Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 28, 2024, 10:28 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Another Reason Christians are Dangerous
#31
RE: Another Reason Christians are Dangerous
(February 1, 2017 at 4:39 am)Fake Messiah Wrote: While there were scientists that predicted we would be out of oil by now, they were actually not so wrong and don't let that confuse you. Oil extraction changed dramatically over the last century and still does.

Not so wrong !?! They were completely wrong. They made predicted a disaster that did not come to pass precisely because they discounted human ingenuity and the power of market forces to efficiently allocate resources. Environmentalists are generally anti-technology and big government types. In their ideal world progress means forcing everyone to live in organic sustenance agricultural communes. No one other than hippy douches (thanks Drich) are going back on the farm to avoid theoretical ecological disasters based on unfalsifiable computer models tweeked to satisfy liberal/"progressive" political agendas. That's not "progressive"; its regressive. Environmentalists won't be happy until we revert to pre-industrial technologies.

In the meantime they hamstring research and development in the only viable zero-emissions power source, nuclear energy. We could move beyond 60-year old technology and learn to scale up new clean and safe technologies, but the enviro-wackos won't have it - another cafe-mocha latte, please. Cities aren't going to go without power. Once the existing reactors have been retired with no replacements in the offing, there will be no choice but to build fossil fuel plants (which of course they'll try to block). Wind farms and solar panel just cannot meet demand, not even in theory with 100% conversion and land coverage.
Reply
#32
RE: Another Reason Christians are Dangerous
Lol, "zero-emission" power source? I guess all of the radioactive waste doesn't count. Why don't you ask Fukishima how awesome nuclear power is?

Yes, it's all the environmentalists fault we don't have clean energy. Black is white. Up is down. It's not like the auto industry killed a super-effective carburetor in the 70's or the oil companies have done everything in their power to keep us on fossil fuels by defunding the alternative power sources like solar. Yeah, they're ineffective, because that's how the oil companies want to keep it. And funny how we're just barely getting viable electric cars now, but the electric car was invented over 100 years ago. I guess you'll probably blame that on the hippies, too.

You and Drich should go create your own society on an island somewhere where you can claim that 2+2=5 and stop fucking up the world everyone else is trying to salvage so their kids have a viable planet to live on.

The thread is titled "Another Reason Christians Are Dangerous," and you guys are absolutely driven to prove that true.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
Reply
#33
RE: Another Reason Christians are Dangerous
(January 31, 2017 at 8:57 pm)Fake Messiah Wrote:
(January 31, 2017 at 8:27 pm)Industrial Lad Wrote: Drich, I'm not sure if you're suggesting I faked an article by NASA with a .gov in the url or what.

Yeah I see you're new around here, but that person only believes in the Bible - you know that the world is flat, unicorns are real - the whole package; and that everything else (including modern science) is a hoax, so good luck reasoning with that person.

No I'm saying the .gov makes nasa a puppet of .gov

Give it a few years and you'll see what I mean.

Most recently when clinton took office there was a huge hole in the ozone #Nasa.gov

When bush II took office the ozone hole magically became a naturally reoccuring natural phenoma and HFC's weren't the only factor. Again #Nasa.gov

Now that trump is in office let us wait and see what happens when some of the non global warming money hits Nasa and let's wait and see how quickly you are to quote Nasa.gov in the near future concerning this topic.

(February 1, 2017 at 5:03 am)Tazzycorn Wrote:
(January 31, 2017 at 3:57 pm)Industrial Lad Wrote: http://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

Solar irradiance
It's reasonable to assume that changes in the sun's energy output would cause the climate to change, since the sun is the fundamental source of energy that drives our climate system.
Indeed, studies show that solar variability has played a role in past climate changes. For example, a decrease in solar activity is thought to have triggered the Little Ice Age between approximately 1650 and 1850, when Greenland was largely cut off by ice from 1410 to the 1720s and glaciers advanced in the Alps.
But several lines of evidence show that current global warming cannot be explained by changes in energy from the sun:
  • Since 1750, the average amount of energy coming from the sun either remained constant or increased slightly.
  • If the warming were caused by a more active sun, then scientists would expect to see warmer temperatures in all layers of the atmosphere. Instead, they have observed a cooling in the upper atmosphere, and a warming at the surface and in the lower parts of the atmosphere. That's because greenhouse gases are trapping heat in the lower atmosphere.
Climate models that include solar irradiance changes can’t reproduce the observed temperature trend over the past century or more without including a rise in greenhouse gases
----------------
Why must we havethousands of years of information of the suns energy output?

