Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #581408 > unrolled thread

Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-05-29 11:20 +0000
    Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports abelard <abelard3@abelard.org> - 2016-05-29 13:30 +0200
      Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-05-29 13:15 +0000
        Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-05-29 05:23 -0700
          Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-05-29 17:28 +0000
        Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports abelard <abelard3@abelard.org> - 2016-05-29 14:24 +0200
          Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-05-29 13:44 +0000
            Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports abelard <abelard3@abelard.org> - 2016-05-29 15:35 +0200
              Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-05-29 17:00 +0000
    Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports frederick <fakeemail@gmail.com> - 2016-05-29 17:35 +0100
      Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-05-29 17:44 +0000
        Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports frederick <fakeemail@gmail.com> - 2016-05-29 17:54 +0100
          Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-05-29 20:48 +0000
            Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports abelard <abelard3@abelard.org> - 2016-05-30 00:18 +0200
              Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports AlleyCat <al@aohell.com> - 2016-05-29 21:41 -0500
                Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-05-30 07:25 +0000
                Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports frederick <fakeemail@gmail.com> - 2016-05-30 08:28 +0100
                  Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> - 2016-05-30 07:37 +0000
                  Re: Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports AlleyCat <al@aohell.com> - 2016-05-30 03:43 -0500

#581408 — Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports

Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36376226


UN Anti-Denialists forced to remove mentioning Australia
in their reports by Australian authorities describing anti-Denialists
as a bunch of confused retards.

Basically anti-denialists are confusing weather with climate,
and heritage site with weather.

Australia UN commissioners want nothing more to do with these
anti-denialist trolls.

Its the job of every scientist to smack down pseudo scientists
and then ask questions later. Particularly pseudo scientists
who declare their pseudo science is "settled" pseudo science.

Looks like Australia is taking this seriously and has sacked
a whole bunch of free loading "settled" pseudo scientists
and the scams they been running selling their
"settled" pseudo science are now toast.

Any references by fellow "settled" pseudo scientists
to Australia is now also toast.

More countries could follow suit and demand these
"settled" pseudo scientists leave as these trolls
from the UN is costing tourism.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#581409

On 29 May 2016 11:20:01 GMT, 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> wrote:

>Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36376226
>
>
>UN Anti-Denialists forced to remove mentioning Australia
>in their reports by Australian authorities describing anti-Denialists
>as a bunch of confused retards.
>
>Basically anti-denialists are confusing weather with climate,
>and heritage site with weather.
>
>Australia UN commissioners want nothing more to do with these
>anti-denialist trolls.
>
>Its the job of every scientist to smack down pseudo scientists
>and then ask questions later. Particularly pseudo scientists
>who declare their pseudo science is "settled" pseudo science.
>
>Looks like Australia is taking this seriously and has sacked
>a whole bunch of free loading "settled" pseudo scientists
>and the scams they been running selling their
>"settled" pseudo science are now toast.
>
>Any references by fellow "settled" pseudo scientists
>to Australia is now also toast.
>
>More countries could follow suit and demand these
>"settled" pseudo scientists leave as these trolls
>from the UN is costing tourism.

your post is confused and dishonest as usual


-- 
www.abelard.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581411

abelard wrote:

> On 29 May 2016 11:20:01 GMT, 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> wrote:
> 
>>Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36376226
>>
>>
>>UN Anti-Denialists forced to remove mentioning Australia
>>in their reports by Australian authorities describing anti-Denialists
>>as a bunch of confused retards.
>>
>>Basically anti-denialists are confusing weather with climate,
>>and heritage site with weather.
>>
>>Australia UN commissioners want nothing more to do with these
>>anti-denialist trolls.
>>
>>Its the job of every scientist to smack down pseudo scientists
>>and then ask questions later. Particularly pseudo scientists
>>who declare their pseudo science is "settled" pseudo science.
>>
>>Looks like Australia is taking this seriously and has sacked
>>a whole bunch of free loading "settled" pseudo scientists
>>and the scams they been running selling their
>>"settled" pseudo science are now toast.
>>
>>Any references by fellow "settled" pseudo scientists
>>to Australia is now also toast.
>>
>>More countries could follow suit and demand these
>>"settled" pseudo scientists leave as these trolls
>>from the UN is costing tourism.
> 
> your post is confused and dishonest as usual

The link was in there for you to prove it as usual troll :)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36376226

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581412

So what about those who oppose the anti-denialists?. Would you agree or disagree that they may be wrong?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581478

HVAC wrote:

> So what about those who oppose the anti-denialists?. Would you agree or
> disagree that they may be wrong?


