Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #684526 > unrolled thread
| Started by | kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-05-09 06:52 -0400 |
| Last post | 2018-05-09 15:49 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 278 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-09 06:52 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-05-09 07:57 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-09 09:17 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-05-09 09:29 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-09 10:10 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-05-10 07:55 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-10 08:55 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-05-10 19:35 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-11 08:13 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-05-12 13:44 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-12 18:57 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-12 12:03 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-23 16:47 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-23 16:49 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-10 22:56 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-11 08:14 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-11 10:35 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Dinsdale <yup@ayup.yup> - 2018-05-11 10:59 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-11 10:25 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-11 08:48 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-11 11:02 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-11 20:45 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-11 23:01 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-12 09:33 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-12 09:31 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-11 19:47 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-11 19:09 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-12 09:33 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-14 23:59 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-15 09:24 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-05-15 07:03 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-05-15 11:43 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-15 20:12 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-16 00:34 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-15 18:00 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-05-15 21:51 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-15 19:06 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-16 10:02 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-16 12:16 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-16 14:05 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-16 13:48 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-05-16 11:00 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-09 20:26 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-10 08:57 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-10 23:00 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-11 08:16 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-11 10:44 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-11 11:03 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Just Wondering <JustWondering@hotmail.com> - 2018-05-11 12:26 -0600
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-11 11:33 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-11 13:42 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-11 19:27 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-11 12:30 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-11 19:32 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-05-11 12:38 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-11 15:25 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-11 20:28 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-11 13:39 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-11 20:26 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-05-11 13:35 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-11 21:07 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-11 13:36 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-11 12:46 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-11 20:55 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-11 19:27 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-11 19:48 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-11 23:27 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-12 09:35 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-15 00:00 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-15 09:24 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-05-15 11:47 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-15 14:47 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-15 21:13 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-15 14:51 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-15 23:00 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-16 09:50 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-05-16 17:44 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-17 02:52 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-16 20:02 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-05-16 20:33 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-16 20:35 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-05-17 00:29 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-17 11:38 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-05-16 20:37 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-17 17:16 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-15 20:00 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-16 00:35 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-05-16 11:01 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-11 08:27 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-16 09:37 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-23 11:07 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-22 23:18 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-23 13:23 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-22 23:58 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-23 16:26 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-23 03:03 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-24 09:35 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-06-08 15:02 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-08 19:00 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-09 10:07 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Boris Mohar <borism_void_@sympatico.ca> - 2018-05-10 07:51 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-09 09:59 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-15 15:56 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-15 02:14 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-15 09:27 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-05-15 11:48 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-15 15:04 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-15 20:02 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-15 17:28 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-05-15 06:55 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-15 10:13 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-15 10:53 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-15 20:06 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2018-05-15 22:17 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-16 08:19 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-15 22:03 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-16 13:38 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-17 06:11 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-16 13:16 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-16 15:31 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-17 20:51 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-18 11:23 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-17 21:52 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-21 07:19 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-21 23:05 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-22 14:44 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-22 02:46 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-22 11:08 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-23 10:24 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-22 20:26 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-23 13:23 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-23 00:03 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-23 16:01 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-05-23 08:39 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-23 10:43 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-24 07:54 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-23 03:08 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-24 09:38 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-23 19:41 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-24 10:05 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-23 20:13 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-05-24 08:59 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-05-24 07:16 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Leo Sgouros <adravirgo@gmail.com> - 2018-05-24 07:26 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-24 12:02 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-05-24 10:36 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-05-24 12:29 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-05-24 14:35 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-24 20:32 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-05-24 19:56 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-05-25 21:36 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-05-25 23:34 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-05-26 07:06 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-05-26 12:48 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-05-26 13:20 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-05-27 12:30 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-05-28 