Because no amount of evidence is sufficient to make Dripshit changehis mind when he doesn't agree with something, while no evidence is needed to prove what he does believe in.

You are the one ignoring 5-0-0 -y-e-a-r-s Of Scientific evidence for this junk science Al gore decided to make popular and tried to cash in on.

(February 1, 2017 at 11:24 am)Faith No More Wrote: Lol, "zero-emission" power source?  I guess all of the radioactive waste doesn't count.  Why don't you ask Fukishima how awesome nuclear power is?

Yes, it's all the environmentalists fault we don't have clean energy.  Black is white.  Up is down.  It's not like the auto industry killed a super-effective carburetor in the 70's or the oil companies have done everything in their power to keep us on fossil fuels by defunding the alternative power sources like solar.  Yeah, they're ineffective, because that's how the oil companies want to keep it.  And funny how we're just barely getting viable electric cars now, but the electric car was invented over 100 years ago.  I guess you'll probably blame that on the hippies, too.

You and Drich should go create your own society on an island somewhere where you can claim that 2+2=5 and stop fucking up the world everyone else is trying to salvage so their kids have a viable planet to live on.

The thread is titled "Another Reason Christians Are Dangerous," and you guys are absolutely driven to prove that true.

Glob...

How do you not see that if you are right and global warming is due to increased carbon emissions the only way to stop this is to reduce the population? Or learn a cheaper way to 'scrub' carbon from oxygen that will work on a planetary scale?
Since we are doing nothing to curtail either, that means a simple reduction in emissions will have zero effect. So what do you guys do, of course you tax the stupid because they won't know any better. they don't know under you model you are planning for a slow agonizing planetary death. Again IF your junk science is right.

NOW Say I'm right. Or rather 500 years of past scientific discovery concerning global climate change is right. and carbon/air simply unlocks the potential energy stored in the radiant heat coming from the sun, making the sun the reason for warmer and colder weather. (making warmer weather marginally hotter and colder weather not as cold to more avaiable carbon there is.) That would allow the political eliete to tax the stupid people and call it whatever "The sky is falling branding they like" and the problem will correct itself in a few years.

Ever wonder why we don't TSIF term "Global warming anymore?" and why we moved on to climate change?

Because when ever you b-holes settle on a direction (warming or cooling) the climate changes again. So unless we have no weather changes you have a TSIF term that covers everything the weather does if it is not the same as the day before.

Again, give it a few years.. let the none global warming money have a chance to sink in and change the minds of 'science.'

Then you'll be able to see what science really is.. a whore. There is someone out there willing to research and back whatever crazy theory you want he just needs the money to convince people like you
Reply
#34
RE: Another Reason Christians are Dangerous
Now say you're right? You have negative credibility, which means that when I hear you claim something, I automatically assume that the opposite is probably true.

ETA: Oh, and like how you ignored the fact that I schooled you on how much climate data we have.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
Reply
#35
RE: Another Reason Christians are Dangerous
(February 1, 2017 at 12:58 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Let's see first it was the coming ice age, then the population bomb, and I think the experts also predicted we woul be out of oil by now. The hysterical voices of authority don't have a very good forecasting record. But the solution is always the same...give politicians more money.
There are 7 billion people on this planet. Most of them are hungry. I have friends in Africa who only get electricity for 12 hours every other day. Because we are so greedy in the west, we won't allow ourselves to feel the crunch. By the time we have a headache, the rest of the world will have a stroke. It's just another instance of western arrogance to deny the population explosion and the effect our raping the Earth's resources is having on this planet.
The god who allows children to be raped out of respect for the free will choice of the rapist, but punishes gay men for engaging in mutually consensual sex couldn't possibly be responsible for an intelligently designed universe.

