For The Deniers

[Cattle Company]

I don't buy into anything the leftwingers say. Especially their global warming HOAX propaganda.

 

[concernedpuma]

I don't buy into anything the leftwingers say. Especially their global warming HOAX propaganda.

That, ole friend, is the beginning of wisdom! Too much sophomoric, but easy to dance to 60's music, you think?


Regards,
CP

 

[plutonium]

The Right? It is the Left that constantly lies about Global Warming...

Daaaa the earth is flat too!!!!

 

[Bodi]

Daaaa the earth is flat too!!!!

Prove that it isn't...

 

[HumblePi]

Fortunately, there are records going back to the year 1880 that have documented temperatures around the world every year since then. These temperatures and the trends, both warming and cooling have been compiled in one short 36 second video. It displays the trend for years 1880 to 2017 for every country on the planet. If for nothing else, no other scientific data, of which there is plenty, this graph alone should alarm even the staunchest critic of global warming.



legend:

 

[concernedpuma]

Fortunately, there are records going back to the year 1880 that have documented temperatures around the world every year since then. These temperatures and the trends, both warming and cooling have been compiled in one short 36 second video. It displays the trend for years 1880 to 2017 for every country on the planet. If for nothing else, no other scientific data, of which there is plenty, this graph alone should alarm even the staunchest critic of global warming.



legend:

I don't doubt the earth is warming. It has heated and cooled since the beginning, and will do so whether you drive your car or not. The difference today seems to be profit to be made by selling the recurring phenomena as fixable with enough of your money.
Regards,
CP

 

[HumblePi]

I don't doubt the earth is warming. It has heated and cooled since the beginning, and will do so whether you drive your car or not. The difference today seems to be profit to be made by selling the recurring phenomena as fixable with enough of your money.
Regards,
CP

There is no refuting the fact that the world is at the warmest it's ever been since records have been kept. What warmed up the planet? Industrialization of course. Does anyone besides myself remember the great London fog that killed 12,000 people? I do, I remember it because I lived during that time and it was hard to not have heard of 12,000 people dying from SMOG. So what's a little smog have to do with deaths? Smog is pollution, and the 'Great Smog' was the worse event in modern history. Over 100,000 people got ill as a result of that smog pollution. It all came from coal-fired power stations in the Greater London area.

To claim that global warming is false is just putting on a pair of blinders not wanted to face the facts. OF COURSE the earth is warming! Global warming is a scientific, irrefutable fact. Glaciers are melting, sea levels are rising, cloud forests are dying, and wildlife is scrambling to keep pace. It has become clear that humans have caused most of the past century's warming by releasing heat-trapping gases as we power our modern lives. Greenhouse gases are at higher levels now than at any time in the last 800,000 years. As humans, we should all be focused on saving this planet for the future of mankind.

 

[Eriech]

There is no refuting the fact that the world is at the warmest it's ever been since records have been kept. What warmed up the planet? Industrialization of course. Does anyone besides myself remember the great London fog that killed 12,000 people? I do, I remember it because I lived during that time and it was hard to not have heard of 12,000 people dying from SMOG. So what's a little smog have to do with deaths? Smog is pollution, and the 'Great Smog' was the worse event in modern history. Over 100,000 people got ill as a result of that smog pollution. It all came from coal-fired power stations in the Greater London area.

To claim that global warming is false is just putting on a pair of blinders not wanted to face the facts. OF COURSE the earth is warming! Global warming is a scientific, irrefutable fact. Glaciers are melting, sea levels are rising, cloud forests are dying, and wildlife is scrambling to keep pace. It has become clear that humans have caused most of the past century's warming by releasing heat-trapping gases as we power our modern lives. Greenhouse gases are at higher levels now than at any time in the last 800,000 years. As humans, we should all be focused on saving this planet for the future of mankind.