10:43 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-05-28 14:03 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-05-29 05:54 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-06-06 16:56 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-06-06 17:20 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-06-06 19:36 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-06-09 12:13 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-06-09 18:28 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-06-06 21:12 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kdthrge@gmail.com - 2018-06-07 06:13 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-06 16:56 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-23 20:09 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-24 10:55 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-23 23:03 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-17 20:50 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-18 11:20 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-17 21:27 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-18 11:45 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-17 22:31 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-18 14:07 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-18 00:50 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-18 15:20 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist de chucka <Dechucka1@hotmail.com> - 2018-05-18 15:42 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-18 03:40 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-21 07:28 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist de chucka <Dechucka1@hotmail.com> - 2018-05-18 15:28 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-18 15:33 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist de chucka <Dechucka1@hotmail.com> - 2018-05-18 15:48 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-05-20 21:58 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-21 23:06 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-15 22:28 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-17 11:35 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-17 07:14 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-18 07:33 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-17 21:08 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-18 11:24 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-17 22:29 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-21 07:28 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-21 23:05 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-22 14:44 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-22 02:47 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-22 11:07 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-22 20:17 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-23 10:25 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-15 08:52 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-15 10:02 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-05-15 07:04 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-05-15 11:51 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-16 08:28 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-15 19:48 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-15 22:36 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-16 09:36 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-16 10:51 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-16 14:07 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-16 14:01 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-17 06:16 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-16 15:42 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-17 11:37 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-16 17:13 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-17 11:26 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-15 22:30 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-16 09:45 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-17 06:18 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-16 15:45 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-17 11:22 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-17 07:51 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-17 11:27 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-17 17:47 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-17 23:36 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-18 09:39 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-17 20:55 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-05-17 18:12 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-18 11:24 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-17 16:41 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2018-05-17 20:06 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-17 20:20 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-18 01:37 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-17 19:03 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-17 22:36 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-18 03:03 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-05-17 20:09 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2018-05-17 23:25 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-18 09:56 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-17 17:55 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2018-05-17 21:01 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-05-17 18:02 -0700
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2018-05-17 21:09 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-17 17:29 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-17 20:53 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-18 11:25 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-17 22:30 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-18 14:08 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-18 00:42 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-18 15:22 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-18 03:31 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-18 07:06 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-18 11:49 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-18 13:25 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-18 19:40 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-18 20:23 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-19 03:39 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-18 18:41 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-19 03:40 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-21 07:36 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-21 23:05 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-22 14:45 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-22 02:48 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-23 10:26 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-22 23:17 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-23 13:21 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-22 23:59 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-23 16:03 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-23 03:04 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-24 09:40 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-23 20:20 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-05-24 11:00 +1000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2018-05-23 23:06 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-05-24 05:03 +0000
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-24 01:59 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-24 01:57 -0400
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-09 09:33 -0500
Re: The last time atmospheric carbon dioxide was this high humans didn't exist benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-09 15:49 -0400
Page 13 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 Next page →
| From | mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-17 21:01 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pdl8kh$1sli$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #686060 |
On 5/17/2018 8:55 PM, % wrote: > On 2018-05-17 5:06 PM, mixed nuts wrote: >> On 5/17/2018 7:41 PM, % wrote: >>> On 2018-05-17 4:36 PM, Nadegda wrote: >>>> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, >>>> melt! >>>> On Thu, 17 May 2018 17:47:27 -0400, benj wrote: >>>>> On 5/17/2018 11:27 AM, kensi wrote: >>>>>> On 5/17/2018 8:51 AM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/16/2018 8:22 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>> On 17/05/2018 6:45 AM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>>>>> so, if you are ready, what are the CO2 vibration modes ? >>>>>>>> http://www.wag.caltech.edu/home/jang/genchem/infrared.htm >>>>>>> Figure 3 Molecular responses to radiation >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What do we mean by molecular vibrations? Picture a diatomic molecule >>>>>>> as [rest of obviously copy-and-pasted material deleted] >>>>>> >>>>>> Well done: you can google and wikipedia. But can you *understand* all >>>>>> that stuff you just plagiarized? >>>>>> >>>>> Ever notice how libs always say everyone else is doing the very things >>>>> they ALWAYS do? >>>>> >>>>> "Kanzi" if you had the tiniest understanding of CO2 spectroscopy you >>>>> would understand what we mean when we say that most of CO2 effects are >>>>> blocked by water vapor bands, that atmospheric CO2 absorption is >>>>> saturated, and that only one wing of one band can have an GHG >>>>> effect and >>>>> because it's a wing the relationship is not linear with concentration. >>>>> >>>>> In other words if you knew 1/10 the science of Sergio, You wouldn't be >>>>> cutting and pasting journalist fantasy screed and pretending it's >>>>> science. >>>>> >>>>> You are just one more crook like Hillary. >>>>> Chortle (rule #5) >>>> >>>> Nicely projected, kooktard, but the people who actually do >>>> understand the >>>> actual science all disagree with you and agree with the IPCC about >>>> climate change. >>>> >>> it was more like a transference than it was a projection >> >> Transference is not a common word in AUK dialect. >> > is that where i am You were, until I took it off the list. -- Grizzly H.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | % <persent@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-17 18:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b9hu86.vu.17.5@news.alt.net> |