Hmmm.... Those who oppose anti-denialists are the deniers of "settled" 
pseudo science of climate warmingism and alarmist practitioners.

There is a lot of denying going on here, but you get the picture.
Its the same as saying there is no denying that denying is going on here, so 
you are not getting the picture you have not got, just the picture that you 
got.

So, the deniers like me claim 0.04% CO2 produces exactly less than 0.04% 
glow bull wumming because my physics lessons taught me how to work those 
things out. The anti-denialists are hallucinating and imagine the effects
are great despite all physicists officially retracting their earlier
claims pointing out there is a formula for this and its not pretty for the
glow bull wammers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581413

On Sun, 29 May 2016 13:15:47 +0000, 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> wrote:

>abelard wrote:
>
>> On 29 May 2016 11:20:01 GMT, 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling reports
>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36376226
>>>
>>>
>>>UN Anti-Denialists forced to remove mentioning Australia
>>>in their reports by Australian authorities describing anti-Denialists
>>>as a bunch of confused retards.
>>>
>>>Basically anti-denialists are confusing weather with climate,
>>>and heritage site with weather.
>>>
>>>Australia UN commissioners want nothing more to do with these
>>>anti-denialist trolls.
>>>
>>>Its the job of every scientist to smack down pseudo scientists
>>>and then ask questions later. Particularly pseudo scientists
>>>who declare their pseudo science is "settled" pseudo science.
>>>
>>>Looks like Australia is taking this seriously and has sacked
>>>a whole bunch of free loading "settled" pseudo scientists
>>>and the scams they been running selling their
>>>"settled" pseudo science are now toast.
>>>
>>>Any references by fellow "settled" pseudo scientists
>>>to Australia is now also toast.
>>>
>>>More countries could follow suit and demand these
>>>"settled" pseudo scientists leave as these trolls
>>>from the UN is costing tourism.
>> 
>> your post is confused and dishonest as usual
>
>The link was in there for you to prove it as usual troll :)

it is still there..and it does prove that your post is confused
    and dishonest as usual

>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36376226
>


-- 
www.abelard.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581414

abelard wrote:

> On Sun, 29 May 2016 13:15:47 +0000, 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> wrote:
> 
>>abelard wrote:
>>
>>> On 29 May 2016 11:20:01 GMT, 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling
>>>>reports
>>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36376226
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>UN Anti-Denialists forced to remove mentioning Australia
>>>>in their reports by Australian authorities describing anti-Denialists
>>>>as a bunch of confused retards.
>>>>
>>>>Basically anti-denialists are confusing weather with climate,
>>>>and heritage site with weather.
>>>>
>>>>Australia UN commissioners want nothing more to do with these
>>>>anti-denialist trolls.
>>>>
>>>>Its the job of every scientist to smack down pseudo scientists
>>>>and then ask questions later. Particularly pseudo scientists
>>>>who declare their pseudo science is "settled" pseudo science.
>>>>
>>>>Looks like Australia is taking this seriously and has sacked
>>>>a whole bunch of free loading "settled" pseudo scientists
>>>>and the scams they been running selling their
>>>>"settled" pseudo science are now toast.
>>>>
>>>>Any references by fellow "settled" pseudo scientists
>>>>to Australia is now also toast.
>>>>
>>>>More countries could follow suit and demand these
>>>>"settled" pseudo scientists leave as these trolls
>>>>from the UN is costing tourism.
>>> 
>>> your post is confused and dishonest as usual
>>
>>The link was in there for you to prove it as usual troll :)
> 
> it is still there..and it does prove that your post is confused
>     and dishonest as usual

Your admission makes you the lying dishonest troll.


