T1B

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:07 am

Papa Willie wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:49 amPLEASE explain this graph to me:

Who said climate doesn't naturally change over a 600 million year period? Do you know what the concern, at the most base level, actually is?

Shlomart Ben Yisrael wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:46 am

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:07 am Do you know what the concern, at the most base level, actually is?

Wolftard had to put on a comfy sweater today, so everything is fine.

TAKE THAT, science!

Innocent Bystander wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:00 pm

EAP wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:22 pm Do you have any fuckin clue what an ice age means to humanity?
Or are you a part of the leftist cockroach community with nothing to worry about?

Pause. You claimed corruption. Mgo asked for an example. You can't turn it around on him by demanding he provide the counter-examples first.

I hate phone-posting. I don't know how to use it most efficiently, and my inability to share URLs is an embarassing bit of tech ignorance.

However, both of you should go to the discussion page for

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of scientists who disagree with the scientific consensus on global warming

if you're really interested in what self-appointed gatekeepers on both sides are debating, and why. The list isn't as important as the criteria for inclusion, and why even that isn't enough. I agree with the minority 'Keep' side, btw.

smackaholic wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:21 pm There are a number of things the chicken little brigade wants to ignore.

First and foremost, more CO2 makes everything grow better. It also allows them to be more efficent with water. This is ACTUAL settled science.

The world is greener than it was 50 years ago, by a good bit actually, thanks to man-made CO2 fertilization.

More people are killed by cold than heat. Always have, always will.

Dig up your algore predictions from 20 years ago. How'd they work out?

Temps increases have more or less stalled over the last 20 years. The doomsayers will point to "hottest month in history" data, because this period was .003 degrees warmer than ever before. They will ignore that their predictions were that it would be 2.003 degrees warmer.

Papa Willie wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 5:05 pm

EAP wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:35 pm

smackaholic wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:21 pm There are a number of things the chicken little brigade wants to ignore.

First and foremost, more CO2 makes everything grow better. It also allows them to be more efficent with water. This is ACTUAL settled science.

The world is greener than it was 50 years ago, by a good bit actually, thanks to man-made CO2 fertilization.

More people are killed by cold than heat. Always have, always will.

Dig up your algore predictions from 20 years ago. How'd they work out?

Temps increases have more or less stalled over the last 20 years. The doomsayers will point to "hottest month in history" data, because this period was .003 degrees warmer than ever before. They will ignore that their predictions were that it would be 2.003 degrees warmer.

Keep posting sheer genius like that, and you'll be the chairman of this board quicker than kierland can drop his pants in San Francisco to LEGALLY defecate in front of women children and dogs.

He already does that. He’s just too small for anybody to notice...

Papa Willie wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 4:07 am

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:07 am

Papa Willie wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:49 amPLEASE explain this graph to me:

Who said climate doesn't naturally change over a 600 million year period? Do you know what the concern, at the most base level, actually is?

Then you certainly see where there have been FAR more radical changes in our climate than what we're seeing now - just in 600 million years. You'll also note that CO2 and temperature levels are FAR below the average for that time period as well. Right?

Papa Willie wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:59 pm

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:51 pm

Papa Willie wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 4:07 am

Then you certainly see where there have been FAR more radical changes in our climate than what we're seeing now - just in 600 million years. You'll also note that CO2 and temperature levels are FAR below the average for that time period as well. Right?

So the answer to my question is...no. Got it.

BTW I'm pretty sure we went over all this in detail in one of the prior threads on this subject. Rehashing the same points over and over won't change anyone's mind. Then again, if we stopped doing that, then I guess this board would cease to exist.

I don't know if I've ever even talked with you about this. Why not go back to the beginning?


Don't you see how our temperatures and CO2 levels are WAAAAAAAAY below the average right now? Mgo - we're not important. Our silly little 80 years here just don't make a fuck - certainly not compared to 4 1/2 billion years.