| In reply to | #686062 |
On 2018-05-17 6:01 PM, mixed nuts wrote: > On 5/17/2018 8:55 PM, % wrote: >> On 2018-05-17 5:06 PM, mixed nuts wrote: >>> On 5/17/2018 7:41 PM, % wrote: >>>> On 2018-05-17 4:36 PM, Nadegda wrote: >>>>> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, >>>>> melt! >>>>> On Thu, 17 May 2018 17:47:27 -0400, benj wrote: >>>>>> On 5/17/2018 11:27 AM, kensi wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/17/2018 8:51 AM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>>>> On 5/16/2018 8:22 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 17/05/2018 6:45 AM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>>>>>> so, if you are ready, what are the CO2 vibration modes ? >>>>>>>>> http://www.wag.caltech.edu/home/jang/genchem/infrared.htm >>>>>>>> Figure 3 Molecular responses to radiation >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What do we mean by molecular vibrations? Picture a diatomic >>>>>>>> molecule >>>>>>>> as [rest of obviously copy-and-pasted material deleted] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well done: you can google and wikipedia. But can you *understand* >>>>>>> all >>>>>>> that stuff you just plagiarized? >>>>>>> >>>>>> Ever notice how libs always say everyone else is doing the very >>>>>> things >>>>>> they ALWAYS do? >>>>>> >>>>>> "Kanzi" if you had the tiniest understanding of CO2 spectroscopy you >>>>>> would understand what we mean when we say that most of CO2 effects >>>>>> are >>>>>> blocked by water vapor bands, that atmospheric CO2 absorption is >>>>>> saturated, and that only one wing of one band can have an GHG >>>>>> effect and >>>>>> because it's a wing the relationship is not linear with >>>>>> concentration. >>>>>> >>>>>> In other words if you knew 1/10 the science of Sergio, You >>>>>> wouldn't be >>>>>> cutting and pasting journalist fantasy screed and pretending it's >>>>>> science. >>>>>> >>>>>> You are just one more crook like Hillary. >>>>>> Chortle (rule #5) >>>>> >>>>> Nicely projected, kooktard, but the people who actually do >>>>> understand the >>>>> actual science all disagree with you and agree with the IPCC about >>>>> climate change. >>>>> >>>> it was more like a transference than it was a projection >>> >>> Transference is not a common word in AUK dialect. >>> >> is that where i am > > You were, until I took it off the list. > get any rain lately
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-17 21:09 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pdl94g$1tfb$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #686063 |
On 5/17/2018 9:02 PM, % wrote: > On 2018-05-17 6:01 PM, mixed nuts wrote: >> On 5/17/2018 8:55 PM, % wrote: >>> On 2018-05-17 5:06 PM, mixed nuts wrote: >>>> On 5/17/2018 7:41 PM, % wrote: >>>>> On 2018-05-17 4:36 PM, Nadegda wrote: >>>>>> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, >>>>>> melt! >>>>>> On Thu, 17 May 2018 17:47:27 -0400, benj wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/17/2018 11:27 AM, kensi wrote: >>>>>>>> On 5/17/2018 8:51 AM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 5/16/2018 8:22 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 17/05/2018 6:45 AM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> so, if you are ready, what are the CO2 vibration modes ? >>>>>>>>>> http://www.wag.caltech.edu/home/jang/genchem/infrared.htm >>>>>>>>> Figure 3 Molecular responses to radiation >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> What do we mean by molecular vibrations? Picture a diatomic >>>>>>>>> molecule >>>>>>>>> as [rest of obviously copy-and-pasted material deleted] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Well done: you can google and wikipedia. But can you >>>>>>>> *understand* all >>>>>>>> that stuff you just plagiarized? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ever notice how libs always say everyone else is doing the very >>>>>>> things >>>>>>> they ALWAYS do? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Kanzi" if you had the tiniest understanding of CO2 spectroscopy you >>>>>>> would understand what we mean when we say that most of CO2 >>>>>>> effects are >>>>>>> blocked by water vapor bands, that atmospheric CO2 absorption is >>>>>>> saturated, and that only one wing of one band can have an GHG >>>>>>> effect and >>>>>>> because it's a wing the relationship is not linear with >>>>>>> concentration. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In other words if you knew 1/10 the science of Sergio, You >>>>>>> wouldn't be >>>>>>> cutting and pasting journalist fantasy screed and pretending it's >>>>>>> science. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You are just one more crook like Hillary. >>>>>>> Chortle (rule #5) >>>>>> >>>>>> Nicely projected, kooktard, but the people who actually do >>>>>> understand the >>>>>> actual science all disagree with you and agree with the IPCC about >>>>>> climate change. >>>>>> >>>>> it was more like a transference than it was a projection >>>> >>>> Transference is not a common word in AUK dialect. >>>> >>> is that where i am >> >> You were, until I took it off the list. >> > get any rain lately Severe thunderstorms yesterday - got pretty dark for a while but the sky cleared when I was driving home. Nice sunset. Might be some rain on Saturday so I mowed today. -- Grizzly H.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-17 17:29 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <PumLC.40002$1a5.16353@fx09.iad> |
| In reply to | #685927 |
On 5/17/2018 8:51 AM, Sergio wrote: > On 5/16/2018 8:22 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >> On 17/05/2018 6:45 AM, Sergio wrote: >>> On 5/16/2018 3:18 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>> On 16/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>> news:fm158hFnd3tU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>> On 15/05/2018 11:52 PM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/15/2018 12:56 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>> On 9/05/2018 11:59 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 5/9/2018 6:52 AM, kensi wrote: >>>>>>>>>> In 2013, atmospheric carbon dioxide broke 400 parts per million >>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>> the first time in human history. Just a year later, atmospheric >>>>>>>>>> carbon dioxide averaged that for an entire month. And now? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/4/1762050/-The-last-time-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-was-this-high-humans-didn-t-exist >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We hear you. Dinosaurs all died from heat stroke from all that CO2 >>>>>>>>> Greenhousing their world. Somehow science doesn't agree with this >>>>>>>>> fantasy. Since CO2 is a minor GHG it's level is obviously more or >>>>>>>>> less >>>>>>>>> irrelevant, both then and now. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Water vapor is THE major GHG factor (50%) and clouds (also >>>>>>>>> water) are >>>>>>>>> another 25% and CO2 is NOT the remaining 25%. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> **Wrong, yappy lap-dog. You really should stop listening to your >>>>>>>> master, >>>>>>>> Sergio. He is wrong and so are you. Obviously. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> name calling and emotional outbursts are simply ways to derail the >>>>>>> subject. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> by doing this you are stating that you are an the end of your >>>>>>> knowledge >>>>>>> and way over your head, or your a libtard. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> remember CO2 is only 0.00039 part of the atmosphere the rest >>>>>>> of is >>>>>>> is not CO2 => 99.99961 % >>>>>>> so the sun hardly hits any CO2 atoms. >>>>>> >>>>>> **It's actually more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly. >>>>>> The Sun doesn't "hit CO2 atoms". Yikes! I made a grave error in >>>>>> assuming you had some scientific knowledge. I won't make that mistake >>>>>> again. I now realise what a monumental cretin you are. >>>>>> >>>>>> Points: >>>>>> >>>>>> * CO2 is not an "atom". CO2 is a MOLECULE. Here's a primer for you: >>>>> >>>>> Trevor has to pick nits because on the main topic he's sunk and his >>>>> argument is in tatters. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> **It's hardly nit-picking. Sergio has demonstrated a sustained inability >>>> to understand basic science. Much like yourself, in fact. It is clear >>>> that you and he require some basic education, before we progress to more >>>> complex discussions. >>>> >>> >>> so, if you are ready, what are the CO2 vibration modes ? >>> >> >> **Here, this will assist with your education: >> >> http://www.wag.caltech.edu/home/jang/genchem/infrared.htm >> > > read this paragraph, it explains the "greenhouse effect" and why it > occures, this also occurs with Water vapor, but in different bands, and > much broader; > > we will discuss it further, so know the material > > > Figure 3 Molecular responses to radiation > > What do we mean by molecular vibrations? Picture a diatomic molecule as > two spheres connected by a spring. When the molecule vibrates, the atoms > move towards and away from each other at a certain frequency. The energy > of the system is related to how much the spring is stretched or > compressed. The vibrational frequency is proportional to the square root > of the ratio of the spring force constant to the masses on the spring. > The lighter the masses on the spring, or the tighter (stronger) the > spring, the higher the vibrational frequency will be. Similarly, > vibrational frequencies for stretching bonds in molecules are related to > the strength of the chemical bonds and the masses of the atoms. > Molecules differ from sets of spheres-and-springs in that the > vibrational frequencies are quantized. That is, only certain energies > for the system are allowed, and only photons with certain energies will > excite molecular vibrations. The symmetry of the molecule will also > determine whether a photon can be absorbed. > > The