T1B

:brad:

Papa Willie wrote: ↑Mon Dec 30, 2019 6:12 pm https://www.yahoo.com/news/greta-thunbe ... 53349.html

Oh my. You knew she had problems. She had to blame something for her shitty life...

The really sick part is the board leftists who actually believe the crap!!!

It's a scientific fact that our 5 billion year old planet goes through extreme climate change since it's birth.

Meaning? That we are nothing.
The extreme violent climate change will continue, as our planet steamrolls towards the next ice age, And the mega violence that comes with it, will kill and wipe out entire species.

Yet you stupid leftists think that man has power over such forces?

Buwahahaha!!!!

This is proof of corrupt leftist propaganda within academia, the press and media, as well as the socialist party.

You left wing idiots bought that BS hook line and sinker, just drank the kool aid like good little sheep.

While the facts about real climate change which has been constant since the earth's inception.
Ice age to global warming and back to ice age CONSTANTLY.

Never changing. Extreme violence wiping out life indiscriminately.

The fact that you idiots don't understand these facts, is priceless. And speaks volumes about how weak minded you sheep really are

What are you three brain dead morons babbling on about now?

Here's what we know, regarding our impact on the climate.

We've caused a substantial increase in atmospheric CO2.

Stuff grows better, with less water. This is elementary botany. Satellite photos prove it. We have contributed to "Global Greening".

Regarding temps- we continue to emerge from an ice-age.

How much are we helping?

Don't know.

Is warming a good thing?

Hard to say.

Best evidence is that it will make more land conducive to agriculture or habitation. It may make some areas less nice. Some really smart folks out there seem to think that overall, there will be a moderating effect, which is to say really cold places will warm a fair bit and really hot places may warm, but it will be negligible.

Regarding horrible storms, there has been a lot of talk about an increase, but there hasn't actually been an increase. They point to rising costs of damage without bothering to point out that this is explained by the simple fact that we have spent much of the last century building stuff where storms hit. The cost of a cat 4 hurricane wiling its cahk on Florida's curtains in 2019 in higher than it would have been in 1919 for the simple reason that nothing was there then.

I think I posted before about a geology prof in college (U of Maine) that went to Antarctica during the IGY (look it up if you don't know) as part of a study there. When he got back /I asked him if the ice cap was melting or growing. He said half found it was growing and half found it was shrinking. I guess nothing has changed. One super volcanic eruption can have an effect for sure.

smackaholic wrote: ↑Mon Dec 30, 2019 7:33 pm
Stuff grows better, with less water. This is elementary botany. Satellite photos prove it.

You might want to check with science before you type.

6H20+6C02=C6H12O6
Today
Tomorrow
And next week

Perhaps you misunderstood my last post.

CO2 absorbtion by plants costs them moisture. In a low CO2 environment, they struggle to get enough at the cost of losing a lot of water.

In a higher CO2 environment, they don't have to work so hard and can get by with less water.

Satellite photos prove that arid areas have greened overall and they attribute it to this simple botanical reality.

88 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 12:09 am

Kierland wrote: ↑Mon Dec 30, 2019 10:55 pm 6H20+6C02=C6H12O6
Today
Tomorrow
And next week

I know chemistry, math and reason are not your best areas, but do you want to give that one another try?

6H20 is 12H and 6O
6CO2 is 6C and 12O
C6H12O6 is 6C, 12H and 6O
Where did you magically disappear the other 12O?

I don't think queerland has a best area.

Plants are more than a chemical reaction, even if he could balance an equation.

Keep up with the math and python will never come back around.

88 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 12:09 am

Kierland wrote: ↑Mon Dec 30, 2019 10:55 pm 6H20+6C02=C6H12O6
Today
Tomorrow
And next week

I know chemistry, math and reason are not your best areas, but do you want to give that one another try?

6H20 is 12H and 6O
6CO2 is 6C and 12O
C6H12O6 is 6C, 12H and 6O
Where did you magically disappear the other 12O?

As we has discussed before, yes the equation is more complicated than what I posted. Nice to see you suddenly care about facts you evil nazi fuck.

