Thread: It is now official. No global warming of the earth's environment in 15 years.

But the Cats out of the bag.It is no longer about verifiable
accurate data.It's about The Movement.And a Kennedy
Circling the wagon mindset.Global Warming Freaks are not going to
stop with their propaganda.Just yesterday I noticed another corruption
thru their efforts.Carl Sagan's Wikipedia Bio has been slightly
corrupted.It has a sentence suggesting Sagan was worried about
Global Warming.

Originally Posted by Foolardi

But the Cats out of the bag.It is no longer about verifiable
accurate data.It's about The Movement.And a Kennedy
Circling the wagon mindset.Global Warming Freaks are not going to
stop with their propaganda.Just yesterday I noticed another corruption
thru their efforts.Carl Sagan's Wikipedia Bio has been slightly
corrupted.It has a sentence suggesting Sagan was worried about
Global Warming.

You are indeed correct, Foolardi!

The least suggestion that global warming is a natural phenomenon causes the Global Warming Freaks to literally go ballistic.

This movement has become a religion to them. They simply cannot let it go!

Originally Posted by Mac-7

But we don't always have severe droughts, do we?

Or floods.

The fact is that plants respond very positively to increased levels of CO2.

And the reason why is that they developed over millions of years with greater CO2 levels than we have now.

Which is another way of saying that CO2 may be less than ideal rather than more as liberals seem to think.

CO2 has been increasing for 150 years. Where is the positive response in plants been hiding for the last 150 years?

Originally Posted by MannieD

CO2 has been increasing for 150 years. Where is the positive response in plants been hiding for the last 150 years?

It (CO2) hasn't changed much in the past 150 years so we still have a long way to go before it reaches critical levels.

But it is documented that plants grow bigger with more CO2.

Originally Posted by Mac-7

It (CO2) hasn't changed much in the past 150 years so we still have a long way to go before it reaches critical levels.

But it is documented that plants grow bigger with more CO2.

A 40% increase is not a significant change? What would your weight be if it increased 40%?
According to you, what are the critical levels?

Originally Posted by MannieD

A 40% increase is not a significant change? What would your weight be if it increased 40%?
According to you, what are the critical levels?

If you begin from a very low base then 40% sounds big but really isn't.

Nor does everyone agree that CO2 has gone up as much as claimed.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1230184221.htm

To assess whether the airborne fraction is indeed increasing, Wolfgang Knorr of the Department of Earth Sciences at the University of Bristol reanalyzed available atmospheric carbon dioxide and emissions data since 1850 and considers the uncertainties in the data.

In contradiction to some recent studies, he finds that the airborne fraction of carbon dioxide has not increased either during the past 150 years or during the most recent five decades.

Originally Posted by Mac-7

If you begin from a very low base then 40% sounds big but really isn't.

Where you begin is irrelevant when you use percentage. Basic math.

Originally Posted by Mac-7

Nor does everyone agree that CO2 has gone up as much as claimed.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1230184221.htm

You are confusing air borne fraction and total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere; they are not the same!

Originally Posted by MannieD

Where you begin is irrelevant when you use percentage. Basic math.

Where you begin does matter.

If you make a dollar an hour and I give you a 40% raise that is still not very much money.

Originally Posted by Mac-7

I don't have a thesis.

It is your side that wants to turn the world upside-down based on your crazy ideas so if anyone needs to sell a thesis it is you not me.

How is it turning the world upside down to take a market based approach to controlling emissions that's been used successfully for 20 years on acid rain emissions and applying it to CO2?

Originally Posted by Mac-7

That's a lot of nonsense.

There was not a single scientific body that agreed with Galileo at the time when he said that the earth orbited around the sun.

But science is not a show of hands.

There is a right and a wrong answer to every question even if the idiot climate scientists cannot tell us what the answer it is.

If you're sick you go to a doctor. If your car breaks down, you go to a mechanic. If you're in legal trouble you go to a lawyer. If your finances are a mess, you go to an accountant. And if the climate is doing weird things, then you go to a climatologist.

Climate scientists are the people who have spent years of hard work and sleepless nights to earn the privilege of putting PhD after their names. They're the ones who have spent their professional lives trying to understand a really complex and difficult subject. They're the experts. And ignoring the experts just because you don't like what they're saying is foolish. Especially since the only reason you don't like what they're saying is because you've been lied to for years by self interested people who don't give a crap about you or your principles, who have played on your fears by trumping up an imaginary boogeyman.

I don't know about you, but if someone tried to pull that on me, I'd be mad. Really mad.

Originally Posted by Mac-7

Of course you side tries to scare the public with dire predictions of famine, plague, civil unrest and who knows what else if we don't do as the climate freaks demand.

You may be a victim of those scare tactics yourself.

Of course your side tries to scare the public with dire predictions of high gas prices, economic collapse, oppressive government and who knows what else if we don't do as Fox News demands.

You may be a victim of those scare tactics yourself.