number of vibrational modes (different types of vibrations) in a > molecule is 3N-5 for linear molecules and 3N-6 for nonlinear molecules, > where N is the number of atoms. So the diatomic molecule we just > discussed has 3 x 2 - 5 = 1 vibration: the stretching of the bond > between the atoms. Carbon dioxide, a linear molecule, has 3 x 3 - 5 = 4 > vibrations. These vibrational modes, shown in Figure 4, are responsible > for the "greenhouse" effect in which heat radiated from the earth is > absorbed (trapped) by CO2 molecules in the atmosphere. The arrows > indicate the directions of motion. Vibrations labeled A and B represent > the stretching of the chemical bonds, one in a symmetric (A) fashion, in > which both C=O bonds lengthen and contract together (in-phase), and the > other in an asymmetric (B) fashion, in which one bond shortens while the > other lengthens. The asymmetric stretch (B) is infrared active because > there is a change in the molecular dipole moment during this vibration. > To be "active" means that absorption of a photon to excite the vibration > is allowed by the rules of quantum mechanics. [Aside: the infrared > "selection rule" states that for a particular vibrational mode to be > observed (active) in the infrared spectrum, the mode must involve a > change in the dipole moment of the molecule.] Infrared radiation at 2349 > (4.26 um) excites this particular vibration. The symmetric stretch is > not infrared active, and so this vibration is not observed in the > infrared spectrum of CO2. The two equal-energy bending vibrations in CO2 > (C and D in Figure 4) are identical except that one bending mode is in > the plane of the paper, and one is out of the plane. Infrared radiation > at 667 (15.00 um) excites these vibrations. Aside: another way of > illustrating the out-of-plane mode is to place circled + or - signs on > the atoms, signifying motion above of below the plane of the paper, > respectively. Thought question: Why do you think it takes more energy > (shorter wavelengths, higher frequencies) to excite the stretching > vibration than the bending vibration? > Hey sergio, posting to this much actual science on the Internet for someone from Oz is considered "bullying" and I"m pretty sure it's a crime. When Trevor's head explodes you won't feel so proud anymore!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-17 20:53 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pdl87n$r44$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #685806 |
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message news:fm3i11F92rqU2@mid.individual.net... > On 16/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: >> >> >> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >> news:fm158hFnd3tU1@mid.individual.net... >>> On 15/05/2018 11:52 PM, Sergio wrote: >>>> On 5/15/2018 12:56 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>> On 9/05/2018 11:59 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>> On 5/9/2018 6:52 AM, kensi wrote: >>>>>>> In 2013, atmospheric carbon dioxide broke 400 parts per million for >>>>>>> the first time in human history. Just a year later, atmospheric >>>>>>> carbon dioxide averaged that for an entire month. And now? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/4/1762050/-The-last-time-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-was-this-high-humans-didn-t-exist >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> We hear you. Dinosaurs all died from heat stroke from all that CO2 >>>>>> Greenhousing their world. Somehow science doesn't agree with this >>>>>> fantasy. Since CO2 is a minor GHG it's level is obviously more or >>>>>> less >>>>>> irrelevant, both then and now. >>>>>> >>>>>> Water vapor is THE major GHG factor (50%) and clouds (also water) are >>>>>> another 25% and CO2 is NOT the remaining 25%. >>>>> >>>>> **Wrong, yappy lap-dog. You really should stop listening to your >>>>> master, >>>>> Sergio. He is wrong and so are you. Obviously. >>>> >>>> name calling and emotional outbursts are simply ways to derail the >>>> subject. >>>> >>>> by doing this you are stating that you are an the end of your knowledge >>>> and way over your head, or your a libtard. >>>> >>>> >>>> remember CO2 is only 0.00039 part of the atmosphere the rest of is >>>> is not CO2 => 99.99961 % >>>> so the sun hardly hits any CO2 atoms. >>> >>> **It's actually more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly. The >>> Sun doesn't "hit CO2 atoms". Yikes! I made a grave error in assuming you >>> had some scientific knowledge. I won't make that mistake again. I now >>> realise what a monumental cretin you are. >>> >>> Points: >>> >>> * CO2 is not an "atom". CO2 is a MOLECULE. Here's a primer for you: >> >> Trevor has to pick nits because on the main topic he's sunk and his >> argument is in tatters. >> >> > > **It's hardly nit-picking. Sergio has demonstrated a sustained inability > to understand basic science. Much as you have done?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-18 11:25 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <fm6odnF2i8U4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #686058 |
On 18/05/2018 10:53 AM, Scout wrote: > > > "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message > news:fm3i11F92rqU2@mid.individual.net... >> On 16/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: >>> >>> >>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>> news:fm158hFnd3tU1@mid.individual.net... >>>> On 15/05/2018 11:52 PM, Sergio wrote: >>>>> On 5/15/2018 12:56 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>> On 9/05/2018 11:59 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/9/2018 6:52 AM, kensi wrote: >>>>>>>> In 2013, atmospheric carbon dioxide broke 400 parts per million for >>>>>>>> the first time in human history. Just a year later, atmospheric >>>>>>>> carbon dioxide averaged that for an entire month. And now? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/4/1762050/-The-last-time-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-was-this-high-humans-didn-t-exist >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> We hear you. Dinosaurs all died from heat stroke from all that CO2 >>>>>>> Greenhousing their world. Somehow science doesn't agree with this >>>>>>> fantasy. Since CO2 is a minor GHG it's level is obviously more or >>>>>>> less >>>>>>> irrelevant, both then and now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Water vapor is THE major GHG factor (50%) and clouds (also water) >>>>>>> are >>>>>>> another 25% and CO2 is NOT the remaining 25%. >>>>>> >>>>>> **Wrong, yappy lap-dog. You really should stop listening to your >>>>>> master, >>>>>> Sergio. He is wrong and so are you. Obviously. >>>>> >>>>> name calling and emotional outbursts are simply ways to derail the >>>>> subject. >>>>> >>>>> by doing this you are stating that you are an the end of your >>>>> knowledge >>>>> and way over your head, or your a libtard. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> remember CO2 is only 0.00039 part of the atmosphere the rest >>>>> of is >>>>> is not CO2 => 99.99961 % >>>>> so the sun hardly hits any CO2 atoms. >>>> >>>> **It's actually more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly. >>>> The Sun doesn't "hit CO2 atoms". Yikes! I made a grave error in >>>> assuming you had some scientific knowledge. I won't make that >>>> mistake again. I now realise what a monumental cretin you are. >>>> >>>> Points: >>>> >>>> * CO2 is not an "atom". CO2 is a MOLECULE. Here's a primer for you: >>> >>> Trevor has to pick nits because on the main topic he's sunk and his >>> argument is in tatters. >>> >>> >> >> **It's hardly nit-picking. Sergio has demonstrated a sustained >> inability to understand basic science. > > Much as you have done? **Since you don't understand climate science, then you are hardly in a position to make a judgement. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-17 22:30 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pdlelc$ol1$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #686079 |
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message news:fm6odnF2i8U4@mid.individual.net... > On 18/05/2018 10:53 AM, Scout wrote: >> >> >> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >> news:fm3i11F92rqU2@mid.individual.net... >>> On 16/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>> news:fm158hFnd3tU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>> On 15/05/2018 11:52 PM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>> On 5/15/2018 12:56 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>> On 9/05/2018 11:59 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>>>> On 5/9/2018 6:52 AM, kensi wrote: >>>>>>>>> In 2013, atmospheric carbon dioxide broke 400 parts per million >>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>> the first time in human history. Just a year later, atmospheric >>>>>>>>> carbon dioxide averaged that for an entire month. And now? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/4/1762050/-The-last-time-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-was-this-high-humans-didn-t-exist >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We hear you. Dinosaurs all died from heat stroke from all that CO2 >>>>>>>> Greenhousing their world. Somehow science doesn't agree with this >>>>>>>> fantasy. Since CO2 is a minor GHG it's level is obviously more or >>>>>>>> less >>>>>>>> irrelevant, both then and now. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Water vapor is THE major GHG factor (50%) and clouds (also water) >>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>> another 25% and CO2 is NOT the remaining 25%. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> **Wrong, yappy lap-dog. You really should stop listening to your >>>>>>> master, >>>>>>> Sergio. He is wrong and so are you. Obviously. >>>>>> >>>>>> name calling and emotional outbursts are simply ways to derail the >>>>>> subject. >>>>>> >>>>>> by doing this you are stating that you are an the end of your >>>>>> knowledge >>>>>> and way over your head, or your a libtard. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> remember CO2 is only 0.00039 part of the atmosphere the rest of >>>>>> is >>>>>> is not CO2 => 99.99961 % >>>>>> so the sun hardly hits any CO2 atoms. >>>>> >>>>> **It's actually more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly. The >>>>> Sun doesn't "hit CO2 atoms". Yikes! I made a grave error in assuming >>>>> you had some scientific knowledge. I won't make that mistake again. I >>>>> now realise what a monumental cretin you are. >>>>> >>>>> Points: >>>>> >>>>> * CO2 is not an "atom". CO2 is a MOLECULE. Here's a primer for you: >>>> >>>> Trevor has to pick nits because on the main topic he's sunk and his >>>> argument is in tatters. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> **It's hardly nit-picking. Sergio has demonstrated a sustained inability >>> to understand basic science. >> >> Much as you have done? > > **Since you don't understand climate science, then you are hardly in a > position to make a judgement. Since your claims have no value, your assessment is similarly lacking in value.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-18 14:08 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <fm71uoF1qk2U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #686106 |