I may defend your right to free speech, but i won't help you pass out flyers.

Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.
--Voltaire

Nietzsche isn't dead. How do I know he lives? He lives in my mind.
Reply
#36
RE: Another Reason Christians are Dangerous
(February 1, 2017 at 11:24 am)Faith No More Wrote: Lol, "zero-emission" power source?  I guess all of the radioactive waste doesn't count.  Why don't you ask Fukishima how awesome nuclear power is?

Those reactors use obsolete technology. The next generation of nuclear power would be immeasurably safer because the fuel rods are designed in such a way that melt-downs are physically impossible. Even before that Thorium was generally safer, but not developed for practical applications because of higher start-up costs than uranium based reactor.

Besides, what is wrong with taking one kind of loose radioactive material out of the ground, sealing it up in virtually impregnable containers, and putting it back in the ground after a few years.

(February 1, 2017 at 11:24 am)Faith No More Wrote: And funny how we're just barely getting viable electric cars now, but the electric car was invented over 100 years ago.

That's because only recently has battery technology improved to make long-distance electric travel possible. In addition the life of lead-cell based batteries is relatively short so there was the added cost of replacing batteries.
Reply
#37
RE: Another Reason Christians are Dangerous
(February 1, 2017 at 11:51 am)Drich Wrote:
(January 31, 2017 at 8:57 pm)Fake Messiah Wrote: Yeah I see you're new around here, but that person only believes in the Bible - you know that the world is flat, unicorns are real - the whole package; and that everything else (including modern science) is a hoax, so good luck reasoning with that person.

No I'm saying the .gov makes nasa a puppet of .gov

Give it a few years and you'll see what I mean.

Most recently when clinton took office there was a huge hole in the ozone #Nasa.gov

When bush II took office the ozone hole magically became a naturally reoccuring natural phenoma and HFC's weren't the only factor. Again #Nasa.gov

Now that trump is in office let us wait and see what happens when some of the non global warming money hits Nasa and let's wait and see how quickly you are to quote Nasa.gov in the near future concerning this topic.

(February 1, 2017 at 5:03 am)Tazzycorn Wrote: Because no amount of evidence is sufficient to make Dripshit changehis mind when he doesn't agree with something, while no evidence is needed to prove what he does believe in.

You are the one ignoring 5-0-0 -y-e-a-r-s Of Scientific evidence for this junk science Al gore decided to make popular and tried to cash in on.

(February 1, 2017 at 11:24 am)Faith No More Wrote: Lol, "zero-emission" power source?  I guess all of the radioactive waste doesn't count.  Why don't you ask Fukishima how awesome nuclear power is?

Yes, it's all the environmentalists fault we don't have clean energy.  Black is white.  Up is down.  It's not like the auto industry killed a super-effective carburetor in the 70's or the oil companies have done everything in their power to keep us on fossil fuels by defunding the alternative power sources like solar.  Yeah, they're ineffective, because that's how the oil companies want to keep it.  And funny how we're just barely getting viable electric cars now, but the electric car was invented over 100 years ago.  I guess you'll probably blame that on the hippies, too.

You and Drich should go create your own society on an island somewhere where you can claim that 2+2=5 and stop fucking up the world everyone else is trying to salvage so their kids have a viable planet to live on.

The thread is titled "Another Reason Christians Are Dangerous," and you guys are absolutely driven to prove that true.

Glob...

How do you not see that if you are right and global warming is due to increased carbon emissions the only way to stop this is to reduce the population? Or learn a cheaper way to 'scrub' carbon from oxygen that will work on a planetary scale?
Since we are doing nothing to curtail either, that means a simple reduction in emissions will have zero effect. So what do you guys do, of course you tax the stupid because they won't know any better. they don't know under you model you are planning for a slow agonizing planetary death. Again IF your junk science is right.

NOW Say I'm right. Or rather 500 years of past scientific discovery concerning global climate change is right. and carbon/air simply unlocks the potential energy stored in the radiant heat coming from the sun, making the sun the reason for warmer and colder weather. (making warmer weather marginally hotter and colder weather not as cold to more avaiable carbon there is.) That would allow the political eliete to tax the stupid people and call it whatever "The sky is falling branding they like" and the problem will correct itself in a few years.

