• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Man made global warming is a hoax

Logical1 said:
As far as I can see, all the nay sayers to my post have long been brain washed by the radical left. Look at the actual numbers and try THINKING for your self for a change.
Click to expand...

"Radical left". *L*. I do so love your constant use of talking points.
 
So giving examples of a situation is wrong? Or you just want people to argue your way and no other way?
 
donhughesmusic said:
So giving examples of a situation is wrong? Or you just want people to argue your way and no other way?
Click to expand...

People need to educate themselves first. Trying to educate a climate change denier who already has his mind made up is a dead end.
 
donhughesmusic said:
Not a deflection, a bit of data that proves that just a little bit of something can still be harmful.
Click to expand...

It is also not accurate. The human contribution to the total CO2 in the atmospheric is 11%. That is 11% of 0.0417%, or 0.004587% of the total atmosphere.

Also, there is no evidence that atmospheric CO2 is harmful to humans until it reaches 3% of the total atmosphere, according to OSHA. That is 72 times higher than current CO2 levels. Atmospheric CO2 levels have not been above 30,000 ppmV in more than 600 million years.

If you have evidence that atmospheric CO2 at 417 ppmV is even remotely harmful to humans, by all means present it. I will wager you are mistaking CO (carbon monoxide) with CO2 (carbon dioxide). They are definitely not the same.
 
Glitch said:
It is also not accurate. The human contribution to the total CO2 in the atmospheric is 11%. That is 11% of 0.0417%, or 0.004587% of the total atmosphere.

Also, there is no evidence that atmospheric CO2 is harmful to humans until it reaches 3% of the total atmosphere, according to OSHA. That is 72 times higher than current CO2 levels. Atmospheric CO2 levels have not been above 30,000 ppmV in more than 600 million years.

If you have evidence that atmospheric CO2 at 417 ppmV is even remotely harmful to humans, by all means present it. I will wager you are mistaking CO (carbon monoxide) with CO2 (carbon dioxide). They are definitely not the same.
Click to expand...

Repetition. *YAWN*
 
longview said:
Wow, I had to go way back to the beginning of the tread to find the context of the quote.
"
Jan 22, 2021





That is the dangers of using subjective language! BTW, I did not know you were a mind reader!"

And yes , your assuming in what context the OP used the the word Gross, assumes you know what they are thinking ,
ie mind reading!
Click to expand...

Boring. Sorry. Gonna give this a 2 out of 10.
 
longview said:
That is the dangers of using subjective language! BTW, I did not know you were a mind reader!"

And yes , your assuming in what context the OP used the the word Gross, assumes you know what they are thinking ,
ie mind reading!
Click to expand...
Maybe he's a sock puppet and not a mind reader?
 
Lord of Planar said:
Maybe he's a sock puppet and not a mind reader?
Click to expand...

Jeeez, you are amazing. No one on earth can do anything you disapprove of without it being them lying or doing something nefarious.

You must have a helluva hard time living as an adult in the real world.

Srsly. Just sad.
 
istodolez said:
Jeeez, you are amazing. No one on earth can do anything you disapprove of without it being them lying or doing something nefarious.

You must have a helluva hard time living as an adult in the real world.

Srsly. Just sad.
Click to expand...
I was just offering another possibility. He is correct in asking if you are a mind reader. How can you so often state something as a fact when there are other possibilities? This is a very poor way of interacting with people, and maintain any integrity.

To claim you know what this person meant in the context you stated, means you have contact with this person in another manner outside of this forum, or you are that person. Posing as two people in the same forum. This is why I offered that as another possibility. Being a mind reader is very unlikely and such studies are categorized as a fringe science. We know how you feel about fringe sciences.

Otherwise, you simply do not know it as fact!

What is the truth? Are you claiming fact where it isn't explicitly seen, or are you two or more people in this forum?
 
Lord of Planar said:
I was just offering another possibility. He is correct in asking if you are a mind reader. How can you so often state something as a fact when there are other possibilities? This is a very poor way of interacting with people, and maintain any integrity.