We won't save the planet by turning the US into Venezuela or Zimbabwe or China or even the average United Nations s-hole country.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[concernedpuma]

There is no refuting the fact that the world is at the warmest it's ever been since records have been kept. What warmed up the planet? Industrialization of course. Does anyone besides myself remember the great London fog that killed 12,000 people? I do, I remember it because I lived during that time and it was hard to not have heard of 12,000 people dying from SMOG. So what's a little smog have to do with deaths? Smog is pollution, and the 'Great Smog' was the worse event in modern history. Over 100,000 people got ill as a result of that smog pollution. It all came from coal-fired power stations in the Greater London area.

To claim that global warming is false is just putting on a pair of blinders not wanted to face the facts. OF COURSE the earth is warming! Global warming is a scientific, irrefutable fact. Glaciers are melting, sea levels are rising, cloud forests are dying, and wildlife is scrambling to keep pace. It has become clear that humans have caused most of the past century's warming by releasing heat-trapping gases as we power our modern lives. Greenhouse gases are at higher levels now than at any time in the last 800,000 years. As humans, we should all be focused on saving this planet for the future of mankind.

I must admit, I know nothing of the great smog. To your point, I believe I conceded that records show the earth warming. Where we separate is the notion that warming is entirely bad or, for the most part, can be stopped.

I too worry about the affects of industrialization on the environment, but rather see deforestation as the biggest problem. CO2 is good for plants, and provided there are enough of them, I believe we will no impact with our CO2 contribution.
I do strongly suspect some proffered solutions are money making schemes, similar to Haley's comet umbrellas.
Don't you find it odd that we speak of terraforming other planets, but this one is doomed?
Regards,
CP

 

[HumblePi]

We won't save the planet by turning the US into Venezuela or Zimbabwe or China or even the average United Nations s-hole country.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Your comment has to do with global warming - how?

 

[Eriech]

Your comment has to do with global warming - how?

The "cure" for Global warming is an assault on capitalism.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[gfm7175]

There is no refuting the fact that the world is at the warmest it's ever been since records have been kept.

Not a fact, as I don't accept it as one. We don't know whether it is or not since there is no way to accurately measure the temperature of the Earth. How many thermometers would you use? Where would you place them? What times would you read them?

What warmed up the planet? Industrialization of course.

OF COURSE!!!!! Well, according to your circularly-defined buzzword of a religion, anyway... Care to define global warming in a non-circular manner?

Does anyone besides myself remember the great London fog that killed 12,000 people? I do, I remember it because I lived during that time and it was hard to not have heard of 12,000 people dying from SMOG. So what's a little smog have to do with deaths? Smog is pollution, and the 'Great Smog' was the worse event in modern history. Over 100,000 people got ill as a result of that smog pollution. It all came from coal-fired power stations in the Greater London area.

I know nothing about the London smog mentioned here, so I have no commentary concerning it.

To claim that global warming is false is just putting on a pair of blinders not wanted to face the facts.

No, it's not. It's merely not accepting a circularly-defined buzzword religion. Try defining the term first...

OF COURSE the earth is warming!

We have no idea... There is no way to accurately measure the temperature of the Earth.

Global warming is a scientific, irrefutable fact.

Actually, it denies various laws of science (laws of thermodynamics, stefan boltzmann law, etc.) Science does not consist of 'facts'... It consists of falsifiable theories. Facts are very easily refuted, even if they happen to be true. Facts are not universal truths nor are they proofs. They are accepted predicate; That's all facts are.

Glaciers are melting,

Glaciers are just fine. There is plenty of ice at both poles.

sea levels are rising,

There is no way to accurately measure sea levels... There is no consistent reference point to do so (as ground shifts).

cloud forests are dying,

What's a cloud forest?

and wildlife is scrambling to keep pace.

Wildlife is doing just fine.

It has become clear that humans have caused most of the past century's warming

No, it is not clear. We don't know what humans are contributing...

by releasing heat-trapping gases as we power our modern lives.

There is no such thing... Heat cannot be trapped. You are denying thermodynamics.

Greenhouse gases are at higher levels now than at any time in the last 800,000 years.

