The latest instance of "proof" of global warming.

Is global warming occurring? Yes

Are human activities part of the reason for global warming? Probably

Is it worth spending trillions of dollars to reduce CO2 emissions in developed countries when China and India are going to emit lots more CO2 than we will either way? Probably not

Are people who write misleading articles about global warming racebaiting fascist thugs? Come on. They're just trying to sell advertising, like Fox News and MSNBC. Originally Posted by Tiny

You're liberal filth...

Well to answer Yssup Rider QUOTE: I’m beginning to think you’ve either got mental deficiencies or something else is imparting your ability to identify your environment.

While I do admit that your posts read like gibberish, I wonder if you heard your leader, the Orange Sphincter, tell you not to believe anything you hear or see.again
This is From the Alex Jones thread

So typical response , when a snowflake has NOTHING . ( like I said ) now some of us work and don't have time post to every stupid comment.

Are you making a scientific statement that the flood in New Jersey was caused by global warming? Originally Posted by kehaar

Did you notice the question ark?

Would have fixed it ,but suddenly this site could not be reached.

Is global warming occurring? Yes

Are human activities part of the reason for global warming? Probably

Is it worth spending trillions of dollars to reduce CO2 emissions in developed countries when China and India are going to emit lots more CO2 than we will either way? Probably not

Are people who write misleading articles about global warming racebaiting fascist thugs? Come on. They're just trying to sell advertising, like Fox News and MSNBC. Originally Posted by Tiny

Most people like yourself really aren't sure if Global Warming is the result of man's use of Coal. In order for any surface to be warmed there must be some sort of Heat Transfer. There is only three primary modes of Heat Transfer. Conduction, Convection and Thermal Radiation. Now in order to thoroughly understand Global Warming and how it relates to Mankind's use of Fossil fuels you must ask yourself which mode of heat transfer does the byproduct of Coal have on the Earth in order to significantly warm it's surface. Now if people understand the modes of Heat Transfer and the science behind them and the chemical reactions in the processes of burning coal they might begin to understand that the processes of heat transfer through Convection and conduction in the refinement of Fossil Fuels are not valid modes of Heat Transfer that can warm the Earths Surface. The reason being is the void of space between the Earth and Sun. The Sun is responsible for warming the Earths surface. Energy is transmitted from the hot Plasma of the sun to Earth by means of the third mode of Heat Transfer which is Thermal Radiation. Man's use of Fossil Fuels results in pollution. Pollutants are not responsible for warming the earth. they add toxicity to it.

Jim

If someone in Tinseltown could just get Woozy O'Donnell to clam up for a month or so, CO2 emissions would be cut in half overnight....global warming issues resolved. Hooray for Hollywood.

The Sun is responsible for warming the Earths surface. Energy is transmitted from the hot Plasma of the sun to Earth by means of the third mode of Heat Transfer which is Thermal Radiation. Man's use of Fossil Fuels results in pollution. Pollutants are not responsible for warming the earth. they add toxicity to it.

Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

exactly. several of us has made this point before, apparently it hasn't sunk in. well let's provide a link shall we? and some pretty graphs!


http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...mo/solact.html


pay particular attention to the time span here ...






while emissions are a matter of pollution and should be dealt with as such, even now, the largest driver of temperature are the solar cycles. a new cycle is beginning and it will include a low cycle of solar activity .. bringing a cooling effect. followed of course by another high cycle.


the fact is, the so-called "hockey stick graph" of the doomsayers advocating "global warming" didn't happen .. so now they call it "climate change" .. an ambiguous term so vague it could mean that it might rain in the Sahara and be dry during the Thailand monsoon season at the same time and be nothing more that what it is .. a statistical fluke.

at the end of the day, even if we eliminated all forms of toxic pollutants into the atmosphere .. there ain't shit we can do about the solar cycles and their affect on temperature.

Most people like yourself really aren't sure if Global Warming is the result of man's use of Coal. In order for any surface to be warmed there must be some sort of Heat Transfer. There is only three primary modes of Heat Transfer. Conduction, Convection and Thermal Radiation. Now in order to thoroughly understand Global Warming and how it relates to Mankind's use of Fossil fuels you must ask yourself which mode of heat transfer does the byproduct of Coal have on the Earth in order to significantly warm it's surface. Now if people understand the modes of Heat Transfer and the science behind them and the chemical reactions in the processes of burning coal they might begin to understand that the processes of heat transfer through Convection and conduction in the refinement of Fossil Fuels are not valid modes of Heat Transfer that can warm the Earths Surface. The reason being is the void of space between the Earth and Sun. The Sun is responsible for warming the Earths surface. Energy is transmitted from the hot Plasma of the sun to Earth by means of the third mode of Heat Transfer which is Thermal Radiation. Man's use of Fossil Fuels results in pollution. Pollutants are not responsible for warming the earth. they add toxicity to it.

Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

while the sun is part of the equation. it doesn't do it by itself. it has more to do with how much cloud cover Earth has to bounce radiation back into space and that leads to uneven environmental effects in a number of areas on around earth.

btw, 10,000 - 12,000 years ago, the mid-east was once wet!!!!

I must also point out that volcanoes are the major driver of climate change. we've had quite a few volcanic eruptions the last few years.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...debate/565769/

this is the controversial dino extinction debate. the more I read about it, the Dekka flats volcanic eruption makes more sense that a meteor strike. I do think that both events played a part at different times.

the kind of anthropologic pollution the libs like to talk about has to be on the order of what the volcanoes produce. I'm talking about massive billions ton of shit shot thru the atmosphere. Human industry can't even come close to those levels of pollution produced by a volcano.

Most people like yourself really aren't sure if Global Warming is the result of man's use of Coal. In order for any surface to be warmed there must be some sort of Heat Transfer. There is only three primary modes of Heat Transfer. Conduction, Convection and Thermal Radiation. Now in order to thoroughly understand Global Warming and how it relates to Mankind's use of Fossil fuels you must ask yourself which mode of heat transfer does the byproduct of Coal have on the Earth in order to significantly warm it's surface. Now if people understand the modes of Heat Transfer and the science behind them and the chemical reactions in the processes of burning coal they might begin to understand that the processes of heat transfer through Convection and conduction in the refinement of Fossil Fuels are not valid modes of Heat Transfer that can warm the Earths Surface. The reason being is the void of space between the Earth and Sun. The Sun is responsible for warming the Earths surface. Energy is transmitted from the hot Plasma of the sun to Earth by means of the third mode of Heat Transfer which is Thermal Radiation. Man's use of Fossil Fuels results in pollution. Pollutants are not responsible for warming the earth. they add toxicity to it.

Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Jim, I don't think it's anywhere near that simple. I don't understand global warming, despite having spent at least a couple of days reading about it. In addition to heat transfer, there are considerations related to other transport phenomena, specifically mass transfer (e.g. melting of ice caps) and fluid dynamics (circulation in the atmosphere). I should be reasonably well equipped as a layman to understand this, having taken classes in theory of transport phenomena and computational methods of solving differential equations used to describe transport phenomena. But I really don't have a clue. Most people who study the subject for a living believe the evidence is very strong that it's happening.

Not sure what you're getting at when you talk about chemical reactions that occur and pollutants that are created when you burn coal, but if you mean particulate matter and sulphur dioxide produced by burning coal may have a cooling effect that partially offsets the effect of the carbon dioxide, you may be right. It sounds reasonable anyway.

Jim, I don't think it's anywhere near that simple. I don't understand global warming, despite having spent at least a couple of days reading about it. In addition to heat transfer, there are considerations related to other transport phenomena, specifically mass transfer (e.g. melting of ice caps) and fluid dynamics (circulation in the atmosphere). I should be reasonably well equipped as a layman to understand this, having taken classes in theory of transport phenomena and computational methods of solving differential equations used to describe transport phenomena. But I really don't have a clue. Most people who study the subject for a living believe the evidence is very strong that it's happening.

Not sure what you're getting at when you talk about chemical reactions that occur and pollutants that are created when you burn coal, but if you mean particulate matter and sulphur dioxide may have a cooling effect that partially offsets the effect of the carbon dioxide, I suspect you could be right, but don't know enough to say. Originally Posted by Tiny

let's make it simple. you like graphs don't you? well here's a simple graph. don't overthink this tiny ..





let me ask you a simple question .. one that befuddles climatards ,,,


"Should we eliminate all CO2 in the atmosphere?"


YES or NO?


i think you are smart enough to answer correctly .. and explain why.

"Should we eliminate all CO2 in the atmosphere?"


YES or NO?


i think you are smart enough to answer correctly .. and explain why. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Hell yeah, let's get rid of all the CO2 in the atmosphere. We need to put an end to photosynthesis. It's a communist plot, like fluoride in drinking water.

Hell yeah, let's get rid of all the CO2 in the atmosphere. We need to put an end to photosynthesis. It's a communist plot, like fluoride in drinking water. Originally Posted by Tiny

you pass the science quiz. but i knew you would. what else do you have to offer to modern science?

ask that to ten climate change illiterates and you'd get 90% FLUNK who would say yes. what does that tell you about the illiteracy of those who champion climate change?

eliminating all CO2 in the atmosphere would kill all life on the planet.

but you knew that already. most don't.

it's all about pollution. like Jim said.

You're liberal filth... Originally Posted by Marshall2.0

Yes, I'm a classical liberal, like Adam Smith and Friedrich Hayek. It sounds like you're illiberal. Do you believe that people who think evolution is real and the earth is round are filth too?

Yes, I'm a classical liberal, like Adam Smith and Friedrich Hayek. It sounds like you're illiberal. Do you believe that people who think evolution is real and the earth is round are filth too? Originally Posted by Tiny

Global Warming DOES NOT EXIST!!!! Just NATURE handling its BUSINESS!!!