To claim you know what this person meant in the context you stated, means you have contact with this person in another manner outside of this forum, or you are that person. Posing as two people in the same forum. This is why I offered that as another possibility. Being a mind reader is very unlikely and such studies are categorized as a fringe science. We know how you feel about fringe sciences.

Otherwise, you simply do not know it as fact!

What is the truth? Are you claiming fact where it isn't explicitly seen, or are you two or more people in this forum?
Click to expand...

Double-talk.
 
Lord of Planar said:
I was just offering another possibility. He is correct in asking if you are a mind reader. How can you so often state something as a fact when there are other possibilities? This is a very poor way of interacting with people, and maintain any integrity.

To claim you know what this person meant in the context you stated, means you have contact with this person in another manner outside of this forum, or you are that person. Posing as two people in the same forum. This is why I offered that as another possibility. Being a mind reader is very unlikely and such studies are categorized as a fringe science. We know how you feel about fringe sciences.

Otherwise, you simply do not know it as fact!

What is the truth? Are you claiming fact where it isn't explicitly seen, or are you two or more people in this forum?
Click to expand...
So do you assume everyone lies and acts with the worst intentions because that’s what you do or what?
 
Logical1 said:
Research shows that there is 35 billion tons of CO2 produced my man every year.

The total weight of the Atmosphere is 5.5 quadrillion tons.

Dividing 35 billion by 5.5 quadrillion come out to .000006

So made made CO2 compared to the whole earths atmosphere is 6 parts in a million. That is such a small amount that it is meaningless.

So lets stop the BS about man made global warming.
Click to expand...


YOu need to back up your sources.

Otherwise, your OP cannot be taken seriously.
 
istodolez said:
So do you assume everyone lies and acts with the worst intentions because that’s what you do or what?
Click to expand...
How does this explain you you "know" what another poster meant when they used a word that could be understood more than one way?

Projection seems to be your department. I most certainly do not operate that way. How I derive at an opinion of a person's intent, is far more complicated than that. I still don't know what to think about you with any acceptable certainty.

I like to assume the best in people until they show me differently. You most certainly have shown me some rather distasteful character traits.
 
Lord of Planar said:
How does this explain you you "know" what another poster meant when they used a word that could be understood more than one way?

Projection seems to be your department. I most certainly do not operate that way. How I derive at an opinion of a person's intent, is far more complicated than that. I still don't know what to think about you with any acceptable certainty.

I like to assume the best in people until they show me differently. You most certainly have shown me some rather distasteful character traits.
Click to expand...

As if anybody cares what you think of another chatter.
 
Steve Case said:
Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" Wikipedia

Alinsky wrote his book for left wing revolutionaries.
Click to expand...

Gah...this is still a thing for you Conservatives? You forgot to somehow link Obama to it.

So dull. Why do folks on the Right always assume that SOMEONE has to tell the Left how to think? Considering that statistically folks on the Left have more education than Conservatives on the Right it is ironic that the Right doesn't think folks on the Left can think for themselves.

So facile.
 
Steve Case said:
Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" Wikipedia

Alinsky wrote his book for left wing revolutionaries.
Click to expand...

The only people that I have ever heard reference hat book is far right extremist right wingers. And thus it’s just more conspiracy theory.
 
istodolez said:
Gah...this is still a thing for you Conservatives? You forgot to somehow link Obama to it.

So dull. Why do folks on the Right always assume that SOMEONE has to tell the Left how to think? Considering that statistically folks on the Left have more education than Conservatives on the Right it is ironic that the Right doesn't think folks on the Left can think for themselves.

So facile.
Click to expand...
I'll help:

1616426481663.webp
 

Attachments

  • 1616426371022.webp
    1616426371022.webp
    27.1 KB · Views: 1
  • 1616426445591.webp
    1616426445591.webp
    11.1 KB · Views: 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom