am confident that you would be able to handle it...but, perhaps not....

0.028% compared to 0.04% is NOTHING.

a change of 0.01% isn't going to destroy the planet.

Whom is the "dolt"?

Read the propaganda? Why?

Why would I read something dumbed down for a 3rd grader? WHO dumbed it down so people like you could "understand"? Do you always read the "dumbed down" version?

I'm sorry, I just don't believe that so little can do so much. It's literally equivalent to someone peeing in a pool. A few drops added to your cars gas tank. You'll never notice.

CO2 is a WEAK greenhouse gas. STOP believing the propaganda. Man probably IS contributing to global warming...but it's NOT the CO2 that is doing it.

What you are doing is equivalent to seeing a riot with hundreds of thousands of participants...and arresting one old lady who really didn't do much...but was too slow to get away when the police arrived.

0.01% is NOTHING.

Originally Posted by Guest

OMG...CO2 went from 0.03% to 0.04%

We're ALL going to die!

here, educate yourself: 400.350.org

That's a great link. Thanks. Some people though are like those bandits in The Treasure of the Sierra Madre.

"We have no information. In fact, we don't need links. I don't have to show you any stinking links, you god-damned cabron and ching' tu madre!"

Originally Posted by Guest

That's a great link. Thanks. Some people though are like those bandits in The Treasure of the Sierra Madre.

"We have no information. In fact, we don't need links. I don't have to show you any stinking links, you god-damned cabron and ching' tu madre!"

No it's not...it's a propaganda link for "renewable" energy.

They even said THIS on their own website...the very page that was linked to:

"The last time CO2 levels were this high, humans did not exist." It's up at the top right of the page.

"The safe level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is 350 parts per million.

The only way to get there is to immediately transition the global economy away from fossil fuels and into into renewable energy, energy efficiency, and sustainable farming practices.

The last time CO2 levels were this high, humans did not exist. Our dependence on fossil fuels is fundamentally changing the nature of the planet — and it’s time to act."


READ that sentence...VERY carefully. The LAST TIME CO2 levels were THIS HIGH, HUMANS DID NOT EXIST.

They ADMIT that CO2 levels HAVE BEEN this high...BEFORE people even existed.

The climate changes...slowly...cyclically...up and down...warmer and colder.

CO2 is NOT an important greenhouse gas...it's just not. You're barking up the wrong tree.