Ever wonder why we don't TSIF term "Global warming anymore?" and why we moved on to climate change?

Because when ever you b-holes settle on a direction (warming or cooling) the climate changes again. So unless we have no weather changes you have a TSIF term that covers everything the weather does if it is not the same as the day before.

Again, give it a few years.. let the none global warming money have a chance to sink in and change the minds of 'science.'

Then you'll be able to see what science really is.. a whore. There is someone out there willing to research and back whatever crazy theory you want he just needs the money to convince people like you
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

%97 of scientist believe global climate change is real. Did the Clinton's and Al Gore pay them all? The fact is there's no such thing as "big science." But big oil has enough money to fill a football stadium and they still can only bribe 3% of scientists. The name didn't change from global warming because it isn't getting hotter. It's because the warming can have a lot worse side effects.



Sent from my LGL52VL using Tapatalk
Reply
#38
RE: Another Reason Christians are Dangerous
The dangerous thing about Christianity is that people will use it to defend their views--and they think that their bible makes their views infallible.  This means that you can't argue with them and have any hope of changing their mind on anything--their mind is already made up, and they're not going to change their mind no matter what.  They're not interested in having a conversation, they're interested in lecturing people on the bible and how god agrees with them on everything.  (Which is funny because they don't even agree with each other on everything, so I guess there's really a bunch of different gods.  In which case we can all hope the different gods just kill each other, if they haven't already)
The whole tone of Church teaching in regard to woman is, to the last degree, contemptuous and degrading. - Elizabeth Cady Stanton
Reply
#39
RE: Another Reason Christians are Dangerous
(February 1, 2017 at 9:57 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Not so wrong !?! They were completely wrong.
Like I told you from their point of view in early XX century it made sense.

(February 1, 2017 at 9:57 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: They made predicted a disaster that did not come to pass precisely because they discounted human ingenuity and the power of market forces to efficiently allocate resources.
"They made predicted a disaster" - wtf?

(February 1, 2017 at 9:57 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Environmentalists are generally anti-technology and big government types.

What do you know about environmentalists?  "big government types" -  guess only you know what that means.


(February 1, 2017 at 9:57 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: In their ideal world progress means forcing everyone to live in organic sustenance agricultural communes.

Well yeah in your made-up world where unicorns and wizards exist along with winged humans environmentalism has different meaning.
But in real world environmental groups push for a world where people don't die out of polluted air - why do you find that so bad? Their ideal world doesn't get shaken by earthquakes every day as a result of fracking like it is in Oklahoma. Environmental groups, which you probably can't name even one, like 350.org are simply pushing for more renewable and clean sources of energy, like wind and solar and that factories filter water and air from harmful chemicals before dumping them into the enviroment.

Would you rather live in China where government shushed down environmentalists? Because this is what Trump has in mind

[Image: water-pollution-in-china-625x340.jpg]

or take a look at this





(February 2, 2017 at 1:43 am)Cecelia Wrote: The dangerous thing about Christianity is that people will use it to defend their views--and they think that their bible makes their views infallible.  This means that you can't argue with them and have any hope of changing their mind on anything--their mind is already made up, and they're not going to change their mind no matter what.  They're not interested in having a conversation, they're interested in lecturing people on the bible and how god agrees with them on everything.  (Which is funny because they don't even agree with each other on everything, so I guess there's really a bunch of different gods.  In which case we can all hope the different gods  just kill each other, if they haven't already)

Yeah they live in alternative reality where they just make shit up for themselves like what environmentalists are or what evolution is or anything else and then they attack that fabrication that has nothing to do with reality and which they think it's true.
It's because they're thought to believe in make-believe stuff. And since they also believe the end is nigh and that we’re living in the last days, they don't care about the future.
Reply
#40
RE: Another Reason Christians are Dangerous
(February 1, 2017 at 9:49 am)Faith No More Wrote:
(January 31, 2017 at 6:36 pm)Drich Wrote: essentily 100 years is being way generous. 1950 is when we seriously started identified and started accurate recording the data points we now use. The fact that you think any different, and chose to speak without checking MAKES the moron I said you where.

http://history.aip.org/climate/solar.htm

The link above is a complete history of science surrounding climate change. While I do not support it's final conclusion as the article does not take into consideration the data points that would ultimately affect climate rendered by a "3d huluhoop effect the earth's orbit would have in conjunction with solar output, I believe the article does indeed correctly follow how climate change via green house gas verse solar sunspots cycles would have..

