- Joined
- Mar 26, 2020
- Messages
- 1,849
- Reaction score
- 218
- Location
- mid-west
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Consider the source. The WWF has a financial interest in this story. It is just another bogus nonsense story they manufactured as a means of gaining funding.
Consider the source. The WWF has a financial interest in this story. It is just another bogus nonsense story they manufactured as a means of gaining funding.
Only about 800 extinctions have been documented in the past 400 years, according to data held by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The estimates vary widely from 24 species to 150 species disappearing per day, but that is based entirely upon computer models and not observed data. Nobody really has any clue.
Yale's School of the Environment explains it better than I:
Global Extinction Rates: Why Do Estimates Vary So Wildly?
Is it 150 species a day or 24 a day or far less than that? Prominent scientists cite dramatically different numbers when estimating the rate at which species are going extinct. Why is that?e360.yale.edu
There is a limit to how much CO2 human activity can produce, but the hydrocarbon sources will price themselves from the market long before then!Cool! Thanks for passing this along.
Fun fact: back about 251 million years ago there was something that triggered some massive climate change and acidification of the oceans (like increased CO2) which caused the elimination of something like 57% biological families and up to 81% of marine species. The worst extinction event in earth's history and it may be tied in part to CO2 or a worse greenhouse gas methane.
Now imagine humanity being able to produce enough CO2 or methane to change the climate! LOL.
There is a limit to how much CO2 human activity can produce, but the hydrocarbon sources will price themselves from the market long before then!
“Any measurable way”, is too high a bar, as we can already measure human impact on the climate, the question is will the changes be beneficial or negative?Thank heavens! Are we sure that the limit on us is less than what it would require to alter the climate in any measurable way? And what is that limit?
“Any measurable way”, is too high a bar, as we can already measure human impact on the climate, the question is will the changes be beneficial or negative?
I want to say that I read somewhere that all the nature hydrocarbons thought to exist, if burned would increase the CO2 level to about 4000 ppm.
But just because it is there, does not mean it is economical to use!
We will run out of the economy viable hydrocarbon fuels, no matter what we do!Oh, sorry. I thought CO2 wasn't a real problem. But it is, the only question is will it be good or bad for us? (It's hard to keep it all straight, this is complex science!)
4000ppm. That doesn't sound like a lot does it? Isn't ppm "parts per million"? That's small, right?
I don't want to run out of gas or coal! It gets cold in the winter and I like to drive places. I hope they find new ways to get all the coal and oil out of the ground. We sure can use it! Gas prices are too high!
And maybe more gas and coal is being made in the earth right now that we can get!
Just more bullshit. These nutter eco cultists always predicts some sort of doomsday prophecy every few years or so so they can sucker more idiots to fund their coffers.
Just more bullshit. These nutter eco cultists always predicts some sort of doomsday prophecy every few years or so so they can sucker more idiots to fund their coffers.
Example: in 1989 the UN predicted that the Maldives would be underwater if something wasnt done right away. That was more than 32 years ago.
AP News
UNITED NATIONS (AP) _ A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2apnews.com
And here's that snake oil salesman Al Gore telling everyone that the polar ice caps would have be gone by 2016.
And the cultists continue to believe in them all. Suckers.
You're the one getting your science information from Al Gore LMAOAnd the cultists continue to believe in them all. Suckers.
You're the one getting your science information from Al Gore LMAO
And how was the carbon cycle being disrupted 250 million years ago? It wasn't.Cool! Thanks for passing this along.
Fun fact: back about 251 million years ago there was something that triggered some massive climate change and acidification of the oceans (like increased CO2) which caused the elimination of something like 57% biological families and up to 81% of marine species. The worst extinction event in earth's history and it may be tied in part to CO2 or a worse greenhouse gas methane.
Now imagine humanity being able to produce enough CO2 or methane to change the climate! LOL.
Al Gore is a politician with a degree in government. By no stretch of imagination is he a scientist.Al Gore is a pretty famous climate scientist. I saw his science movie. Who should I get my climate science from?
Al Gore is a politician with a degree in government. By no stretch of imagination is he a scientist.
Where he got a degree in government.No, I'm pretty sure Al Gore is a scientist. He went to Harvard or some place like that.
Where he got a degree in government.
He also went to law school at Vanderbilt but didn't finish.
Wikipedia shit when it comes up like that, man. Save yourself some trouble.
Yes, I'm sure.Oh. OK. Thanks. I didn't think to check it. My bad. (Are you sure he didn't do some science research, though?)
You know where Al Gore got his "science" from? The same charlatans that you so fanatically believe in.You're the one getting your science information from Al Gore LMAO
Al Gore is counting is stacks of money that he made while sitting in his beach house after all the suckers believed him. LOLFunny you don't see more from Al Gore these days. I wonder if he's still doing research on global warming. I'd like to read some of his papers but his movie was so boring I doubt I could make it through his SCIENCE papers! LOL.