>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36376226

Why don't you just admit you are anti-denialist?

Telling/re-telling an anti-denialist story angrified you.

Everyone would understand then :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581424

On Sun, 29 May 2016 13:44:07 +0000, 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> wrote:

>abelard wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 29 May 2016 13:15:47 +0000, 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>abelard wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 29 May 2016 11:20:01 GMT, 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling
>>>>>reports
>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36376226
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>UN Anti-Denialists forced to remove mentioning Australia
>>>>>in their reports by Australian authorities describing anti-Denialists
>>>>>as a bunch of confused retards.
>>>>>
>>>>>Basically anti-denialists are confusing weather with climate,
>>>>>and heritage site with weather.
>>>>>
>>>>>Australia UN commissioners want nothing more to do with these
>>>>>anti-denialist trolls.
>>>>>
>>>>>Its the job of every scientist to smack down pseudo scientists
>>>>>and then ask questions later. Particularly pseudo scientists
>>>>>who declare their pseudo science is "settled" pseudo science.
>>>>>
>>>>>Looks like Australia is taking this seriously and has sacked
>>>>>a whole bunch of free loading "settled" pseudo scientists
>>>>>and the scams they been running selling their
>>>>>"settled" pseudo science are now toast.
>>>>>
>>>>>Any references by fellow "settled" pseudo scientists
>>>>>to Australia is now also toast.
>>>>>
>>>>>More countries could follow suit and demand these
>>>>>"settled" pseudo scientists leave as these trolls
>>>>>from the UN is costing tourism.
>>>> 
>>>> your post is confused and dishonest as usual
>>>
>>>The link was in there for you to prove it as usual troll :)
>> 
>> it is still there..and it does prove that your post is confused
>>     and dishonest as usual
>
>Your admission makes you the lying dishonest troll.

i s'pose it's  to be expected that you can't read


"The department was concerned that the framing of the report confused
two issues - the world heritage status of the sites and risks arising
from climate change and tourism.

it's just the tourist board trying to protect their income

"Recent experience in Australia had shown that negative commentary
about the status of world heritage properties impacted on tourism."

nothing to do with agw...

just like brazil trying to avoid losing income over zika...


it's all about money money money...

i'll pretend your dishonesty and confusion is merely because
     you can't read or comprehend well


>>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36376226
>
>Why don't you just admit you are anti-denialist?
>
>Telling/re-telling an anti-denialist story angrified you.

i don't mind you lying...it just undermines your credibility every
     time you do it
therefore the more nonsense you post, the better

>Everyone would understand then :)


-- 
www.abelard.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581467

abelard wrote:

 
>>>>>>Anti-Denialistists forced to remove Australia from their trolling
>>>>>>reports
>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36376226
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>UN Anti-Denialists forced to remove mentioning Australia
>>>>>>in their reports by Australian authorities describing anti-Denialists
>>>>>>as a bunch of confused retards.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Basically anti-denialists are confusing weather with climate,
>>>>>>and heritage site with weather.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Australia UN commissioners want nothing more to do with these
>>>>>>anti-denialist trolls.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Its the job of every scientist to smack down pseudo scientists
>>>>>>and then ask questions later. Particularly pseudo scientists
>>>>>>who declare their pseudo science is "settled" pseudo science.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Looks like Australia is taking this seriously and has sacked
>>>>>>a whole bunch of free loading "settled" pseudo scientists
>>>>>>and the scams they been running selling their
>>>>>>"settled" pseudo science are now toast.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Any references by fellow "settled" pseudo scientists
>>>>>>to Australia is now also toast.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>More countries could follow suit and demand these
>>>>>>"settled" pseudo scientists leave as these trolls
>>>>>>from the UN is costing tourism.
>>>>> 
>>>>> your post is confused and dishonest as usual
>>>>
>>>>The link was in there for you to prove it as usual troll :)
>>> 
>>> it is still there..and it does prove that your post is confused
>>>     and dishonest as usual
>>
>>Your admission makes you the lying dishonest troll.
> 
> i s'pose it's  to be expected that you can't read

OOooppp!!! You didn't read this bit then:

> "The department was concerned that the framing of the report confused
> two issues - the world heritage status of the sites and risks arising
> from climate change and tourism.
"

In short the original post was as accurate as it needed to be :)
Australians don't give XXXX about anti-denialists.