Again, I am saying solar out put in conjunction with orbit over century long cycles determines climate (As did the last 500 years of science) this article maps out sunspots effect out a particular type of solar output/cosmic rays. But the article does accurately describe how and when our knowledge of climate change data was and is gathered.

So 1950 sport that means with 67 years of data youre people claim the sky is falling, and because I am not in a panic makes me the less credible??!?! Again the Sky is falling junk started in the late 90's AND inorder for to believe this bunk you have to ignore over 500 years of solar science and observation, even several mini Iceages with in the last 3 or 400 years, all of which is completely contrary to what your sky is falling doctrine tells you...

You know what you douche bags had you go for the last 10 years or so. give it a rest and let the adults run the world again. Maybe next time you all can do something with aliens or 'alien credits.' Some special tax that will help those who pay it avoid being probed Big Grin


Lol, yeah, it's not like we can't dig into the layers of ice in the Antarctic to test the composition of the atmosphere and temperature of the earth for the last several thousands of years.  If everyone stayed as stupid as you, we'd still have lead in our gasoline.

So, while we have only been studying the climate for decades now, we actually have data about the climate for thousands of years.  How do you think we know about all of those ice ages and stuff, ya fuckin' tool?

Sure, it's just a natural warming from sunspots and the orbit.  It all just coincidentally started when we started burning fossil fuels.  Once again, the proven-to-be retarded, ignorant internet crusader knows more than 99% of the people with degrees in the field. Jerkoff

Tell me, what's it like to feel so superior when you're actually so goddamn stupid?  It's just really hard for me to imagine someone someone with your level of self-awareness.

Glob...

What does digging into ice tell you? more carbon it was warmer???

Retard I am not disputing that their isn't more carbon or that it is warmer. I'm disputing the reason why.

Solar output and the earth's proxcimity to the sun is my/The standing explaination the world had for hundreds of years.

You blindingly trusting anything popular with a 'science' label on it is akin to blind faith in God. WFT are YOU doing?!?!

The reason I'm right/superior here is I know how heat transfer works. There is only So Many BTU's of potential heat energy in a Solar ray. One of the links I posted in my opening post explains "heat transfer" from radiant to measurable air temp, another article I posted explains once the heat is released and converted from radiant to convective heat Co2's role is that of facilitating said transfer more efficiently, but has a poor "green house effect." Meaning if you fill a vessel witha high concentration of co2 and a like one with just a normal mix of 'air' the co2 vessel will get warmer quicker, but will also platue @ or just marginally higher than the vessel with plain air in it.

The Following article puts all of these factors together and takes it one step further, in saying that water vapor is almost 50x better at producing a 'green house effect' than co2 ever could be.

To summarize: I've demonstrated that while CO2 has about 2x the HTEV of water at the molecular level, it is actually less effective a GHG when appropriately measured by weight equivelancy. Because the atmosphere contains on average 40 x as much water in than CO2, water has essentially 50 x the influence on climate as CO2. Water and CO2 combined only account for 1/36th of the reason the Atmosphere retains heat. At just 1/1800th of the reason the Atmosphere retains heat, CO2 can simply not be statistically relevant to climate change other than the fact that in cycle, a warmer earth and ocean during interglacials such as the present Holocene, should lead to higher CO2 levels in the atmosphere even without humans. Warmer ocean surfaces evaporate more CO2 into the air than smaller, colder oceans do during ice ages. From these simple facts of physics and math one can readily see that AGW alarmists are perpetrating a hoax

http://physics.stackexchange.com/questio...-trap-heat

Hmph

(February 1, 2017 at 10:18 pm)Industrial Lad Wrote:
(February 1, 2017 at 11:51 am)Drich Wrote: No I'm saying the .gov makes nasa a puppet of .gov

Give it a few years and you'll see what I mean.