It’s amazing how (allegedly) “grown up” men can be so jealous of a teenage girl.

Mikey wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 3:28 pm It’s amazing how (allegedly) “grown up” men can be so jealous of a teenage girl.

The article is about her father now claiming he thinks its a bad idea for Greta to start the school strikes and speak to world leaders.

Kierland wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 2:43 pm

88 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 12:09 am

Kierland wrote: ↑Mon Dec 30, 2019 10:55 pm 6H20+6C02=C6H12O6
Today
Tomorrow
And next week

I know chemistry, math and reason are not your best areas, but do you want to give that one another try?

6H20 is 12H and 6O
6CO2 is 6C and 12O
C6H12O6 is 6C, 12H and 6O
Where did you magically disappear the other 12O?

As we has discussed before, yes the equation is more complicated than what I posted. Nice to see you suddenly care about facts you evil nazi fuck.

Do you ever have anything to add to a conversation than incorrectly balanced chemical equations and very unoriginal insults?

Innocent Bystander wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 5:16 pm

Mikey wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 3:28 pm It’s amazing how (allegedly) “grown up” men can be so jealous of a teenage girl.

The article is about her father now claiming he thinks its a bad idea for Greta to start the school strikes and speak to world leaders.

5 years from now, no one will remember her name. And we'll likely be on to the next climate "crisis". It looks as though ocean acidification might be it. And unlike warming, there might actually be something to be concerned about.

Yes. More CO2 doesn’t mean less water, because as you said the equation must balance.

I'll say it again, this time in caps. Maybe it will help, but I doubt it.

THERE IS MORE THAN CHEMISTRY GOING ON HERE.

THERE IS A BIOMECHANICAL PROCESS HAPPENING. PLANTS ABSORB CO2 THROUGH STOMA. STOMA HAVE TO OPEN TO SUCK IN CO2. WHEN THEY DO THIS, THEY LOSE WATER. THE LONGER THEY ARE OPEN, THE MORE WATER THEY LOSE. AS THE CO2 CONCENTRATION IN THE AIR INCREASES, THEY OPEN LESS. THEREFORE THEY USE LESS WATER.

BOTANY 101.

LOOK IT UP ON YOUTUBE.

A “biochemical process” is called organic chemistry and the equation still must balance. So no more c02 does not way less h2o.

Can someone with a better understanding of the photosynthesis process PLEASE attempt to explain to this dumbfukk what I mean.

Kierland wrote:A “biochemical process” is called organic chemistry and the equation still must balance. So no more c02 does not way less h2o.

When you use quotations, you should actually repeat the word you are “quoting”.

I said biomechanical. I did not say biochemical.

Once again, I find it inexplicable that someone this poor at putting thoughts to paper could be a lawyer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Innocent Bystander wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 5:16 pm

Mikey wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 3:28 pm It’s amazing how (allegedly) “grown up” men can be so jealous of a teenage girl.

The article is about her father now claiming he thinks its a bad idea for Greta to start the school strikes and speak to world leaders.

I wasn’t referring to the article. I was referring to a certain group of posters who apparently didn’t get enough attention from their mommies and can’t stand to see this pretty much inconsequential teenager getting any kind of coverage.

Mikey wrote:

Innocent Bystander wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 5:16 pm

Mikey wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 3:28 pm It’s amazing how (allegedly) “grown up” men can be so jealous of a teenage girl.

The article is about her father now claiming he thinks its a bad idea for Greta to start the school strikes and speak to world leaders.

I wasn’t referring to the article. I was referring to a certain group of posters who apparently didn’t get enough attention from their mommies and can’t stand to see this pretty much inconsequential teenager getting any kind of coverage.

I agree that she is inconsequential, but the MSM is treating her as something other.

Btw, my mommy paid me plenty of attention.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What you mean is that a plant uses less water when C02 is raised which isn’t true. Unless YOU want to show an equation that says it does.

smackaholic wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 6:39 pm

Btw, my mommy paid me plenty of attention.

Yeah, I don't think we need to hear about that.

I'm just bored at work and wasting time until I leave

Kierland wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 6:41 pm What you mean is that a plant uses less water when C02 is raised which isn’t true. Unless YOU want to show an equation that says it does.

This article seems to support 'holics position, but it also say's it's not all good news.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconvers ... wise-79427

Rising carbon dioxide is making the world's plants more water-wisePep Canadell, Francis Chiew, Lei Cheng, Lu Zhang, Yingping Wang, CSIROJuly 24, 2017 7.18pm AEST

Its also from Australia, so they were likely drunk at the time it was written.

That and it has no math about water transfer of h2o from plant to air when stoma are open. Why? Because it’s a shit article.
Maybe you can explain how a plant will lose water when there is say 100%RH?

The bigger the plant due to c02 fertilization the more water it uses.

The link to details of their data/study, is in the article.

Without looking at that thoroughly, it's silly to call it bullshit.

Kierland wrote:That and it has no math about water transfer of h2o from plant to air when stoma are open. Why? Because it’s a shit article.
Maybe you can explain how a plant will lose water when there is say 100%RH?

The bigger the plant due to c02 fertilization the more water it uses.

I am not talking about conditions where there is ample water. I believe I used the word arid somewhere.

I am talking about areas prone to drought.

In areas where water is not a limiting factor, plants will indeed grow faster,using more water.

And they will also suck more CO2 out of the air.

This last thing is what smart folks like to refer to as a negative feedback system. Prolly has something to do with the fact that this planet has maintained an environment conducive to life for many millions of years.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This,
There are lots of links which one do you think proves your point?

smackaholic wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:08 pm

Kierland wrote:That and it has no math about water transfer of h2o from plant to air when stoma are open. Why? Because it’s a shit article.
Maybe you can explain how a plant will lose water when there is say 100%RH?

The bigger the plant due to c02 fertilization the more water it uses.

I am not talking about conditions where there is ample water. I believe I used the word arid somewhere.

I am talking about areas prone to drought.

In areas where water is not a limiting factor, plants will indeed grow faster,using more water.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What you are trying to say is that when the RH of the air is less than the RH of the area just “inside” the plant from the stoma, when the stoma is open, the plant will lose less water because the stoma open less (smaller) when the c02 is greater, therefor, since the stoma is not open as wide, there will be less water lost to the atmosphere.
All true, problem is you didn’t say that was only true in arid climates which is why I jumped your shit.

Kierland wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:09 pm This,
There are lots of links which one do you think proves your point?

It was in the very 1st paragraph....
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-00114-5

Also, I'm not trying to prove a point, I'm mearly entertaining myself for another hour or so.

Happy New Year!

It’s funny that you think that is science.
Also funny that posting BS is entertaining to you.

Kierland wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 5:55 pm A “biochemical process” is called organic chemistry and the equation still must balance. So no more c02 does not way less h2o.

You're in way over your head.
And it shows.

Kierland wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:28 pm It’s funny that you think that is science.
Also funny that posting BS is entertaining to you.

What's funny is how you don't have a clue.

You follow a mob mentality, while ignoring scientific fact.

The planet is always in climate change, at all times since it was formed.

Man didn't exist when the planet was going from extreme ice ages to extreme warming, over and over.

These extreme climate changes continue. They've never stopped.
It's violent enough to kill entire species.

Left wing fake news talks about more hurricanes? That's nothing compared to the sheer amount of violence as the planet steamrolls back to yet another ice age.

It's hilarious how duped and manipulated you are.

The real intellectual curiosity comes from understanding the extremes that our planet goes through time and time again.

Your left wing bullshit propaganda only tells you that man is responsible for the end of the world in just a short while.
LMFAO.

More will die as we head back to yet another extreme ice age.

Man has zero control.
An ice age makes major hurricanes look like a tiny fart in your bathtub,

Yet, the left wing propaganda makes no mention of this reality
And you remain stupid like the millions of other low IQ sheep.