>>>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36376226
>>
>>Why don't you just admit you are anti-denialist?
>>
>>Telling/re-telling an anti-denialist story angrified you.
> 
> i don't mind 

<bitch slap!>

You did mind!! So stop being such a weepie!!

>>Everyone would understand then :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581480

Tell me, what does Denialist mean?





















Tehehe.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581483

frederick wrote:

> Tell me, what does Denialist mean?
> 
> Tehehe.


According the All Gore, the supreme high priest Anti-Denialist of the glow 
ball wumming religion calling itself the "settled" pseudo science,
anyone not believing in their "settled" pseudo science is a denier.

That includes anyone who knows a bit of Physics and challenges
these trolls to some basic numbers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581490

On 29/05/16 18:44, 7 wrote:
> frederick wrote:
>
>> Tell me, what does Denialist mean?
>>
>> Tehehe.
>
>
> According the All Gore, the supreme high priest Anti-Denialist of the glow
> ball wumming religion calling itself the "settled" pseudo science,
> anyone not believing in their "settled" pseudo science is a denier.
>
> That includes anyone who knows a bit of Physics and challenges
> these trolls to some basic numbers.
>

Can you explain the CO2/heat graph any other way? Do you think that CO2 
doesn't in-fact harm the ozone layer?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581551

frederick wrote:

> On 29/05/16 18:44, 7 wrote:
>> frederick wrote:
>>
>>> Tell me, what does Denialist mean?
>>>
>>> Tehehe.
>>
>>
>> According the All Gore, the supreme high priest Anti-Denialist of the
>> glow ball wumming religion calling itself the "settled" pseudo science,
>> anyone not believing in their "settled" pseudo science is a denier.
>>
>> That includes anyone who knows a bit of Physics and challenges
>> these trolls to some basic numbers.
>>
> 
> Can you explain the CO2/heat graph any other way? Do you think that CO2
> doesn't in-fact harm the ozone layer?


CO2 stays on the ground and doesn't reach the ozone layer.

CO2 is a transparent gas and doesn't cause any global warming.

The net effect of 0.04% CO2 in the atmosphere is exactly less
than 0.04%. Most of the heat in the atmosphere is carried by
water vapour which is not transparent when condensing.

Since the planet is 2/3rds water with water on land and lakes
as well, it is the biggest heat carrying gas in the atmosphere
and its temperature is 100% tied to solar input.

The Sun heats the water with terrawatts of power all of which
is lost during the night and replenished the next day.
The Earth warms an average 1 degree per hour in the Sun
and cools 1 degree per hour during the night.

The Sun is rotating an average of every 6.5 days and constantly
resurfacing which is why we cannot predict weather more
than 5 days in advance before it is 100% wrong.

The weather on the Earth reflects the weather on the Sun.
So if there was a huge hotter area that develops in the Sun,
then it will cause a lot of water to be lifted into the
atmosphere. As the Sun rotates, this water rains down
as thunderstorms. Interestingly, approximately 7 days
later, the pattern would repeat because the hot spot
comes back into view and this pattern can repeat
for two three weeks while the hot spot dissipates.

None of this known to the Anti-Denialists of
the "settled" pseudo science.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581587

On Sun, 29 May 2016 20:48:58 +0000, 7 <7@enemygadgets.com> wrote:

>frederick wrote:

>> Can you explain the CO2/heat graph any other way? Do you think that CO2
>> doesn't in-fact harm the ozone layer?