Most recently when clinton took office there was a huge hole in the ozone #Nasa.gov

When bush II took office the ozone hole magically became a naturally reoccuring natural phenoma and HFC's weren't the only factor. Again #Nasa.gov

Now that trump is in office let us wait and see what happens when some of the non global warming money hits Nasa and let's wait and see how quickly you are to quote Nasa.gov in the near future concerning this topic.


You are the one ignoring 5-0-0 -y-e-a-r-s Of Scientific evidence for this junk science Al gore decided to make popular and tried to cash in on.


Glob...

How do you not see that if you are right and global warming is due to increased carbon emissions the only way to stop this is to reduce the population? Or learn a cheaper way to 'scrub' carbon from oxygen that will work on a planetary scale?
Since we are doing nothing to curtail either, that means a simple reduction in emissions will have zero effect. So what do you guys do, of course you tax the stupid because they won't know any better. they don't know under you model you are planning for a slow agonizing planetary death. Again IF your junk science is right.

NOW Say I'm right. Or rather 500 years of past scientific discovery concerning global climate change is right. and carbon/air simply unlocks the potential energy stored in the radiant heat coming from the sun, making the sun the reason for warmer and colder weather. (making warmer weather marginally hotter and colder weather not as cold to more avaiable carbon there is.) That would allow the political eliete to tax the stupid people and call it whatever "The sky is falling branding they like" and the problem will correct itself in a few years.

Ever wonder why we don't TSIF term "Global warming anymore?" and why we moved on to climate change?

Because when ever you b-holes settle on a direction (warming or cooling) the climate changes again. So unless we have no weather changes you have a TSIF term that covers everything the weather does if it is not the same as the day before.

Again, give it a few years.. let the none global warming money have a chance to sink in and change the minds of 'science.'

Then you'll be able to see what science really is.. a whore. There is someone out there willing to research and back whatever crazy theory you want he just needs the money to convince people like you
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

%97 of scientist believe global climate change is real. Did the Clinton's and Al Gore pay them all? The fact is there's no such thing as "big science." But big oil has enough money to fill a football stadium and they still can only bribe 3% of scientists. The name didn't change from global warming because it isn't getting hotter. It's because the warming can have a lot worse side effects.



Sent from my LGL52VL using Tapatalk
in 1491 97% of 'scientists' believed the earth to be flat as well..

That said, know I acknowledge global climate change is a 'thing.' Why? because we are not in an ice age any more.

I am disputing the reason they say climate change is happening. I pointing to increased solar out put as well as an orbit that takes us closer to the sun.

Why? read the last article in my last post.

(February 1, 2017 at 9:49 am)Faith No More Wrote:
(January 31, 2017 at 6:36 pm)Drich Wrote: essentily 100 years is being way generous. 1950 is when we seriously started identified and started accurate recording the data points we now use. The fact that you think any different, and chose to speak without checking MAKES the moron I said you where.

http://history.aip.org/climate/solar.htm

The link above is a complete history of science surrounding climate change. While I do not support it's final conclusion as the article does not take into consideration the data points that would ultimately affect climate rendered by a "3d huluhoop effect the earth's orbit would have in conjunction with solar output, I believe the article does indeed correctly follow how climate change via green house gas verse solar sunspots cycles would have..

Again, I am saying solar out put in conjunction with orbit over century long cycles determines climate (As did the last 500 years of science) this article maps out sunspots effect out a particular type of solar output/cosmic rays. But the article does accurately describe how and when our knowledge of climate change data was and is gathered.

So 1950 sport that means with 67 years of data youre people claim the sky is falling, and because I am not in a panic makes me the less credible??!?! Again the Sky is falling junk started in the late 90's AND inorder for to believe this bunk you have to ignore over 500 years of solar science and observation, even several mini Iceages with in the last 3 or 400 years, all of which is completely contrary to what your sky is falling doctrine tells you...

You know what you douche bags had you go for the last 10 years or so. give it a rest and let the adults run the world again. Maybe next time you all can do something with aliens or 'alien credits.' Some special tax that will help those who pay it avoid being probed Big Grin


Lol, yeah, it's not like we can't dig into the layers of ice in the Antarctic to test the composition of the atmosphere and temperature of the earth for the last several thousands of years.  If everyone stayed as stupid as you, we'd still have lead in our gasoline.