Take a look back into the 70's and look what all of these esteemed scientists were saying back then:
http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/0 ... rmism.html

So were they all wrong then, and now they're all right? Don't be a sheep, dude. You're too smart for that.

EAP wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:20 pm Leftism is a religion.
It's a disease.
It's a bonafide mental disorder.

Innocent Bystander wrote:[
The planet is not just between Ice Ages, it's between pole flips.

BSmack wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:33 pm pole flips.

Dr_Phibes wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:43 pm

Shlomart Ben Yisrael wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:46 am

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:07 am Do you know what the concern, at the most base level, actually is?

Wolftard had to put on a comfy sweater today, so everything is fine.

TAKE THAT, science!

BSmack wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:33 pm

Innocent Bystander wrote:[
The planet is not just between Ice Ages, it's between pole flips.

I think we can handle pole flips.

https://youtu.be/svSbBnuD-bg

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 4:37 am Spray, you understand guitar playing real well. I wouldn't attempt to debate you on the finer points of that. The same holds true here. You (and EAP) need to express that you have even a rudimentary understanding of the issue of climate change in order to seriously engage me. I'll give you a hint. It's about the rate of change. All you're doing so far is bringing up the non-scientific Rush Limbaugh-type talking points. I have zero interest in going there. If you want to get me going then you need to stop boring me.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 4:37 am Spray, you understand guitar playing real well. I wouldn't attempt to debate you on the finer points of that. The same holds true here. You (and EAP) need to express that you have even a rudimentary understanding of the issue of climate change in order to seriously engage me. I'll give you a hint. It's about the rate of change. All you're doing so far is bringing up the non-scientific Rush Limbaugh-type talking points. I have zero interest in going there. If you want to get me going then you need to stop boring me.

Papa Willie wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 3:16 pm In the context of earth’s history, scientists were telling us yesterday that the earth was flat.

Go to Google Images, type in “CO2 levels”, and then tell me how many graphs you see that go back even a million years. Again - why would anybody base an argument off of 1/30,000,000th of available data?

smackaholic wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 3:31 pm MGO,

There was a brief acceleration of temps which ended our fears of the coming ice age, about 40 years ago.

These ice age fears were based on about 40 years of lowering temps.

This spurt in temps has kinda lost steam the last 15 years or so. The temps may still be rising slowly which means that this past july might be the warmest month on record. But the acceleration in rate of change has turned into a deceleration of rate of change.

What we do know is that for about 200 years, it has been warming. Sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly. And right smack in the middle of the 20th century, it actually cooled a bit, when there should have been warming, if our tossing CO2 into the air had a strong relation to temps.

So this warming had a jump on the industrial revolution by at least a few years. I don't have numbers in front of me, but I don't think our effect on atmospheric CO2 levels didn't really get started, until the second half of the 19th century and that we really didn't get serious about shitting CO2 into the air until a few decades into the 20th century, which ironically is about the time we started a 40 year cooling.

smackaholic wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 3:31 pm MGO,

There was a brief acceleration of temps which ended our fears of the coming ice age, about 40 years ago.

These ice age fears were based on about 40 years of lowering temps.

This spurt in temps has kinda lost steam the last 15 years or so. The temps may still be rising slowly which means that this past july might be the warmest month on record. But the acceleration in rate of change has turned into a deceleration of rate of change.

What we do know is that for about 200 years, it has been warming. Sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly. And right smack in the middle of the 20th century, it actually cooled a bit, when there should have been warming, if our tossing CO2 into the air had a strong relation to temps.

So this warming had a jump on the industrial revolution by at least a few years. I don't have numbers in front of me, but I don't think our effect on atmospheric CO2 levels didn't really get started, until the second half of the 19th century and that we really didn't get serious about shitting CO2 into the air until a few decades into the 20th century, which ironically is about the time we started a 40 year cooling.

Kierland wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 4:15 pm Trust the process.
Post a bunch of crap.
Noise and light.
Flood the zone.

Sin,
88ovens