>CO2 stays on the ground and doesn't reach the ozone layer.
>
>CO2 is a transparent gas and doesn't cause any global warming.

rubbish

>The net effect of 0.04% CO2 in the atmosphere is exactly less
>than 0.04%. Most of the heat in the atmosphere is carried by
>water vapour which is not transparent when condensing.
>
>Since the planet is 2/3rds water with water on land and lakes
>as well, it is the biggest heat carrying gas in the atmosphere

which is a dependent variable...

>and its temperature is 100% tied to solar input.

nonsense


you don't have a clue


-- 
www.abelard.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581630

On Mon, 30 May 2016 00:18:30 +0200,  abelard says...  

> >CO2 is a transparent gas and doesn't cause any global warming.
> 
> rubbish
> 

LOL... ANOTHER dumb ass.

.04% of the atmosphere can not warm anything. Try it... make your 
experiment. Even one of your own screatures of climate change KNOWS you 
can't replicate CO² causing warming, in anything OTHER than a small 
chamber.

Unless someone can re-create the The Earth itself, it's geology, The Sun, 
the Moon, the stars, Earth's magnetic fields, air currents, ocean 
currents, cloud patterns, resonant temperature cycles, energy storage, 
release mechanisms, etc., there is NO way to prove that .04% of the 
atmosphere (CO²) can "hold in warmth".  It's still just a THEORY.

Professor Kristie Boering, UC BERKELEY - Screature type:

"We can do experiments on small scales in the lab. We can make 
OBSERVATIONS on a global scale, but you're right... it IS hard to 
replicate in a three foot by three foot chamber. It's a challenge to 
replicate that."

Even your friendly neighborhood screecher-type, knows you can't replicate 
ALL of Earth's variables, in a laboratory. Whether ANYONE can prove that 
CO² is a greenhouse gas, is irrelevant... man has yet to be proven to 
cause anything relating to weather and climate. We CAN seed clouds and 
change the weather, but our minuscule output of CO² (6% or 24ppm) isn't 
causing anything.

24ppm... BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

CO² has been "proven" to hold in warmth in a CHAMBER and ONLY in a 
LABORATORY. "You" can't replicate all of the Earth's weather and climate 
"variables" in a 3 foot by 3 foot chamber. What's warming our planet is 
everything BUT CO².

Keeping the public in the dark is the same as lying. TERMITES produce more 
CO² than WE do... why don't you tax THEM, or if you're SO fucking worried 
about the planet... KILL ALL THE TERMITES. We know you're not worried 
about the planet... the planet's fine... the leftist power hungry nerds 
are what's wrong.

WE all know, including you, that CO² is not what's warming our planet...  
even in it's "higher-than-before-industry-began" levels, it's STILL too 
low (.0407%) to do anything. 

The Earth is warming itself. We know it, you know it, and all the OTHER 
liars who say otherwise, know it.

WE aren't the tipping point (there really isn't one, but for arguments 
sake...), but you can't tax termites or the ocean or volcanoes, or, or, 
or... right?

IF CO² could actually warm the planet, why aren't we blaming termites 
instead of Exxon and Peabody? Oh yeah, termites have NO political power OR 
money.

NO ONE can "imitate" Earth's atmospheric conditions, etc., and tell 
anyone, WITH CERTAINTY, that CO² is THE factor in Global Warming and 
Climate Change.

There ARE other greenhouse gases that keep our planet habitable, 
but since no one can PROVE that man is or isn't responsible for ALL of the 
CO² OR the greenhouse gases that matter (water vapour), YOU have to lie 
and try to convince the stupid, low information, low IQ Obama voters they 
"we" are responsible for warming. 

Nice try, but you have all failed. The Earth goes on and ALL of Al Gore's 
and other doom-sayers' predictions have NOT come to fruition. Too bad, so 
sad.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581657

AlleyCat wrote:


> CO² has been "proven" to hold in warmth in a CHAMBER and ONLY in a
> LABORATORY. 

No it hasn't!!!!

The demos are fake involving EXTREMELY HIGH concentrations of CO2.

And they *NEVER* tell you how much of the magic gas was used to tell a lie.