Mikey wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 6:37 pm

Innocent Bystander wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 5:16 pm

Mikey wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 3:28 pm It’s amazing how (allegedly) “grown up” men can be so jealous of a teenage girl.

The article is about her father now claiming he thinks its a bad idea for Greta to start the school strikes and speak to world leaders.

I wasn’t referring to the article. I was referring to a certain group of posters who apparently didn’t get enough attention from their mommies and can’t stand to see this pretty much inconsequential teenager getting any kind of coverage.

She's not inconsequential. She's Time's Person of the Year

EAP wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:44 pm

Kierland wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:28 pm It’s funny that you think that is science.
Also funny that posting BS is entertaining to you.

What's funny is how you don't have a clue.

You follow a mob mentality, while ignoring scientific fact.

The planet is always in climate change, at all times since it was formed.

Man didn't exist when the planet was going from extreme ice ages to extreme warming, over and over.

These extreme climate changes continue. They've never stopped.
It's violent enough to kill entire species.

Left wing fake news talks about more hurricanes? That's nothing compared to the sheer amount of violence as the planet steamrolls back to yet another ice age.

It's hilarious how duped and manipulated you are.

The real intellectual curiosity comes from understanding the extremes that our planet goes through time and time again.

Your left wing bullshit propaganda only tells you that man is responsible for the end of the world in just a short while.
LMFAO.

More will die as we head back to yet another extreme ice age.

Man has zero control.
An ice age makes major hurricanes look like a tiny fart in your bathtub,

Yet, the left wing propaganda makes no mention of this reality
And you remain stupid like the millions of other low IQ sheep.

You really are an idiot 88, and your process is crap.

Innocent Bystander wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 10:04 pm

Mikey wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 6:37 pm

Innocent Bystander wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 5:16 pm

The article is about her father now claiming he thinks its a bad idea for Greta to start the school strikes and speak to world leaders.

I wasn’t referring to the article. I was referring to a certain group of posters who apparently didn’t get enough attention from their mommies and can’t stand to see this pretty much inconsequential teenager getting any kind of coverage.

She's not inconsequential. She's Time's Person of the Year

So Time magazine is credible to you?

It's leftist propaganda.

What's "Time's person of the year"

sin,

anyone under 40

Kierland wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 10:09 pm

EAP wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:44 pm

Kierland wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:28 pm It’s funny that you think that is science.
Also funny that posting BS is entertaining to you.

What's funny is how you don't have a clue.

You follow a mob mentality, while ignoring scientific fact.

The planet is always in climate change, at all times since it was formed.

Man didn't exist when the planet was going from extreme ice ages to extreme warming, over and over.

These extreme climate changes continue. They've never stopped.
It's violent enough to kill entire species.

Left wing fake news talks about more hurricanes? That's nothing compared to the sheer amount of violence as the planet steamrolls back to yet another ice age.

It's hilarious how duped and manipulated you are.

The real intellectual curiosity comes from understanding the extremes that our planet goes through time and time again.

Your left wing bullshit propaganda only tells you that man is responsible for the end of the world in just a short while.
LMFAO.

More will die as we head back to yet another extreme ice age.

Man has zero control.
An ice age makes major hurricanes look like a tiny fart in your bathtub,

Yet, the left wing propaganda makes no mention of this reality
And you remain stupid like the millions of other low IQ sheep.

You really are an idiot 88, and your process is crap.

You are the board problem.
You have no original thoughts.
Right or wrong, I'm original.
You're just a spaz who yells racist and nazi a lot.

The State wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 7:02 pm

smackaholic wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 6:39 pm

Btw, my mommy paid me plenty of attention.

Yeah, I don't think we need to hear about that.

Especially since no one smothers like the Jewish mother. You'd just roll your eyes at the goy and sigh, if only I had it so easy.

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:31 pm

Kierland wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:09 pm This,
There are lots of links which one do you think proves your point?

It was in the very 1st paragraph....
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-00114-5

Also, I'm not trying to prove a point, I'm mearly entertaining myself for another hour or so.

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year to you, too, TWIS. Don't get too drunk.