Global warming hoax fools millions

[jem]

The reason has to do with the fact that the warmings take about 5000 years to be complete. The lag is only 800 years. All that the lag shows is that CO2 did not cause the first 800 years of warming, out of the 5000 year trend. The other 4200 years of warming could in fact have been caused by CO2, as far as we can tell from this ice core data.


http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/co2-in-ice-cores/

That is a pro global warming site.

Until we see further evidence, neither you, scientists, Gore, nor and I have any proof that man is causing global warming.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from jem:

so first you tell me you have proof that CO2 precedes warming and now you tell me you don't.

You keep speculating that man is contributing to the accumulation -- but you have never shown that the accumulation causes the warming.

Huh? I showed you a graph of the heat absorption of CO2 molecules. How much more proof do you need?

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from jem:

The reason has to do with the fact that the warmings take about 5000 years to be complete. The lag is only 800 years. All that the lag shows is that CO2 did not cause the first 800 years of warming, out of the 5000 year trend. The other 4200 years of warming could in fact have been caused by CO2, as far as we can tell from this ice core data.


http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/co2-in-ice-cores/

That is a pro global warming site.

Until we see further evidence, neither you, scientists, Gore, nor and I have any proof that man is causing global warming.

So CO2 molecules don't absorb heat because 5000 years ago something something something? You know, I've posted an actual graph of the heat absorption of each molecule. Many molecules = more heat absorption.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from bigdavediode:

... You know, I've posted an actual graph of the heat absorption of each molecule. Many molecules = more heat absorption.

How many molecules did you say there were again?

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from Lucrum:

How many molecules did you say there were again?

If you brought it all together, the World's carbon dioxide would fill a cube 116.92 km high. In 2007 there was 2,989 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. If you know what a Mole is or Avagadro's number you can calculate it out.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from bigdavediode:

In 2007 there was 2,989 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere...

How about 2010?

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from Lucrum:

How about 2010?

Here you go -- updated each month, this website details the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere:

http://co2now.org/

 

[DoneNDone]

Quote from bigdavediode:

Insanity? I would suggest that Exxon, the Republicans and the other global warming denier groups have done a favor overall to society. Without the utterly fake "controversy" the debate might have just stagnated (although it was also helpful when famous people championed the cause.)

Now, you could argue that without the "controversy" the same thing would have happened with CO2 as happened with sulfur dioxide emissions trading programs. With sulfur dioxide trading allowances and markets were set up to limit the output of these chemicals, and it's worked both invisibly and effectively. (These markets were signed into law by George H. W. Bush, by the way.) Nobody cared about them and there's been nothing but success.

However I would argue that CO2 emissions have greater cross-industry impact and therefore it's more difficult to introduce these standards. Initially the climate-change deniers gained the upper hand and confused large swaths of people -- many of whom still buy into it. Now, though, higher level politicians have rallied to the cause and are actively working on it. So overall, I'd say all the fake "controversy" has helped advance the cause considerably.

that's all good, but the climate isn't following your blueprint


GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from DoneNDone:

that's all good, but the climate isn't following your blueprint


GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS

Actually the climate is warming, so it's following the blueprint.

Got anything else?

 

[DoneNDone]

Quote from bigdavediode:

Actually the climate is warming, so it's following the blueprint.

Got anything else?

LOL..

if i had any motive, i'd drum up some quotes from your fellow climatologists.


As I don't, (have any motive that is, other then to stop your insane idiocy), I d find it more rewarding to argue with a 4 year old.... children are so honest

OK, to be a good sport, I'll refer you back to the OP's original post........
Have you Drowned Yet!

what douche-bags you people are