At 0.04%, the effect is not measurable because it is too small.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581658

On 30/05/16 03:41, AlleyCat wrote:
>
> On Mon, 30 May 2016 00:18:30 +0200,  abelard says...
>
>>> CO2 is a transparent gas and doesn't cause any global warming.
>>
>> rubbish
>>
>
> LOL... ANOTHER dumb ass.
>
> .04% of the atmosphere can not warm anything. Try it... make your
> experiment. Even one of your own screatures of climate change KNOWS you
> can't replicate CO² causing warming, in anything OTHER than a small
> chamber.
>
> Unless someone can re-create the The Earth itself, it's geology, The Sun,
> the Moon, the stars, Earth's magnetic fields, air currents, ocean
> currents, cloud patterns, resonant temperature cycles, energy storage,
> release mechanisms, etc., there is NO way to prove that .04% of the
> atmosphere (CO²) can "hold in warmth".  It's still just a THEORY.
>
> Professor Kristie Boering, UC BERKELEY - Screature type:
>
> "We can do experiments on small scales in the lab. We can make
> OBSERVATIONS on a global scale, but you're right... it IS hard to
> replicate in a three foot by three foot chamber. It's a challenge to
> replicate that."
>
> Even your friendly neighborhood screecher-type, knows you can't replicate
> ALL of Earth's variables, in a laboratory. Whether ANYONE can prove that
> CO² is a greenhouse gas, is irrelevant... man has yet to be proven to
> cause anything relating to weather and climate. We CAN seed clouds and
> change the weather, but our minuscule output of CO² (6% or 24ppm) isn't
> causing anything.
>
> 24ppm... BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>
> CO² has been "proven" to hold in warmth in a CHAMBER and ONLY in a
> LABORATORY. "You" can't replicate all of the Earth's weather and climate
> "variables" in a 3 foot by 3 foot chamber. What's warming our planet is
> everything BUT CO².
>
> Keeping the public in the dark is the same as lying. TERMITES produce more
> CO² than WE do... why don't you tax THEM, or if you're SO fucking worried
> about the planet... KILL ALL THE TERMITES. We know you're not worried
> about the planet... the planet's fine... the leftist power hungry nerds
> are what's wrong.
>
> WE all know, including you, that CO² is not what's warming our planet...
> even in it's "higher-than-before-industry-began" levels, it's STILL too
> low (.0407%) to do anything.
>
> The Earth is warming itself. We know it, you know it, and all the OTHER
> liars who say otherwise, know it.
>
> WE aren't the tipping point (there really isn't one, but for arguments
> sake...), but you can't tax termites or the ocean or volcanoes, or, or,
> or... right?
>
> IF CO² could actually warm the planet, why aren't we blaming termites
> instead of Exxon and Peabody? Oh yeah, termites have NO political power OR
> money.
>
> NO ONE can "imitate" Earth's atmospheric conditions, etc., and tell
> anyone, WITH CERTAINTY, that CO² is THE factor in Global Warming and
> Climate Change.
>
> There ARE other greenhouse gases that keep our planet habitable,
> but since no one can PROVE that man is or isn't responsible for ALL of the
> CO² OR the greenhouse gases that matter (water vapour), YOU have to lie
> and try to convince the stupid, low information, low IQ Obama voters they
> "we" are responsible for warming.
>
> Nice try, but you have all failed. The Earth goes on and ALL of Al Gore's
> and other doom-sayers' predictions have NOT come to fruition. Too bad, so
> sad.
>

But that doesn't explain why the CO2 to temperature graph is so 
inextricably linked.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581659

frederick wrote:

> On 30/05/16 03:41, AlleyCat wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 30 May 2016 00:18:30 +0200,  abelard says...
>>
>>>> CO2 is a transparent gas and doesn't cause any global warming.
>>>
>>> rubbish
>>>
>>
>> LOL... ANOTHER dumb ass.
>>
>> .04% of the atmosphere can not warm anything. Try it... make your
>> experiment. Even one of your own screatures of climate change KNOWS you
>> can't replicate CO² causing warming, in anything OTHER than a small
>> chamber.
>>
>> Unless someone can re-create the The Earth itself, it's geology, The Sun,
>> the Moon, the stars, Earth's magnetic fields, air currents, ocean
>> currents, cloud patterns, resonant temperature cycles, energy storage,
>> release mechanisms, etc., there is NO way to prove that .04% of the
>> atmosphere (CO²) can "hold in warmth".  It's still just a THEORY.
>>
>> Professor Kristie Boering, UC BERKELEY - Screature type:
>>
>> "We can do experiments on small scales in the lab. We can make
>> OBSERVATIONS on a global scale, but you're right... it IS hard to
>> replicate in a three foot by three foot chamber. It's a challenge to
>> replicate that."
>>
>> Even your friendly neighborhood screecher-type, knows you can't replicate
>> ALL of Earth's variables, in a laboratory. Whether ANYONE can prove that
>> CO² is a greenhouse gas, is irrelevant... man has yet to be proven to
>> cause anything relating to weather and climate. We CAN seed clouds and
>> change the weather, but our minuscule output of CO² (6% or 24ppm) isn't
>> causing anything.
>>
>> 24ppm... BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>
>> CO² has been "proven" to hold in warmth in a CHAMBER and ONLY in a
>> LABORATORY. "You" can't replicate all of the Earth's weather and climate
>> "variables" in a 3 foot by 3 foot chamber. What's warming our planet is
>> everything BUT CO².
>>
>> Keeping the public in the dark is the same as lying. TERMITES produce
>> more CO² than WE do... why don't you tax THEM, or if you're SO fucking
>> worried about the planet... KILL ALL THE TERMITES. We know you're not
>> worried about the planet... the planet's fine... the leftist power hungry
>> nerds are what's wrong.
>>
>> WE all know, including you, that CO² is not what's warming our planet...
>> even in it's "higher-than-before-industry-began" levels, it's STILL too
>> low (.0407%) to do anything.
>>
>> The Earth is warming itself. We know it, you know it, and all the OTHER
>> liars who say otherwise, know it.
>>
>> WE aren't the tipping point (there really isn't one, but for arguments
>> sake...), but you can't tax termites or the ocean or volcanoes, or, or,
>> or... right?
>>
>> IF CO² could actually warm the planet, why aren't we blaming termites
>> instead of Exxon and Peabody? Oh yeah, termites have NO political power
>> OR money.
>>
>> NO ONE can "imitate" Earth's atmospheric conditions, etc., and tell
>> anyone, WITH CERTAINTY, that CO² is THE factor in Global Warming and
>> Climate Change.
>>
>> There ARE other greenhouse gases that keep our planet habitable,
>> but since no one can PROVE that man is or isn't responsible for ALL of
>> the CO² OR the greenhouse gases that matter (water vapour), YOU have to
>> lie and try to convince the stupid, low information, low IQ Obama voters
>> they "we" are responsible for warming.
>>
>> Nice try, but you have all failed. The Earth goes on and ALL of Al Gore's
>> and other doom-sayers' predictions have NOT come to fruition. Too bad, so
>> sad.
>>
> 
> But that doesn't explain why the CO2 to temperature graph is so
> inextricably linked.

They are not linked in the materially false claims of the
"settled" pseudo science video made by All Gore.

CO2 lags temperature records by around 10,000 to 20,000 years.
There is enough CO2 dissolved in oceans to start outgassing
when the ocean temperatures rise. But it takes thousands
of years to do that.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#581666

On Mon, 30 May 2016 08:28:06 +0100,  frederick says...  

> > Nice try, but you have all failed. The Earth goes on and ALL of Al Gore's
> > and other doom-sayers' predictions have NOT come to fruition. Too bad, so
> > sad.
> >
> 
> But that doesn't explain why the CO2 to temperature graph is so 
> inextricably linked.

LOL... AL GORE'S CO²/Temperature "link"?

REAL scientists debunking that, rat cheer.

Once you get passed the rodeo clown in the $3000 suit, he bought with YOUR 
tax money... listen to what the REAL scientists say.

http://tinypic.com/r/2vmwntd/9

 

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web