So, while we have only been studying the climate for decades now, we actually have data about the climate for thousands of years.  How do you think we know about all of those ice ages and stuff, ya fuckin' tool?

Sure, it's just a natural warming from sunspots and the orbit.  It all just coincidentally started when we started burning fossil fuels.  Once again, the proven-to-be retarded, ignorant internet crusader knows more than 99% of the people with degrees in the field. Jerkoff

Tell me, what's it like to feel so superior when you're actually so goddamn stupid?  It's just really hard for me to imagine someone someone with your level of self-awareness.

Glob...

What does digging into ice tell you? more carbon it was warmer???

Retard I am not disputing that their isn't more carbon or that it is warmer. I'm disputing the reason why.

Solar output and the earth's proxcimity to the sun is my/The standing explaination the world had for hundreds of years.

You blindingly trusting anything popular with a 'science' label on it is akin to blind faith in God. WFT are YOU doing?!?!

The reason I'm right/superior here is I know how heat transfer works. There is only So Many BTU's of potential heat energy in a Solar ray. One of the links I posted in my opening post explains "heat transfer" from radiant to measurable air temp, another article I posted explains once the heat is released and converted from radiant to convective heat Co2's role is that of facilitating said transfer more efficiently, but has a poor "green house effect." Meaning if you fill a vessel witha high concentration of co2 and a like one with just a normal mix of 'air' the co2 vessel will get warmer quicker, but will also platue @ or just marginally higher than the vessel with plain air in it.

The Following article puts all of these factors together and takes it one step further, in saying that water vapor is almost 50x better at producing a 'green house effect' than co2 ever could be.

To summarize: I've demonstrated that while CO2 has about 2x the HTEV of water at the molecular level, it is actually less effective a GHG when appropriately measured by weight equivelancy. Because the atmosphere contains on average 40 x as much water in than CO2, water has essentially 50 x the influence on climate as CO2. Water and CO2 combined only account for 1/36th of the reason the Atmosphere retains heat. At just 1/1800th of the reason the Atmosphere retains heat, CO2 can simply not be statistically relevant to climate change other than the fact that in cycle, a warmer earth and ocean during interglacials such as the present Holocene, should lead to higher CO2 levels in the atmosphere even without humans. Warmer ocean surfaces evaporate more CO2 into the air than smaller, colder oceans do during ice ages. From these simple facts of physics and math one can readily see that AGW alarmists are perpetrating a hoax

http://physics.stackexchange.com/questio...-trap-heat

Hmph
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  A question about Dawkins enemies of reason documentary Quill01 3 451 April 17, 2022 at 5:25 pm
Last Post: Belacqua
  The reason religion is so powerful Macoleco 344 20509 June 30, 2021 at 11:43 am
Last Post: Abaddon_ire
  Reason Jesus must have been a real person mrj 74 9931 March 5, 2021 at 6:44 am
Last Post: arewethereyet
  "How God got started", how god belief + basic reason + writing -> modern humans? Whateverist 26 6685 October 15, 2017 at 12:12 pm
Last Post: Gawdzilla Sama
  Atheists Have the Most Logical Reason for being Moral Rhondazvous 24 7238 January 22, 2016 at 6:49 pm
Last Post: Reforged
  The only important reason I'm more powerful than god. Foxaèr 5 1936 November 13, 2015 at 4:24 am
Last Post: ignoramus
  The reason humans believe drfuzzy 31 5736 October 10, 2015 at 1:18 pm
Last Post: TheRocketSurgeon
  The Most Dangerous Religion. Tysonic 24 4796 August 31, 2015 at 6:36 am
Last Post: Foxaèr
  Atheism is the absence of reason.. Vault Boy 49 10936 August 6, 2015 at 12:30 pm
Last Post: JesusHChrist
  If atheists treated Christians like many Christians treat atheists... StealthySkeptic 24 10855 August 25, 2014 at 11:02 pm
Last Post: Darkstar



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)