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.

 

The cowardice of the left

page: 11
85
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
Burning fossil fuel pollutes the atmosphere and is the predominate cause of global warming.


Burning fossil fuels allowed sequestered CO2 that had been locked up in the earth back into the atmosphere and reverse a downward trend that was threatening to diminish plant life world-wide. We were in real danger of dipping below 200ppm and starving the biosphere.

The predominate causes of global warming are 1) the Sun and 2) water vapor.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas with logarithmic efficiency. It requires a doubling of concentration to have the same thermal impact. So the effect we see now will require 800 ppm to replicate the effect. Then we we need to go to 1600 ppm for the effect again. So no, CO2 is not a boogey-man that will kill us all. Sorry to disappoint you (but not really sorry).




posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: DBCowboy
So from the true believers and the ones who support using children to peddle their propaganda, the science is settled and there's no need to do anymore science because everything that needs to be learned from man-made climate change has been learned.

The only solution is globalist communism.

Heh.


Well I for one have been convinced !!

I'm enrolling in the Frankfurt School next semester !!

I will be proud !!



Please explain to me how accepting the fact burning fossil fuels is causing global warming will lead to people accepting globalist communism as the only solution?




I'll tell you after I graduate 😎

And I'll even release my records !!



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: CrawlingChaos

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: CrawlingChaos

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: CrawlingChaos
a reply to: dfnj2015

There once was a consensus you could turn lead into gold...

There was once a consensus the Earth was flat...

There once was a consensus that certain races couldn't match mental abilities..

They were all scientific consensus....


There are good methods and there are bad methods. Science over the last 500 years has been extremely successfully in getting rid of silly superstitions by people who claim to have the most common sense.

The facts remain. Burning fossil fuel pollutes the atmosphere and is the predominate cause of global warming. But again, what difference does it make if this fact is true? WHO CARES. No one on the planet is going to stop driving cars. NO ONE!!!

Why is this even an issue of discussion?



Explain how it violates Planks Law of Radiation then


I never made any assertions about Plank's Law of Radiation. Good luck with that.


The carbon model violates a known law of thermodynamics. You explain how, good luck with that....


We burn the fuel. The mean temperature of the planet is rising. Most people know how to read a thermometer.

But this is why we have peer review research so idiots like you and me don't make stuff up for political gain or because we are superstitious idiots with bigotry and prejudice.

I will defer to the scientists on this one and NOT you:

The 97% consensus on global warming

People with PhDs get paid lost of money regardless of politics. They really don't care about what the facts are. They are just presenting the facts.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Democrats may have problems with facts. But most climate scientists are in agreement about what the facts are with regards to global warming. The facts have nothing to do with Democrats.

What exactly is the political gain to be had by making false claims about global warming?? This is crazy talk to think global warming is somehow a issue of the Democrats. The scientists are really smart people. They get paid no matter what. Just because you don't like the facts being presented doesn't mean you have to paint it some communist conspiracy.

Again, even if the fact is accepted global warming is caused by burning fossil fuels it's not like people are going to stop using fossil fuels anytime soon. Why is there any outrage about this at all in the first place???? I just don't get it.


The facts have everything to do with democrats. Democrats are the ones pushing carbon tax schemes the most so they can rake in bundles for personal gains. Just look at Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington State. It doesn't work or have hope without global warming being blamed on the tax payers, and so it was no surprise when the leftist democrats paid big bucks to left wing professors to "fudge" the data to help make it look more scary and cause more fear to get people supporting new taxation schemes. Has anyone stopped polluting or curbed their personal carbon output? Has Jay Inslee, or Bernie, or Al Gore?

OF COURSE NOT!






posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:14 PM
link   
I cant imagine being on the left and supporting this kind of behavior. Sometime, as a prank we need to switch positions for 1 thread, so we can experience what it feels like to promote this type on nonsense. We can do a role switch and see what its like to defend this crap. It will be fun. We have to try though.
It will drive them bananas!



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: dfnj2015
Burning fossil fuel pollutes the atmosphere and is the predominate cause of global warming.


