Per my ex: Global warming is a hoax and a money making scam

Sea level, and pretty much everything else.

 

And that would mostly be people who think burning fossil fuels has been the principal cause of increased surface temperature in the last 100y.

 

However, that does not resemble what he said. And if you think maintaining a skeptical attitude towards scaremongering narratives that are being used to transfer a lot of wealth to people who haven't earned it is anti-science, you just admitted you are anti-science.

 

Per YOUR gf? Well if your ex says so then 10,000 scientists are certainly wrong.

Nobody gives a damn what YOU SAY your EX GF says.

So your argument amounts to this: If a liberal says so it must be true!!!

 

You're so funny. Got another one?

• When scientists (specifically, Ralph Keeling’s father) first started measuring atmospheric CO2 consistently in 1958, at the pristine Mauna Loa mountaintop observatory in Hawaii, the CO2 level stood at 316 parts per million (ppm), just a little higher than the pre-industrial level of 280 ppm.
• https://e360.yale.edu/features/how-the-world-passed-a-carbon-threshold-400ppm-and-why-it-matters#:~:text=When scientists (specifically, Ralph Keeling’s father) first started,next big, round number looming in our future.

Carbon dioxide levels hit landmark at 415 ppm, highest in human history


http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ing-is-a-hoax-and-a-money-making-scam.585287/

 

Pretty girl, isn't she? She still has her looks. And I don't look my best because I think I had just come in from shoveling snow.

 

This is not the first thread I've made where I repeated what she told me.

 

You should be working for NASA.

Maybe the third time is a charm ?

 

How little CO2 will end vegetative life on the planet?

 

I see what you did there

 

I've seen no credible evidence that 10,000 scientists (who have actually considered the matter and aren't just parroting the politically correct line) think we need to drastically change our energy production systems to prevent catastrophic warming caused by CO2 emissions.

Huh?? Liberals are almost all on board the CAGW bandwagon. His point was that a liberal who was also on board got off when she saw first-hand where the wagon was really going.

 

Yup, the earth has always been doomed regardless of what we do. We’re just trying to keep the earth habitable as long as possible till we can relocate.

 

He never said that. He said that recycling things like plastics is part of the solution.

Besides, the planet is not in danger. It will survive anything we may do to it. What won't survive without spending trillions of dollars on relocating climate regugees, building new cities further from the coasts, creating new food sources where drought has not struck and ruined farming in the already hot climates, etc., is the human race, along with countless other species. Taking drastic action now will be much, much less costly.

 

My ex is an environment freak, she's a bit closer to the action than we are and she really wants what's best for the environment. She now sees the global warming hoax for what it is and that's a money maker. She's rather see the effort and money spent on not polluting and cleaning things up instead of things that won't make a difference. also, once people see through the scam she's afraid people will think cleaning up pollution is also a scam. At one time she was against the XL pipeline, but then it occurred to her what's more dangerous for the environment, a pipeline that doesn't pollute is a low risk to the environment, or thousands of trains, trucks and ships carrying that same oil? Those trains, trucks and ships all pollute and a crash or leak by anyone of them would be harder to clean up than a pipeline leak. Remember the Exxon Valdez? Once that thing started leaking there was no way to stop it. Once a leak is detected in a pipeline it automatically shuts off.

You're the guy with the IQ 40 points higher than mine, right?

 

There is no Planet B. If we don't take action, hundreds of millions will die, or relocate to inland areas. Much cheaper to do all we can now to prevent the slow-moving apocalypse.

 

What good is painting our streets white if Mexico, India, China, So America, etc, all pollute without any controls? You saw what de Blasio proposed in NYC to fight global warming, haven't you? Take a look at a map of the Earth and that city is just a tiny speck on it, it's hardly noticeable. So the extreme and costly position de Blasio is taking will only cause misery and have ZERO impact on global warming.

 

Yeah, we've heard that for what, 40 years now? Do you see the people who live at sea level like the Hamptons, NYC, etc stressing about being flooded out?

 

Sea levels are rising, is that not true?

 

How so? What are they wrong about, and how do you know that?

 

Nice twist.

 

Sorry, I don't know about de Blasio's proposal and so have no opinion on that. You could have been more specific, or provided a link.

As to other countries spewing out greenhouse gasses, that's what the Paris Accord is specifically designed to deal with.

 

Not yet.

 

Fact. The anti-fossil-fuel scare narrative is anti-science. Full stop.

 

Their "science" is politically motivated trash.

That CO2 is the principal factor governing the earth's surface temperature.

Because I know what Occam's Razor and post hoc fallacies are. I also know enough atmospheric physics to understand why the climate models that predict CO2 emissions will cause catastrophic warming in this century are reliant on absurdly exaggerated and empirically unsupported positive water vapor feedback.

 

Like the Second Coming...?