There is no such thing as a "greenhouse gas"... Heat cannot be trapped... You weren't around 800,000 years ago to observe the levels of these gases in the atmosphere, nor was there any way to accurately measure the levels of those gases in the atmosphere. Heck, even today, we can't accurately measure the levels of gases in the atmosphere. They aren't uniformly spread throughout the atmosphere, and we don't have nearly enough stations correctly spaced across Earth to accurately measure atmospheric gas levels.

As humans, we should all be focused on saving this planet for the future of mankind.

I want to take care of Earth as much as you do, but I refuse to believe in a circularly-defined buzzword religion which is very unconvincing to me, as it denies long-standing scientific theories.

 

[Quaestio]

Not a fact, as I don't accept it as one.


OF COURSE!!!!! Well, according to your circularly-defined buzzword of a religion, anyway... Care to define global warming in a non-circular manner?


I know nothing about the London smog mentioned here, so I have no commentary concerning it.


No, it's not. It's merely not accepting a circularly-defined buzzword religion. Try defining the term first...


We have no idea... There is no way to accurately measure the temperature of the Earth.


Actually, it denies various laws of science (laws of thermodynamics, stefan boltzmann law, etc.) Science does not consist of 'facts'... It consists of falsifiable theories. Facts are very easily refuted, even if they happen to be true. Facts are not universal truths nor are they proofs. They are accepted predicate; That's all facts are.


Glaciers are just fine. There is plenty of ice at both poles.


There is no way to accurately measure sea levels... There is no consistent reference point to do so (as ground shifts).


What's a cloud forest?


Wildlife is doing just fine.


No, it is not clear. We don't know what humans are contributing...


There is no such thing... Heat cannot be trapped. You are denying thermodynamics.


There is no such thing as a "greenhouse gas"... Heat cannot be trapped... You weren't around 800,000 years ago to observe the levels of these gases in the atmosphere, nor was there any way to accurately measure the levels of those gases in the atmosphere. Heck, even today, we can't accurately measure the levels of gases in the atmosphere. They aren't uniformly spread throughout the atmosphere, and we don't have nearly enough stations correctly spaced across Earth to accurately measure atmospheric gas levels.


I want to take care of Earth as much as you do, but I refuse to believe in a circularly-defined buzzword religion which is very unconvincing to me, as it denies long-standing scientific theories.

So you have no qualifications or background in any field of science, right?

Here's an example from a typical Physics textbook used by many Universities. Are you claiming it's wrong? And every other Physics textbook as well?

University Physics with Modern Physics -Hugh D. Young and Roger A. Freedman, 14th Edition, 2016



Thermodynamics and Heat - Chapter 17

17.7 Mechanisms of Heat Transfer

Radiation, Climate, and Climate Change - pgs 594-595

Our planet constantly absorbs radiation coming from the sun. In thermal equilibrium,
the rate at which our planet absorbs solar radiation must equal the rate at
which it emits radiation into space. The presence of an atmosphere on our planet
has a significant effect on this equilibrium.

Most of the radiation emitted by the sun (which has a surface temperature
of 5800 K) is in the visible part of the spectrum, to which our atmosphere is
transparent. But the average surface temperature of the earth is only ~287 K (14°C).
Hence most of the radiation that our planet emits into space is infrared radiation,
just like the radiation from the person shown in Fig. 17.29.

However, our atmosphere is not completely transparent to infrared radiation. This is because our
atmosphere contains carbon dioxide (CO2), which is its fourth most abundant constituent
(after nitrogen, oxygen, and argon). Molecules of CO2 in the atmosphere
absorb some of the infrared radiation coming upward from the surface. They then
re-radiate the absorbed energy, but some of the re-radiated energy is directed back
down toward the surface instead of escaping into space. In order to maintain thermal
equilibrium, the earth’s surface must compensate for this by increasing its
temperature T and hence its total rate of radiating energy which is proportional to
T4 (Stefan–Boltzmann law).

This phenomenon, called the greenhouse effect, makes our planet’s surface
temperature about 33°C higher than it would be if there were no atmospheric CO2.
If CO2 were absent, the earth’s average surface temperature would be below the
freezing point of water, and life as we know it would be impossible.

