It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Greenland Glacier Starts Growing Again..Does It Prove Global Warming Theory A Myth?

page: 5
22
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 11:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

What you wanted was a yes or no answer to a question which resembles, "are you still beating your wife?"

I told you that I think that human CO2 emissions are the primary cause of global warming in as simple terms as I could.

Now answer my question. What do you think is causing global warming?

edit on 3/29/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 12:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

The yes or no question that I was beating a wife with. Was related to my position on CO2 emissions from melting ice. I will spitballing with that but you firmed the information up for me pretty well . Thanks

I asked you was mankind the sole reason for global warming? Your reply was human CO2 emissions are the” primary” cause. Which wasted all those words when you could’ve said no.

But to answer your question directly.


I think it’s mother nature. The earth heat’s and cools it’s an ongoing cycle and no one can truly predict what the earth is or isn’t going to do next . Mount Krakatoa could erupt and cover the atmosphere in ash next week and this whole conversation could be for not .


First hypothesis temperatures are rising in correlation CO2. Then the temperatures fell off from the CO2 rise. So the second hypothesis was that they don’t have to necessarily correlate .

People watched a movie and I had to listen to them for eight years tell me all the ice caps will be gone by 2014. That didn’t happen either.

Global temperatures will rise by as much as 4°. Last I heard global temperatures have only risen by 0.8°

I know you can dispute everything I just said. Everything I just said I heard or read from someone or somewhere that was a global warming enthusiast .

It’s like talking to 9/11 truthers everybody’s got a theory but very few on the same side can agree on anything . Stuff like that happens when emotions get involved and there’s not enough actual data to shut down one side or the other .

The original prediction was from Earth Day 1970 we’re hilariously ridiculous.

But a guy who said he made the Internet makes a movie that tugs at everybody’s heartstrings telling us it’s our fault .

Who’s profiting from this? I know one guy. Al gore was worth around 50 million in 2007. Now the estimates of his worth are anywhere from 300,000,000 to 1,000,000,000.

Hypocrisy examples


He sold current TV to Al Jazeera for $500 million and pocketed $100 million . Al Jazeera is solely back by Qatar’s oil money. Correct me if I’m wrong but I never heard him say it’s OK to take big oils money . Shouldn’t that be a no no ?

He started investment fund called general investment management. The rollout was a plan to invest in green Technologies . ($7.3 billion 2015)

Around 2012 GIM had one green company listed out of 30 funds .

I’m done listing them it goes on and on .

So to sum it up. Yes I believe the climate is getting warmer.

But anyone buying his dogma hook line and sinker has fallen victim to a flimflam Man .


The smartest people I see out of this whole mess. Are the Russians and Canadians setting up shipping bases in the north sea pass. And as usual US is sucking hind tit on that coming gold mind .


If you only replied to one sentence you don’t get a reply. Give me your opinion on my reply en masse Please.










posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown


I think it’s mother nature. The earth heat’s and cools it’s an ongoing cycle and no one can truly predict what the earth is or isn’t going to do next . Mount Krakatoa could erupt and cover the atmosphere in ash next week and this whole conversation could be for not .
Krakatoa might cool things down a bit, like Pinatubo did. But it's not ash that does that and the sulfur dioxide which does do it doesn't last as long as the CO2 we have put into the atmosphere does. But sure, let's hope for a catastrophe to overwhelm our "work", a cometary impact would work, but a volcano won't.


First hypothesis temperatures are rising in correlation CO2. Then the temperatures fell off from the CO2 rise.
No. There is no hypothesis which says that tropospheric temperatures fall due to CO2 increases.


People watched a movie and I had to listen to them for eight years tell me all the ice caps will be gone by 2014. That didn’t happen either.
Nor was it said. Too bad you don't pay attention to what people say what was said rather than what was actually said.



Who’s profiting from this? I know one guy.
Are profits bad? What are you, a communist?

edit on 3/30/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage


Are profits bad? What are you, a communist


I can see why you would side with abandoning your principles for the almighty dollar my bad .

The first amendment might give you the freedom of speech. I don’t think it gives Al Gore the freedom to con .



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown



I can see why you would side with abandoning your principles for the almighty dollar my bad .

So, profit is bad.
Period.


That is not, nor has it ever been, one of my "principles."
edit on 3/30/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Abandoning your principles for the almighty dollar is bad .

