KW
Well-Known Member
More actual data that leftists ignore. Less than 1 degree warming for a century!
The new Pause lengthens: now 7 years 6 months
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
CO2 Alarmism
- Thread starter KW
- Start date
More actual data that leftists ignore. Less than 1 degree warming for a century!
The new Pause lengthens: now 7 years 6 months
KW
Well-Known Member
This is irrelevant.
As the attached article points out, the fact that a house can heat up when the central heating is off does not mean that the central heating does not work.
Climate myths: Ice cores show CO2 increases lag behind temperature rises, disproving the link to global warming | New Scientist
You are propagating a myth here that is an old chestnut. People that follow the science of climate change can see you coming a mile off.
It is not a myth, it is fact.
You fail to explain why temperatures fell as CO2 kept rising for centuries. Obviously, CO2 was not causing the warming.
Why not accept reality?
KW
Well-Known Member
No. It doesn’t mean that “CO2 is not causing the warming”.
https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a011300/a011362/G2013-077_AACS_CO2_lag_youtube_hq.mov
If CO2 is causing the warming, and CO2 levels continue rising for centuries, why did the earth cool?
KW
Well-Known Member
Leftist propaganda is already causing death and destruction due to energy shortages.
KW
Well-Known Member
As are many other gases.
So?
Do we agree that 5% of CO2 is generated by mankind and that the total fraction of CO2 in the atmosphere is 1/2500? So that means 1/50000 of the atmosphere is human produced CO2.
KW
Well-Known Member
Probably.
Why would anyone rational want to join this club. They drive out any real science.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
You've forgotten that America is a bastion of scientific illiteracy and intellectual dishonesty. We've also a lot of evolution deniers, and I bet on a venn diagram the two circles would sit atop of each other almost perfectly.
Your source is incorrect. The future will wonder why there were so many people unwilling or unable to examine the data and draw the same conclusion as the consensus of climate scientists, or at a minimum, recognize that these people's opinions are more informed than their own and defer to them, just as they will wonder why there were so many that did the same with vaccination rate versus death rate data. They'll wonder why we let this happen to them and their planet, and resent us for it.
Why shouldn't it? But it does so democratically and civilly.
The American right is completely characterized by fighting opposing views, and there is nothing democratic or civil about it. The want to suppress the vote of those who would vote against their party. They want to suppress teaching racial history or gender identity issues in the public schools. They want to ban books. Anything they disagree with becomes PC or woke in an effort to inhibit such expression by mocking and demeaning it. The Republican party has only purpose when not in power, and that is to obstruct the Democratic president because he represents an opposing view. It attempted to obstruct the January 6th committee from forming and now does what it can to impede its purpose. It beset the recent Supreme Court nominee for no better reason than that they oppose everything from the left.
Liberalism has nothing to do with understanding climate science and its implications. People who oppose climate deniers do so not because they are liberal, but because they have developed a defense to indoctrination, critical thinking, which not only teaches one to look for a compelling argument before believing, but also teaches one how to do that - how to evaluate evidence properly to arrive at sound conclusions. Without that skill, one has to be able to decide who to trust. If one chooses to trust conservative media uncritically, he will be consistently lied to and he will accept the lies, because he has no defense against them, no test to decide if they are lies. But with those skills, one can say with confidence what is the case and who is wrong, and not be successfully lied to the propagandists.
Think about why you are promoting what you are here. Whose agenda are you serving? Not your own. You don't benefit at all by convincing others that you are correct. Whose agenda then? Somebody else's. That's pretty much always the case when being indoctrinated by anybody that doesn't know or love you. They also want you to hate liberals because liberals oppose them, and most conservatives comply uncritically. They want you to oppose taxing the wealthy. Do you think that that's because it benefits you? They want you to oppose Social Security, Medicare, and virtually any form of government support for ordinary people. Aren't you also one of those? Nothing they teach their uncritical audiences is for the benefit of the listeners.
exchemist
Veteran Member
The link I posted explains that reality is not what you are trying to pretend it is.
So do the various reports from the IPCC, and the countless explanations of how the climate change feedback loops work that are available all over the internet.
Personally, I am not a conspiracy theorist. I think the professional climate scientists and the atmospheric chemists (my tutor at university was one) seem to know what they are talking about. What they say certainly fits with my own understanding of the physics and chemistry.
As someone who has spent a 30yr career in the oil industry and has thus no ideological reason to embrace the idea, I back their judgement against that of a single octogenarian individual, let alone some random guy on the internet from the steel industry, with a political axe to grind, who just churns out long-discredited talking points. (That New Scientist article was from 2007, so your argument has been known to be crap for at least 15 years now
.)
Heyo
Veteran Member
Yes, it seems we are more in agreement about the facts than was initially obvious.
Do we agree that most of the carbon in the atmosphere and a part of the additional carbon emitted by humans is bound in the Carbon Cycle?
KW
Well-Known Member
Yes. It is a buffered system. Rising CO2 levels increase plant growth rates.
KW
Well-Known Member
That wasn’t what we were discussing..
However, we all know that Biden restricted drilling and stopped pipeline construction due to the left wing of his party.
Kooky
Freedom from Sanity
Yes, we were. Here is your claim:
"Leftist propaganda is already causing death and destruction due to energy shortages."
Are you going to acknowledge that you were simply posting facts free nonsense?
If not, then put up evidence to support your claim.
No, we don't "all know" that. Nor is there a causal link between oil corporations abandoning fracking, and people dieing due to energy shortages. That's a claim you made, and that you have failed to back up with factual information.
Therefore, I am going to continue telling you that your claims are utter nonsense until you come back with evidence to support this argument with actual facts.