Greenie-Weenies Knowledge Base matches CO² Levels...

[pjmret]

Deluded wannabe scientists are wrong about so many things they are unaware of.

well the OP is deluded, as I proved.

 

[pjmret]

The fact is that researchers 60 years ago claimed hundreds of years of data showed alarming trends toward damaging cooling. Researchers today claim hundreds of years of data show alarming trends towards global warming. They cannot both be right. So what does hundreds of years of data prove? Not much more than that these alarmists don't know what they are talking about.

Researchers and institutions are in business to make a living while in business. Unfortunately, greedy politicians motivated by greedy lobbyists have passed damaging government funding of projects promoted by these people that enrich these people while doing really very little for real science.

well a tiny number of papers did, outweighed by global warming papers.

only a ***** would pick the minority of papers versus the majority.

but you are indeed a science ***** lol

 

[mark francis]

well the OP is deluded, as I proved.

Really? Why not post proof that the atmospheric content of CO2 is not considerably less than 1%? Have you bought into the lie that there are irrefutable trends in changing CO2 content that should make poor Americans willing to sacrifice tens of trillions of dollars to the gurus claiming, but never proving, there is reason for alarm?

 

[pjmret]

Really? Why not post proof that the atmospheric content of CO2 is not considerably less than 1%? Have you bought into the lie that there are irrefutable trends in changing CO2 content that should make poor Americans willing to sacrifice tens of trillions of dollars to the gurus claiming, but never proving, there is reason for alarm?

You are such a science ***** the percentage of co 2 is not Under debate here it's the influence of it. You are stupid enough to say because it's very small that it can't be a problem but I proved you too were wrong

 

[pjmret]

Really? Why not post proof that the atmospheric content of CO2 is not considerably less than 1%? Have you bought into the lie that there are irrefutable trends in changing CO2 content that should make poor Americans willing to sacrifice tens of trillions of dollars to the gurus claiming, but never proving, there is reason for alarm?

The economics of fixing the climate damage is not a science question *****.

You are willing to believe that global warming is not a problem but the scientific evidence shows it is or haven't you noticed how hot it's gotten lately in the past decade

 

[mark francis]

well a tiny number of papers did, outweighed by global warming papers.

only a ***** would pick the minority of papers versus the majority.

but you are indeed a science ***** lol

You imply that fewer older papers must be wrong in light of the many more newer papers. That may be a valid concept in promoting propaganda but has no value in real science.

 

[mark francis]

You are such a science ***** the percentage of co 2 is not Under debate here it's the influence of it. You are stupid enough to say because it's very small that it can't be a problem but I proved you too were wrong

Your error in slamming the OP was in not detailing which particular point in the OP you felt compelled to criticize, yet without facts to support your private opinion.

 

[pjmret]

You imply that fewer older papers must be wrong in light of the many more newer papers. That may be a valid concept in promoting propaganda but has no value in real science.

Of course all the papers since then have favored global warming and not global cooling as more research has gone on But I was just responding to your stupid claim about how researchers were really piling on global cooling which Proved was wrong because you are a science *****

 

[mark francis]

The economics of fixing the climate damage is not a science question *****.

You are willing to believe that global warming is not a problem but the scientific evidence shows it is or haven't you noticed how hot it's gotten lately in the past decade

Leftists after the release of tax dollars into their coffers promote misunderstandings and misinterpretations of very limited data to deceive poor people into sacrificing more of their increasing tax dollars and modern comforts to rich gurus who cannot fix the non-existent problem to begin with.

 

[mark francis]

Of course all the papers since then have favored global warming and not global cooling as more research has gone on But I was just responding to your stupid claim about how researchers were really piling on global cooling which Proved was wrong because you are a science *****

You join millions of others who could not prove what they preach if their lives depended on it, but they willingly parrot the unprovable leftist lies like brainless bobbleheads.

 

[LittleGreenMan]

How about explaining how some clouds blocks the sun and cool the Earth and other clouds block the sun and warm the Earth? The Year Without a Summer, 1816 caused a worldwide short and poor growing season with a 5.4°F cooler than ~normal~. This was the result of the Mount Tambora volcano blowing up in Indonesia. That should have caused a year without a winter, right? And when the meteor hit off Yucatan and ended the Cretaceous Period with a cooling period, why wasn't there a heating period? (Be careful answering here; Venus is cloud-covered and hot as hell and Mars has no clouds and is cold as a witch's tit.)

There is substantial discussion about the relationship between heating and CO² and which comes first, the chicken or the egg. Does CO² induce heating, or does heating increase CO² output? There is a third opinion that I postulate: they are coincident companions; they rise or fall in unison due to events neither controls nor causes, like sunspot cycles. Just in case I don't live long enough to receive my Nobel Prize in person, I'd like MIT to change the name of the institution to Little Green Man Institute of Blather, LGMIB. It just rolls off your tongue!

(Watch out for trick questions here. If you don't know your ass from your elbow, maybe you should just give a canned answer like, "You're a scientific *****..." (Feel free to use more than the standard four words and ignore spelling, that's just for sissies anyway.)

 

[pjmret]

Leftists after the release of tax dollars into their coffers promote misunderstandings and misinterpretations of very limited data to deceive poor people into sacrificing more of their increasing tax dollars and modern comforts to rich gurus who cannot fix the non-existent problem to begin with.

More right-wing word salad with 0 intellectual content LOL

 

[mark francis]

More right-wing word salad with 0 intellectual content LOL

You sure have a habit of spewing unsupported opinions without an ounce of proof.

 

[pjmret]

You sure have a habit of spewing unsupported opinions without an ounce of proof.

Feel free to Google global climate change and you will find more evidence than you can digest in a lifetime But you are so stupid you don't understand how even a small amount of carbon dioxide can be influential

 

[mark francis]

Feel free to Google global climate change and you will find more evidence than you can digest in a lifetime But you are so stupid you don't understand how even a small amount of carbon dioxide can be influential

I suspect there may be hundreds of thousands of bobble head leftists who parrot global warming propaganda while being totally unable incapable of proving what they propagate.