Not 97% but .3% of Climatologists agree.

Quote from futurecurrents:

Jerm. I suggest running the car in a closed garage or running a hose from the tail pipe into the car.

Just trying to help.

I hate to see anyone suffer. Even you. Though I do tend to reserve my murderous ire for the intentional liars who would trade current profits and personal ideology for the surviveability of the the planet

Is there a particular time of day that your meds wear off and you go full retard. Before posting on the Internet you may want to have the nurse at the institution bring you your pills.
 
So let's see, we need to destroy the environment...to protect it?







(CNSNews.com) – A wind farm in the Montezuma Hills region of Northern California is seeking a permit to legally kill up to five golden eagles over the next five years even though the raptors are currently protected under federal law and an international migratory bird treaty.

Noting that “the project contributes to California’s Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard goals,” the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) has recommended a five-year permit with additional mitigation and monitoring efforts, including the purchase of “conservation credits in an approved mitigation bank.”
- See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/bar...it-kill-protected-golden#sthash.KiZShlzw.dpuf
 
Quote from futurecurrents:

So you are saying every science org in the world does NOT agree that man has cause warming of the earth from his greenhouse gas emissions? And that there is no science org that disagrees?
Uh...no. Why would I say that?
There are members here more knowledgeable than I on this subject. And more credible than you on any subject. That have repeatedly shot down this absurd assertion of yours.

I'm trying to get you to actually say something.
You're a radical illogical irrational closed minded leftist loon.
Apparently you agree with me that the earth has not stopped warming so at at least we have that out of the way.
LOL Seriously?

Reading comprehension, it's not just for conservatives.
 
Quote from jem:
you seem to ignorantly imply greenhouse gases only warm.
Not ignorance, basic science spelt out for you.
Without greenhouse gases the Earth would be frozen.
Greenhouse gases reflect some radiation (heat from the sun) from the lower atmosphere back to Earth.
They reflect some radiation (heat from the sun ) from the upper atmosphere back to outer space and so there is a natural balance.
The only thing they are doing from the effects humans have on them, is to warm the planet.

Without science you wouldn't even understand that much, not that I expect you do.

Quote from jem:

Do greenhouse gases in the earths atmosphere also work so as to prevent warming?
In the upper atmosphere they do. That you have to pose such a question shows how ignorantly you approach the subject. Which is pretty much how you've approached most stuff on this board.

Quote from jem:

Does adding greenhouse gases to our atmosphere on earth right now create more warming all cooling.
Please.. provide science not opinion.
The science is what makes it screamingly obvious, except to deniers such as yourself, that more co2 greenhouse gas sitting in the lower atmosphere is making the same atmosphere co2 denser , and therefore allows even less radiation to escape than otherwise would be the case , making the Earth even warmer, changing the climate.

Quote from jem:
Because our argument is not that we should keep polluting...
Because YOUR argument? You mean a conspiracist /denier / extremist / political argument.

Why the f*k do you imagine it's not a good idea to keep polluting? Because polluting the atmosphere by pouring billions of tons of co2 greenhouse gas into it is sooner or later going to tip the balance and warm the planet and change the climate.

The most basic science confirms it.. whereas you are merely in the usual brainless bullshit denial of it , like you always are.
 
Quote from stu:



The most basic science confirms it..


When the most basic science produces models that go 180 degrees opposite of empirical evidence, maybe you should rethink that basic science.

But no. Not when there are $22 billion reasons per year not to.
 
Quote from stu:

Not ignorance, basic science spelt out for you.
Without greenhouse gases the Earth would be frozen.
Greenhouse gases reflect some radiation (heat from the sun) from the lower atmosphere back to Earth.
They reflect some radiation (heat from the sun ) from the upper atmosphere back to outer space and so there is a natural balance.
The only thing they are doing from the effects humans have on them, is to warm the planet.

Without science you wouldn't even understand that much, not that I expect you do.


In the upper atmosphere they do. That you have to pose such a question shows how ignorantly you approach the subject. Which is pretty much how you've approached most stuff on this board.


The science is what makes it screamingly obvious, except to deniers such as yourself, that more co2 greenhouse gas sitting in the lower atmosphere is making the same atmosphere co2 denser , and therefore allows even less radiation to escape than otherwise would be the case , making the Earth even warmer, changing the climate.


Because YOUR argument? You mean a conspiracist /denier / extremist / political argument.

Why the f*k do you imagine it's not a good idea to keep polluting? Because polluting the atmosphere by pouring billions of tons of co2 greenhouse gas into it is sooner or later going to tip the balance and warm the planet and change the climate.

The most basic science confirms it.. whereas you are merely in the usual brainless bullshit denial of it , like you always are.

+1 Well said.

jerm is intellectually dishonest to support a pathologically extreme and obstinate ideology.

He has no interest in the actual truth.

I don't think he himself believes his bullshit.

He is trying to re-live those wonderful days when he was a public defender for murderers. He's the kind of guy who would be proud to get OJ exonerated.
 
Quote from fhl:

When the most basic science produces models that go 180 degrees opposite of empirical evidence, maybe you should rethink that basic science.


What the hell are you talking about? Do YOU even know?
 
Quote from Lucrum:

Uh...no. Why would I say that?
There are members here more knowledgeable than I on this subject. And more credible than you on any subject. That have repeatedly shot down this absurd assertion of yours.


You're a radical illogical irrational closed minded leftist loon.

LOL Seriously?

Reading comprehension, it's not just for conservatives.


OK. I see the problem...................... You are an idiot.

It IS absolutely true that every science organization in the world is in basic agreement about AGW. In addition there is none that dispute it.

In addition, there is 97% consensus among climate scientists. If you don't accept facts you are simply an idiot.

But we knew that about you already.

In addition, Exxon, BP and The Weather Channel agree.

What part of this do you NOT understand?

Is up.. down? Black.. white?
 
Back
Top