On 18/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: > > > "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message > news:fm6odnF2i8U4@mid.individual.net... >> On 18/05/2018 10:53 AM, Scout wrote: >>> >>> >>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>> news:fm3i11F92rqU2@mid.individual.net... >>>> On 16/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>> news:fm158hFnd3tU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>> On 15/05/2018 11:52 PM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/15/2018 12:56 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>> On 9/05/2018 11:59 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 5/9/2018 6:52 AM, kensi wrote: >>>>>>>>>> In 2013, atmospheric carbon dioxide broke 400 parts per >>>>>>>>>> million for >>>>>>>>>> the first time in human history. Just a year later, atmospheric >>>>>>>>>> carbon dioxide averaged that for an entire month. And now? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/4/1762050/-The-last-time-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-was-this-high-humans-didn-t-exist >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We hear you. Dinosaurs all died from heat stroke from all that CO2 >>>>>>>>> Greenhousing their world. Somehow science doesn't agree with this >>>>>>>>> fantasy. Since CO2 is a minor GHG it's level is obviously more >>>>>>>>> or less >>>>>>>>> irrelevant, both then and now. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Water vapor is THE major GHG factor (50%) and clouds (also >>>>>>>>> water) are >>>>>>>>> another 25% and CO2 is NOT the remaining 25%. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> **Wrong, yappy lap-dog. You really should stop listening to your >>>>>>>> master, >>>>>>>> Sergio. He is wrong and so are you. Obviously. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> name calling and emotional outbursts are simply ways to derail the >>>>>>> subject. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> by doing this you are stating that you are an the end of your >>>>>>> knowledge >>>>>>> and way over your head, or your a libtard. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> remember CO2 is only 0.00039 part of the atmosphere the rest >>>>>>> of is >>>>>>> is not CO2 => 99.99961 % >>>>>>> so the sun hardly hits any CO2 atoms. >>>>>> >>>>>> **It's actually more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly. >>>>>> The Sun doesn't "hit CO2 atoms". Yikes! I made a grave error in >>>>>> assuming you had some scientific knowledge. I won't make that >>>>>> mistake again. I now realise what a monumental cretin you are. >>>>>> >>>>>> Points: >>>>>> >>>>>> * CO2 is not an "atom". CO2 is a MOLECULE. Here's a primer for you: >>>>> >>>>> Trevor has to pick nits because on the main topic he's sunk and his >>>>> argument is in tatters. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> **It's hardly nit-picking. Sergio has demonstrated a sustained >>>> inability to understand basic science. >>> >>> Much as you have done? >> >> **Since you don't understand climate science, then you are hardly in a >> position to make a judgement. > > Since your claims have no value, your assessment is similarly lacking in > value. **They're not _my_ claims. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-18 00:42 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pdlmkc$too$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #686120 |
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message news:fm71uoF1qk2U2@mid.individual.net... > On 18/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: >> >> >> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >> news:fm6odnF2i8U4@mid.individual.net... >>> On 18/05/2018 10:53 AM, Scout wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>> news:fm3i11F92rqU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>> On 16/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>>> news:fm158hFnd3tU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>> On 15/05/2018 11:52 PM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>>>> On 5/15/2018 12:56 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 9/05/2018 11:59 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 5/9/2018 6:52 AM, kensi wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> In 2013, atmospheric carbon dioxide broke 400 parts per million >>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>> the first time in human history. Just a year later, atmospheric >>>>>>>>>>> carbon dioxide averaged that for an entire month. And now? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/4/1762050/-The-last-time-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-was-this-high-humans-didn-t-exist >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> We hear you. Dinosaurs all died from heat stroke from all that >>>>>>>>>> CO2 >>>>>>>>>> Greenhousing their world. Somehow science doesn't agree with this >>>>>>>>>> fantasy. Since CO2 is a minor GHG it's level is obviously more or >>>>>>>>>> less >>>>>>>>>> irrelevant, both then and now. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Water vapor is THE major GHG factor (50%) and clouds (also water) >>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>> another 25% and CO2 is NOT the remaining 25%. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> **Wrong, yappy lap-dog. You really should stop listening to your >>>>>>>>> master, >>>>>>>>> Sergio. He is wrong and so are you. Obviously. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> name calling and emotional outbursts are simply ways to derail the >>>>>>>> subject. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> by doing this you are stating that you are an the end of your >>>>>>>> knowledge >>>>>>>> and way over your head, or your a libtard. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> remember CO2 is only 0.00039 part of the atmosphere the rest >>>>>>>> of is >>>>>>>> is not CO2 => 99.99961 % >>>>>>>> so the sun hardly hits any CO2 atoms. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> **It's actually more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly. >>>>>>> The Sun doesn't "hit CO2 atoms". Yikes! I made a grave error in >>>>>>> assuming you had some scientific knowledge. I won't make that >>>>>>> mistake again. I now realise what a monumental cretin you are. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Points: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * CO2 is not an "atom". CO2 is a MOLECULE. Here's a primer for you: >>>>>> >>>>>> Trevor has to pick nits because on the main topic he's sunk and his >>>>>> argument is in tatters. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> **It's hardly nit-picking. Sergio has demonstrated a sustained >>>>> inability to understand basic science. >>>> >>>> Much as you have done? >>> >>> **Since you don't understand climate science, then you are hardly in a >>> position to make a judgement. >> >> Since your claims have no value, your assessment is similarly lacking in >> value. > > **They're not _my_ claims Then I suppose you're going to tell us that someone has been impersonating you? Or are you going to claim they hacked your account? Must be the second since all the header information leads back to you, but hey if you want to claim you're not the idiot that has been posting that nonsense as Trevor Wilson....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-18 15:22 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <fm769vF2nf8U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #686127 |
On 18/05/2018 2:42 PM, Scout wrote: > > > "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message > news:fm71uoF1qk2U2@mid.individual.net... >> On 18/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: >>> >>> >>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>> news:fm6odnF2i8U4@mid.individual.net... >>>> On 18/05/2018 10:53 AM, Scout wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>> news:fm3i11F92rqU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>> On 16/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in >>>>>>> message news:fm158hFnd3tU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>> On 15/05/2018 11:52 PM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 5/15/2018 12:56 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 9/05/2018 11:59 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 5/9/2018 6:52 AM, kensi wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> In 2013, atmospheric carbon dioxide broke 400 parts per >>>>>>>>>>>> million for >>>>>>>>>>>> the first time in human history. Just a year later, atmospheric >>>>>>>>>>>> carbon dioxide averaged that for an entire month. And now? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/4/1762050/-The-last-time-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-was-this-high-humans-didn-t-exist >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> We hear you. Dinosaurs all died from heat stroke from all >>>>>>>>>>> that CO2 >>>>>>>>>>> Greenhousing their world. Somehow science doesn't agree with >>>>>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>>>> fantasy. Since CO2 is a minor GHG it's level is obviously >>>>>>>>>>> more or less >>>>>>>>>>> irrelevant, both then and now. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Water vapor is THE major GHG factor (50%) and clouds (also >>>>>>>>>>> water) are >>>>>>>>>>> another 25% and CO2 is NOT the remaining 25%. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> **Wrong, yappy lap-dog. You really should stop listening to >>>>>>>>>> your master, >>>>>>>>>> Sergio. He is wrong and so are you. Obviously. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> name calling and emotional outbursts are simply ways to derail the >>>>>>>>> subject. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> by doing this you are stating that you are an the end of your >>>>>>>>> knowledge >>>>>>>>> and way over your head, or your a libtard. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> remember CO2 is only 0.00039 part of the atmosphere the >>>>>>>>> rest of is >>>>>>>>> is not CO2 => 99.99961 % >>>>>>>>> so the sun hardly hits any CO2 atoms. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> **It's actually more like 410ppm right now and increasing >>>>>>>> rapidly. The Sun doesn't "hit CO2 atoms". Yikes! I made a grave >>>>>>>> error in assuming you had some scientific knowledge. I won't >>>>>>>> make that mistake again. I now realise what a monumental cretin >>>>>>>> you are. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Points: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * CO2 is not an "atom". CO2 is a MOLECULE. Here's a primer for you: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Trevor has to pick nits because on the main topic he's sunk and >>>>>>> his argument is in tatters. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> **It's hardly nit-picking. Sergio has demonstrated a sustained >>>>>> inability to understand basic science. >>>>> >>>>> Much as you have done? >>>> >>>> **Since you don't understand climate science, then you are hardly in >>>> a position to make a judgement. >>> >>> Since your claims have no value, your assessment is similarly lacking >>> in value. >> >> **They're not _my_ claims > > Then I suppose you're going to tell us that someone has been > impersonating you? **They're not my claims. I am citing the evidence from the IPCC reports. > > Or are you going to claim they hacked your account? **They're not my claims. I am citing the evidence from the IPCC reports. > > Must be the second since all the header information leads back to you, > but hey if you want to claim you're not the idiot that has been posting > that nonsense as Trevor Wilson.... **Your idiocy is boundless. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-18 03:31 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pdm16o$lmn$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #686132 |
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message news:fm769vF2nf8U2@mid.individual.net... > On 18/05/2018 2:42 PM, Scout wrote: >> >> >> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >> news:fm71uoF1qk2U2@mid.individual.net... >>> On 18/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>> news:fm6odnF2i8U4@mid.individual.net... >>>>> On 18/05/2018 10:53 AM, Scout wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>>> news:fm3i11F92rqU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>> On 16/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:fm158hFnd3tU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>> On 15/05/2018 11:52 PM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 5/15/2018 12:56 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 9/05/2018 11:59 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/9/2018 6:52 AM, kensi wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> In 2013, atmospheric carbon dioxide broke 400 parts per >>>>>>>>>>>>> million for >>>>>>>>>>>>> the first time in human history. Just a year later, >>>>>>>>>>>>> atmospheric >>>>>>>>>>>>> carbon dioxide averaged that for an entire month. And now? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/4/1762050/-The-last-time-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-was-this-high-humans-didn-t-exist >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> We hear you. Dinosaurs all died from heat stroke from all that >>>>>>>>>>>> CO2 >>>>>>>>>>>> Greenhousing their world. Somehow science doesn't agree with >>>>>>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>>>>> fantasy. Since CO2 is a minor GHG it's level is obviously more >>>>>>>>>>>> or less >>>>>>>>>>>> irrelevant, both then and now. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Water vapor is THE major GHG factor (50%) and clouds (also >>>>>>>>>>>> water) are >>>>>>>>>>>> another 25% and CO2 is NOT the remaining 25%. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> **Wrong, yappy lap-dog. You really should stop listening to your >>>>>>>>>>> master, >>>>>>>>>>> Sergio. He is wrong and so are you. Obviously. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> name calling and emotional outbursts are simply ways to derail >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> subject. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> by doing this you are stating that you are an the end of your >>>>>>>>>> knowledge >>>>>>>>>> and way over your head, or your a libtard. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> remember CO2 is only 0.00039 part of the atmosphere the rest >>>>>>>>>> of is >>>>>>>>>> is not CO2 => 99.99961 % >>>>>>>>>> so the sun hardly hits any CO2 atoms. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> **It's actually more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly. >>>>>>>>> The Sun doesn't "hit CO2 atoms". Yikes! I made a grave error in >>>>>>>>> assuming you had some scientific knowledge. I won't make that >>>>>>>>> mistake again. I now realise what a monumental cretin you are. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Points: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * CO2 is not an "atom". CO2 is a MOLECULE. Here's a primer for >>>>>>>>> you: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Trevor has to pick nits because on the main topic he's sunk and his >>>>>>>> argument is in tatters. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> **It's hardly nit-picking. Sergio has demonstrated a sustained >>>>>>> inability to understand basic science. >>>>>> >>>>>> Much as you have done? >>>>> >>>>> **Since you don't understand climate science, then you are hardly in a >>>>> position to make a judgement. >>>> >>>> Since your claims have no value, your assessment is similarly lacking >>>> in value. >>> >>> **They're not _my_ claims >> >> Then I suppose you're going to tell us that someone has been >> impersonating you? > > **They're not my claims. I am citing the evidence from the IPCC reports. > >> >> Or are you going to claim they hacked your account? > > **They're not my claims. I am citing the evidence from the IPCC reports. No, you are making the claims and then attempting to cite unspecified IPCC reports to support your claims. >> Must be the second since all the header information leads back to you, >> but hey if you want to claim you're not the idiot that has been posting >> that nonsense as Trevor Wilson.... > > **Your idiocy is boundless. If you're then one typing and you say something like "It's actually more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly." that is YOU making a claim. Not the IPCC, not some professor, but YOU. Now you might cite the IPCC or some professor in supporting the claim you made, but the claim is YOURS. You typed it, that makes it yours. If not, then STFU and let them talk to us. See that's your problem Trevor....you want to make claims like you know what you're talking about....but then refuse to accept responsibility for making the claims you do.....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-18 07:06 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <pdmfjo$1mjf$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #686149 |
On 5/18/2018 2:31 AM, Scout wrote: > > > "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message > news:fm769vF2nf8U2@mid.individual.net... >> On 18/05/2018 2:42 PM, Scout wrote: >>> >>> >>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>> news:fm71uoF1qk2U2@mid.individual.net... >>>> On 18/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>> news:fm6odnF2i8U4@mid.individual.net... >>>>>> On 18/05/2018 10:53 AM, Scout wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in >>>>>>> message news:fm3i11F92rqU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>> On 16/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in >>>>>>>>> message news:fm158hFnd3tU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>> On 15/05/2018 11:52 PM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 5/15/2018 12:56 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/05/2018 11:59 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/9/2018 6:52 AM, kensi wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In 2013, atmospheric carbon dioxide broke 400 parts per >>>>>>>>>>>>>> million for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the first time in human history. Just a year later, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> atmospheric >>>>>>>>>>>>>> carbon dioxide averaged that for an entire month. And now? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/4/1762050/-The-last-time-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-was-this-high-humans-didn-t-exist >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> We hear you. Dinosaurs all died from heat stroke from all >>>>>>>>>>>>> that CO2 >>>>>>>>>>>>> Greenhousing their world. Somehow science doesn't agree >>>>>>>>>>>>> with this >>>>>>>>>>>>> fantasy. Since CO2 is a minor GHG it's level is obviously >>>>>>>>>>>>> more or less >>>>>>>>>>>>> irrelevant, both then and now. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Water vapor is THE major GHG factor (50%) and clouds (also >>>>>>>>>>>>> water) are >>>>>>>>>>>>> another 25% and CO2 is NOT the remaining 25%. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> **Wrong, yappy lap-dog. You really should stop listening to >>>>>>>>>>>> your master, >>>>>>>>>>>> Sergio. He is wrong and so are you. Obviously. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> name calling and emotional outbursts are simply ways to >>>>>>>>>>> derail the >>>>>>>>>>> subject. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> by doing this you are stating that you are an the end of your >>>>>>>>>>> knowledge >>>>>>>>>>> and way over your head, or your a libtard. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> remember CO2 is only 0.00039 part of the atmosphere the >>>>>>>>>>> rest of is >>>>>>>>>>> is not CO2 => 99.99961 % >>>>>>>>>>> so the sun hardly hits any CO2 atoms. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> **It's actually more like 410ppm right now and increasing >>>>>>>>>> rapidly. The Sun doesn't "hit CO2 atoms". Yikes! I made a >>>>>>>>>> grave error in assuming you had some scientific knowledge. I >>>>>>>>>> won't make that mistake again. I now realise what a monumental >>>>>>>>>> cretin you are. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Points: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> * CO2 is not an "atom". CO2 is a MOLECULE. Here's a primer for >>>>>>>>>> you: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Trevor has to pick nits because on the main topic he's sunk and >>>>>>>>> his argument is in tatters. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> **It's hardly nit-picking. Sergio has demonstrated a sustained >>>>>>>> inability to understand basic science. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Much as you have done? >>>>>> >>>>>> **Since you don't understand climate science, then you are hardly >>>>>> in a position to make a judgement. >>>>> >>>>> Since your claims have no value, your assessment is similarly >>>>> lacking in value. >>>> >>>> **They're not _my_ claims >>> >>> Then I suppose you're going to tell us that someone has been >>> impersonating you? >> >> **They're not my claims. I am citing the evidence from the IPCC reports. >> >>> >>> Or are you going to claim they hacked your account? >> >> **They're not my claims. I am citing the evidence from the IPCC reports. > > No, you are making the claims and then attempting to cite unspecified > IPCC reports to support your claims. > > > >>> Must be the second since all the header information leads back to >>> you, but hey if you want to claim you're not the idiot that has been >>> posting that nonsense as Trevor Wilson.... >> >> **Your idiocy is boundless. > > If you're then one typing and you say something like "It's actually > more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly." that is YOU making a > claim. Not the IPCC, not some professor, but YOU. Now you might cite the > IPCC or some professor in supporting the claim you made, but the claim > is YOURS. You typed it, that makes it yours. > > If not, then STFU and let them talk to us. > > See that's your problem Trevor....you want to make claims like you know > what you're talking about....but then refuse to accept responsibility > for making the claims you do..... > Trevor "the parrot" Wilson, says he's not a scientist and squawks, " arr ... 43% !! .... 9% .... " and has no idea why. and then, parrot boy says he proves Water Vapor is 3 to 4 times more of a global warming gas than CO2, without knowing it! Or why !! Trevor "the stupid parrot" Wilson, and known proven liar.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-18 11:49 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pdmsm0$f66$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #686149 |
On 5/18/2018 3:31 AM, Scout wrote: > "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message > news:fm769vF2nf8U2@mid.individual.net... >> **Your idiocy is boundless. > > If you're then one typing and you say something like "It's actually > more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly." Latest CO2 reading 412.16 ppm May 16, 2018 Carbon dioxide concentration at Mauna Loa Observatory https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/ SPNAK! on Scout and other climate change deniers. Or are you going to accuse the Scripps Institution of Oceanography of being "leftist biased" rather than scientific now? -- "To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks "I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade in here." ~Checkmate
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-18 13:25 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <00ELC.58156$VB3.23307@fx11.iad> |
| In reply to | #686167 |
On 5/18/2018 11:49 AM, kensi wrote: > On 5/18/2018 3:31 AM, Scout wrote: >> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >> news:fm769vF2nf8U2@mid.individual.net... >>> **Your idiocy is boundless. >> >> If you're then one typing and you say something like "It's actually >> more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly." > > Latest CO2 reading 412.16 ppm > May 16, 2018 > Carbon dioxide concentration at Mauna Loa Observatory > > https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/ > > SPNAK! on Scout and other climate change deniers. > > Or are you going to accuse the Scripps Institution of Oceanography of > being "leftist biased" rather than scientific now? > Gosh, How odd that this world "standard" for CO2 levels is located right in Hawaii where currently an active volcano, a well known natural source of CO2 by "consensus science", just happens to be spewing forth gasses of all kinds. Coincidence? So who do you trust? Some anonymous big mouth troll voice on the internet or the facts of science?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-18 19:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pdna6h$jjt$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #686190 |
Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! On Fri, 18 May 2018 13:25:10 -0400, benj wrote: > On 5/18/2018 11:49 AM, kensi wrote: >> On 5/18/2018 3:31 AM, Scout wrote: >>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>> news:fm769vF2nf8U2@mid.individual.net... >>>> **Your idiocy is boundless. >>> >>> If you're then one typing and you say something like "It's actually >>> more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly." >> >> Latest CO2 reading 412.16 ppm May 16, 2018 Carbon dioxide concentration >> at Mauna Loa Observatory >> >> https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/ >> >> SPNAK! on Scout and other climate change deniers. >> >> Or are you going to accuse the Scripps Institution of Oceanography of >> being "leftist biased" rather than scientific now? >> > Gosh, How odd that this world "standard" for CO2 levels is located right > in Hawaii where currently an active volcano, a well known natural source > of CO2 by "consensus science", just happens to be spewing forth gasses > of all kinds. Coincidence? > > So who do you trust? Some anonymous big mouth troll voice on the > internet or the facts of science? Now where was that site kensi linked me to, that was soooo handy for using on your particular brand of kook? Oh, here it is: https://skepticalscience.com/Measuring-CO2-levels-from-the-volcano-at- Mauna-Loa.html ---------- But how about gas from the volcano? It is true that volcanoes blow out CO2 from time to time and that this can interfere with the readings. Most of the time, though, the prevailing winds blow the volcanic gasses away from the observatory. But when the winds do sometimes blow from active vents towards the observatory, the influence from the volcano is obvious on the normally consistent records and any dubious readings can be easily spotted and edited out (Ryan, 1995). Importantly, Mauna Loa is not the only atmospheric measuring station in the world. As the graph from NOAA shows, other stations show the same year- after-year increasing trend. ---------- Also https://skepticalscience.com/mauna-loa-volcano-co2-measurements.htm ---------- The measurements of the amount of CO2 made at the Mauna Loa Observatory are accurate and uncontaminated by any emissions from the volcano. The measurements show a steadily increasing tend of CO2 concentrations in the air, a trend that is confirmed by many measurements made elsewhere. ---------- SPNAK! The heightened CO2 concentrations must be getting to your brain. <snicker> -- FNVWe Nadegda Fakey couldn't teach a monkey to eat a banana, much less answer a direct question posed to him. -- Fakey's Dogwhistle Holder
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-18 20:23 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <08KLC.65096$4M6.9990@fx27.iad> |
| In reply to | #686212 |
On 5/18/2018 3:40 PM, Nadegda wrote: > Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! > On Fri, 18 May 2018 13:25:10 -0400, benj wrote: > >> On 5/18/2018 11:49 AM, kensi wrote: >>> On 5/18/2018 3:31 AM, Scout wrote: >>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>> news:fm769vF2nf8U2@mid.individual.net... >>>>> **Your idiocy is boundless. >>>> >>>> If you're then one typing and you say something like "It's actually >>>> more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly." >>> >>> Latest CO2 reading 412.16 ppm May 16, 2018 Carbon dioxide concentration >>> at Mauna Loa Observatory >>> >>> https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/ >>> >>> SPNAK! on Scout and other climate change deniers. >>> >>> Or are you going to accuse the Scripps Institution of Oceanography of >>> being "leftist biased" rather than scientific now? >>> >> Gosh, How odd that this world "standard" for CO2 levels is located right >> in Hawaii where currently an active volcano, a well known natural source >> of CO2 by "consensus science", just happens to be spewing forth gasses >> of all kinds. Coincidence? >> >> So who do you trust? Some anonymous big mouth troll voice on the >> internet or the facts of science? > > Now where was that site kensi linked me to, that was soooo handy for using > on your particular brand of kook? Oh, here it is: > > https://skepticalscience.com/Measuring-CO2-levels-from-the-volcano-at- > Mauna-Loa.html > > ---------- BZZZZTT! "skeptical science" website of the Nazi failed cartoonist as some kind of "proof" of something? You are failed and out of the game, Nads. I guess you only look at the pictures anyway. snip rest of cartoonist blather and drool.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-19 03:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pdo68r$jjt$11@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #686260 |
Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! On Fri, 18 May 2018 20:23:19 -0400, benj wrote: > On 5/18/2018 3:40 PM, Nadegda wrote: >> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, >> melt! On Fri, 18 May 2018 13:25:10 -0400, benj wrote: >> >>> On 5/18/2018 11:49 AM, kensi wrote: >>>> On 5/18/2018 3:31 AM, Scout wrote: >>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>> news:fm769vF2nf8U2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>> **Your idiocy is boundless. >>>>> >>>>> If you're then one typing and you say something like "It's actually >>>>> more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly." >>>> >>>> Latest CO2 reading 412.16 ppm May 16, 2018 Carbon dioxide >>>> concentration at Mauna Loa Observatory >>>> >>>> https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/ >>>> >>>> SPNAK! on Scout and other climate change deniers. >>>> >>>> Or are you going to accuse the Scripps Institution of Oceanography of >>>> being "leftist biased" rather than scientific now? >>>> >>> Gosh, How odd that this world "standard" for CO2 levels is located >>> right in Hawaii where currently an active volcano, a well known >>> natural source of CO2 by "consensus science", just happens to be >>> spewing forth gasses of all kinds. Coincidence? >>> >>> So who do you trust? Some anonymous big mouth troll voice on the >>> internet or the facts of science? >> >> Now where was that site kensi linked me to, that was soooo handy for >> using on your particular brand of kook? Oh, here it is: >> >> https://skepticalscience.com/Measuring-CO2-levels-from-the-volcano-at- >> Mauna-Loa.html >> >> ---------- > > BZZZZTT! > > "skeptical science" website of the Nazi failed cartoonist as some kind > of "proof" of something? You are failed and out of the game, Nads. > I guess you only look at the pictures anyway. > > snip rest of cartoonist blather and drool. Calling the climatologist a "Nazi" is rather ironic, coming from a far- right loon like you. -- FNVWe Nadegda Fakey couldn't teach a monkey to eat a banana, much less answer a direct question posed to him. -- Fakey's Dogwhistle Holder
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-18 18:41 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pdnm3g$qf0$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #686167 |
"kensi" <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> wrote in message news:pdmsm0$f66$1@gioia.aioe.org... > On 5/18/2018 3:31 AM, Scout wrote: >> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >> news:fm769vF2nf8U2@mid.individual.net... >>> **Your idiocy is boundless. >> >> If you're then one typing and you say something like "It's actually more >> like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly." > > Latest CO2 reading 412.16 ppm > May 16, 2018 > Carbon dioxide concentration at Mauna Loa Observatory > > https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/ So let's see....you offer a SINGLE data point and from that we're suppose to assume that the conditions everywhere else on the planet are EXACTLY the same and will NEVER change. Maybe Trevor can explain to you your glaring error.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-19 03:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pdo6br$jjt$12@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #686239 |
Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! On Fri, 18 May 2018 18:41:07 -0400, Scout wrote: > "kensi" <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> wrote in message > news:pdmsm0$f66$1@gioia.aioe.org... >> On 5/18/2018 3:31 AM, Scout wrote: >>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>> news:fm769vF2nf8U2@mid.individual.net... >>>> **Your idiocy is boundless. >>> >>> If you're then one typing and you say something like "It's actually >>> more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly." >> >> Latest CO2 reading 412.16 ppm May 16, 2018 Carbon dioxide concentration >> at Mauna Loa Observatory >> >> https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/ > > So let's see....you offer a SINGLE data point<SPANK!> Multiple measurements occur at multiple sites, and they all correlate strongly with each other: CO2 is increasing steadily year-over-year. https://skepticalscience.com/mauna-loa-volcano-co2-measurements.htm -- FNVWe Nadegda Fakey couldn't teach a monkey to eat a banana, much less answer a direct question posed to him. -- Fakey's Dogwhistle Holder
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-21 07:36 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <fme829Fjn2mU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #686149 |
On 18/05/2018 5:31 PM, Scout wrote: > > > "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message > news:fm769vF2nf8U2@mid.individual.net... >> On 18/05/2018 2:42 PM, Scout wrote: >>> >>> >>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>> news:fm71uoF1qk2U2@mid.individual.net... >>>> On 18/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message >>>>> news:fm6odnF2i8U4@mid.individual.net... >>>>>> On 18/05/2018 10:53 AM, Scout wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in >>>>>>> message news:fm3i11F92rqU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>> On 16/05/2018 12:30 PM, Scout wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in >>>>>>>>> message news:fm158hFnd3tU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>> On 15/05/2018 11:52 PM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 5/15/2018 12:56 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/05/2018 11:59 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/9/2018 6:52 AM, kensi wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In 2013, atmospheric carbon dioxide broke 400 parts per >>>>>>>>>>>>>> million for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the first time in human history. Just a year later, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> atmospheric >>>>>>>>>>>>>> carbon dioxide averaged that for an entire month. And now? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/5/4/1762050/-The-last-time-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-was-this-high-humans-didn-t-exist >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> We hear you. Dinosaurs all died from heat stroke from all >>>>>>>>>>>>> that CO2 >>>>>>>>>>>>> Greenhousing their world. Somehow science doesn't agree >>>>>>>>>>>>> with this >>>>>>>>>>>>> fantasy. Since CO2 is a minor GHG it's level is obviously >>>>>>>>>>>>> more or less >>>>>>>>>>>>> irrelevant, both then and now. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Water vapor is THE major GHG factor (50%) and clouds (also >>>>>>>>>>>>> water) are >>>>>>>>>>>>> another 25% and CO2 is NOT the remaining 25%. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> **Wrong, yappy lap-dog. You really should stop listening to >>>>>>>>>>>> your master, >>>>>>>>>>>> Sergio. He is wrong and so are you. Obviously. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> name calling and emotional outbursts are simply ways to >>>>>>>>>>> derail the >>>>>>>>>>> subject. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> by doing this you are stating that you are an the end of your >>>>>>>>>>> knowledge >>>>>>>>>>> and way over your head, or your a libtard. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> remember CO2 is only 0.00039 part of the atmosphere the >>>>>>>>>>> rest of is >>>>>>>>>>> is not CO2 => 99.99961 % >>>>>>>>>>> so the sun hardly hits any CO2 atoms. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> **It's actually more like 410ppm right now and increasing >>>>>>>>>> rapidly. The Sun doesn't "hit CO2 atoms". Yikes! I made a >>>>>>>>>> grave error in assuming you had some scientific knowledge. I >>>>>>>>>> won't make that mistake again. I now realise what a monumental >>>>>>>>>> cretin you are. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Points: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> * CO2 is not an "atom". CO2 is a MOLECULE. Here's a primer for >>>>>>>>>> you: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Trevor has to pick nits because on the main topic he's sunk and >>>>>>>>> his argument is in tatters. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> **It's hardly nit-picking. Sergio has demonstrated a sustained >>>>>>>> inability to understand basic science. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Much as you have done? >>>>>> >>>>>> **Since you don't understand climate science, then you are hardly >>>>>> in a position to make a judgement. >>>>> >>>>> Since your claims have no value, your assessment is similarly >>>>> lacking in value. >>>> >>>> **They're not _my_ claims >>> >>> Then I suppose you're going to tell us that someone has been >>> impersonating you? >> >> **They're not my claims. I am citing the evidence from the IPCC reports. >> >>> >>> Or are you going to claim they hacked your account? >> >> **They're not my claims. I am citing the evidence from the IPCC reports. > > No, you are making the claims and then attempting to cite unspecified > IPCC reports to support your claims. **Here's the data you requested: http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter08_FINAL.pdf > > > >>> Must be the second since all the header information leads back to >>> you, but hey if you want to claim you're not the idiot that has been >>> posting that nonsense as Trevor Wilson.... >> >> **Your idiocy is boundless. > > If you're then one typing and you say something like "It's actually > more like 410ppm right now and increasing rapidly." that is YOU making a > claim. Not the IPCC, not some professor, but YOU. Now you might cite the > IPCC or some professor in supporting the claim you made, but the claim > is YOURS. You typed it, that makes it yours. **Here is the data you requested: https://www.co2.earth/global-co2-emissions https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/global-co2-emissions-rise-after-paris-climate-agreement-signed/ https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter02_FINAL.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere > > If not, then STFU and let them talk to us. > > See that's your problem Trevor....you want to make claims like you know > what you're talking about....but then refuse to accept responsibility > for making the claims you do..... **Cites posted as requested. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 13 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web