 

[AlphaOmega]

Not just that, but I'm beginning to think I was lied to about how important they think democracy is.


They don't care one bit about democracy, only power.

says the crowd trying to remove a lawfully and duly elected president because they lost.

 

[Quaestio]

University Physics with Modern Physics -Hugh D. Young and Roger A. Freedman, 14th Edition, 2016

Chapter 42 Molecules and Condensed Matter - page 1438

One molecule that can readily absorb and emit infrared radiation is carbon
dioxide (CO2). Figure 42.10 shows the three possible modes of vibration of a
CO2 molecule. A number of transitions are possible between excited levels
of the same vibrational mode as well as between levels of different vibrational
modes. The energy differences are less than 1 eV in all of these transitions,
and so involve infrared photons of wavelength longer than 1 μm.

Hence a gas of CO2 can readily absorb light at a number of different infrared wavelengths.
This makes CO2 primarily responsible for the greenhouse effect (Section 17.7)
on the earth, even though CO2 is only 0.04% of our atmosphere by volume. On
Venus, however, the atmosphere has more than 90 times the total mass of our atmosphere
and is almost entirely CO2. The resulting greenhouse effect is tremendous:
The surface temperature on Venus is more than 400 kelvins higher than
what it would be if the planet had no atmosphere at all.

 

[The Mark]

says the crowd trying to remove a lawfully and duly elected president because they lost.

That's not why I want him removed, rather it's because I think his actions deserve no less, and probably more.

 

[AlphaOmega]

That's not why I want him removed, rather it's because I think his actions deserve no less, and probably more.

What action? The ones you dont agree with or the ones you dont agree with but pretend are illegal?

 

[The Mark]

What action? The ones you dont agree with or the ones you dont agree with but pretend are illegal?

The ones I know are illegal, or at the least unacceptable for a president.

 

[AlphaOmega]

The ones I know are illegal, or at the least unacceptable for a president.

name the one that is illegal? The #1

 

[The Mark]

name the one that is illegal? The #1

Obstruction of justice.

A close second is violating the Emoluments Clause of the constitution.

 

[AlphaOmega]

Obstruction of justice.

A close second is violating the Emoluments Clause of the constitution.

Yeah? Please cite facts. Remember we were looking for facts not your feelings.

 

[marke]

Obstruction of justice.

A close second is violating the Emoluments Clause of the constitution.

Violating the Emoluments Clause? Who are we talking about? Are you now recommending Congress open up investigations into the cash and gifts received by Obama administration officials and Obama himself from declared Muslim terrorist enemies of the US?

 

[Individual]

Too many people.

 

[concernedpuma]

University Physics with Modern Physics -Hugh D. Young and Roger A. Freedman, 14th Edition, 2016

Chapter 42 Molecules and Condensed Matter - page 1438

One molecule that can readily absorb and emit infrared radiation is carbon
dioxide (CO2). Figure 42.10 shows the three possible modes of vibration of a
CO2 molecule. A number of transitions are possible between excited levels
of the same vibrational mode as well as between levels of different vibrational
modes. The energy differences are less than 1 eV in all of these transitions,
and so involve infrared photons of wavelength longer than 1 μm.

Hence a gas of CO2 can readily absorb light at a number of different infrared wavelengths.
This makes CO2 primarily responsible for the greenhouse effect (Section 17.7)
on the earth, even though CO2 is only 0.04% of our atmosphere by volume. On
Venus, however, the atmosphere has more than 90 times the total mass of our atmosphere
and is almost entirely CO2. The resulting greenhouse effect is tremendous:
The surface temperature on Venus is more than 400 kelvins higher than
what it would be if the planet had no atmosphere at all.

View attachment 67249214

No chance you are violating copyright here, is there?
Regards,
CP

 

[Individual]

If we accept global warming to be human caused, why not focus more on eliminating the cause recognizing the fact that it would aid in resolving a great many other issues as well?
We appear to have become accustomed to accept solutions to most all problems to be a monetary one, and then habitually complain about the resulting consequences.