Letting people know where you stand and making huge profits are great . ( ask Donald Trump )

Someone should email Al Gore about that .🤔



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown




Abandoning your principles for the almighty dollar is bad .

Unless your principles are misguided and include screwing everyone you can (ask Trump).

Why are you obsessed with Gore?

Why are you avoiding addressing your erroneous claims about climate?
edit on 3/30/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

At least you know what you’re getting with Trump .

Kinda missed my point there didn’t you?



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

Ah, so. Trump is a straight up asshole who will screw anyone he can any way he can, so that's a good thing.

Now, regarding climate: please address volcanoes, comets, and...CO2 causing cooling?

You know...the topic.
edit on 3/30/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Fallingdown

Ah, so. Trump is a straight up asshole who will screw anyone he can any way he can, so that's a good thing.

Now, regarding climate: please address volcanoes, comets, and...CO2 causing cooling?

You know...the topic.



Nobody has sent me on errands in 10 years and it will never happen .

But I loved your grand slam when you corrected volcano ash was sulfur dioxide .

You sure showed me.
edit on 30-3-2019 by Fallingdown because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

How about that CO2 cooling thing?
Do you have a source, or did you make it up?
edit on 3/30/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

You made it up. Give me a screenshot where I said CO2 causes cooling?

If anything resembles that it was probably a joke.

One thing I’ve noticed. I keep throwing them out there and you keep missing them.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown




You made it up. Give me a screenshot where I said CO2 causes cooling?

The post is still there and that's not exactly what I said, but...

First hypothesis temperatures are rising in correlation CO2. Then the temperatures fell off from the CO2 rise.


edit on 3/30/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Why even bother with idiots from the right, they don't know anything and only parrot what they have been told to say?

They somehow think they can dispute science about climate change with the idiotic response "it has been naturally happening throughout the centuries on planet earth." and believe that somehow negates the science.

Scientists understand that simple concept but they have done thorough research which shows that this is not one of those "natural" times and provide date and research to show you why it is different.

But hey...it's conservatives, the scum of the human species.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:54 AM
link   
a reply to: 0n514ught

Hi newby, welcome to election 2020.

Conservatives are just as prone to idiocy as anyone else but name calling does nothing to advance a discussion.

edit on 3/30/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 02:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

You seriously didn’t understand that? I know my grammar sucks but......

Atmospheric CO2 kept increasing and global temperatures didn’t keep in pace .

The second sentence should’ve been a big hint at what I meant .

“ so the second hypothesis was that they don’t necessarily have to correlate “

How long are we going to do this days, weeks or months I’m.






edit on 30-3-2019 by Fallingdown because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 02:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

I see the source of my misunderstanding. Thanks for the clarification.



“ so the second hypothesis was that they don’t necessarily have to correlate “
This is not true. There was no second hypothesis. The theory is that increased CO2 concentrations cause increased forcing which leads to global warming. That theory has not changed, over many decades.
1975:

By analogy with similar events in the past, the natural climatic cooling which, since 1940, has more than compensated for the carbon dioxide effect, will soon bottom out. Once this happens, the exponential rise in the atmospheric carbon dioxide content will tend to become a significant factor and by early in the next century will have driven the mean planetary temperature beyond the limits experienced during the last 1000 years.

science.sciencemag.org...
edit on 3/30/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 02:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Positive radiative forcing is another way of saying the greenhouse effect .

So in if increased concentration of CO2 cause increased positive forcing .

Amplifying the greenhouse effect. Why aren’t the temperatures going up with the CO2 concentrations ?



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 02:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown




Why aren’t the temperatures going up with the CO2 concentrations ?


www.realclimate.org...
edit on 3/30/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 02:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

At this point in our discussion I was dealing exclusively with CO2 emissions versus temperature .



Atmospheric CO2 keeps rising but the temperature has pretty much flatlined or fallen a little in the last 50 years .

Which stands in contrast to the link you gave me earlier .


By analogy with similar events in the past, the natural climatic cooling which, since 1940, has more than compensated for the carbon dioxide effect, will soon bottom out. Once this happens, the exponential rise in the atmospheric carbon dioxide content will tend to become a significant factor and by early in the next century will have driven the mean planetary temperature beyond the limits experienced during the last 1000 years.


Now I’m not sure if the temperature is higher than it has been in the last thousand years.

But I am positive the temperature has been higher than it has been in the last thousand years .







 
22
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join