Burning fossil fuels allowed sequestered CO2 that had been locked up in the earth back into the atmosphere and reverse a downward trend that was threatening to diminish plant life world-wide. We were in real danger of dipping below 200ppm and starving the biosphere.

The predominate causes of global warming are 1) the Sun and 2) water vapor.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas with logarithmic efficiency. It requires a doubling of concentration to have the same thermal impact. So the effect we see now will require 800 ppm to replicate the effect. Then we we need to go to 1600 ppm for the effect again. So no, CO2 is not a boogey-man that will kill us all. Sorry to disappoint you (but not really sorry).


Again, I don't care one way or the other. What difference does it make? People will continue to buy cars and burn fossil fuel whether or not sea levels rise 1 or 2 feet. Why do you care so much what the peer review science is saying?

I don't get it. I'm not disappointed at all. If the scientists say burning fossil fuels is polluting I believe them. Why don't you?



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: CrawlingChaos

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: CrawlingChaos

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: CrawlingChaos
a reply to: dfnj2015

There once was a consensus you could turn lead into gold...

There was once a consensus the Earth was flat...

There once was a consensus that certain races couldn't match mental abilities..

They were all scientific consensus....


There are good methods and there are bad methods. Science over the last 500 years has been extremely successfully in getting rid of silly superstitions by people who claim to have the most common sense.

The facts remain. Burning fossil fuel pollutes the atmosphere and is the predominate cause of global warming. But again, what difference does it make if this fact is true? WHO CARES. No one on the planet is going to stop driving cars. NO ONE!!!

Why is this even an issue of discussion?



Explain how it violates Planks Law of Radiation then


I never made any assertions about Plank's Law of Radiation. Good luck with that.


The carbon model violates a known law of thermodynamics. You explain how, good luck with that....


We burn the fuel. The mean temperature of the planet is rising. Most people know how to read a thermometer.

But this is why we have peer review research so idiots like you and me don't make stuff up for political gain or because we are superstitious idiots with bigotry and prejudice.

I will defer to the scientists on this one and NOT you:

The 97% consensus on global warming

People with PhDs get paid lost of money regardless of politics. They really don't care about what the facts are. They are just presenting the facts.



So you don't believe in the laws of physics, but I'm to defer to you about physics... So science is real if I believe this, and fake for that....


I think you don't even have a rudimentary grasp of science. I point outa violation of law, and you cut an paste... You don't even understand the discussion.


edit on 23-9-2019 by CrawlingChaos because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:16 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy




posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Democrats may have problems with facts. But most climate scientists are in agreement about what the facts are with regards to global warming. The facts have nothing to do with Democrats.

What exactly is the political gain to be had by making false claims about global warming?? This is crazy talk to think global warming is somehow a issue of the Democrats. The scientists are really smart people. They get paid no matter what. Just because you don't like the facts being presented doesn't mean you have to paint it some communist conspiracy.

Again, even if the fact is accepted global warming is caused by burning fossil fuels it's not like people are going to stop using fossil fuels anytime soon. Why is there any outrage about this at all in the first place???? I just don't get it.


The facts have everything to do with democrats. Democrats are the ones pushing carbon tax schemes the most so they can rake in bundles for personal gains.


Pushing a carbon tax is one thing. Saying the fact that burning fossil fuel has pollution consequences is another. Why can't we agree global warming is real because the science has show it to be fact not superstition. And at he same time, call the Democrats poo poo for trying to raise taxes? There is no connection between these two phenomena. Democrats will always raise taxes because the billionaires pay zero taxes and we have too much poverty because wages, products, and services all fixed by corporate cartels.

But obscene levels of wealth inequality in this country has nothing to do with global warming being a fact and having NOTHING to do with political agendas.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:20 PM
link   
a reply to: interupt42

Whatever, you win. Good night.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: dfnj2015
Burning fossil fuel pollutes the atmosphere and is the predominate cause of global warming.


Burning fossil fuels allowed sequestered CO2 that had been locked up in the earth back into the atmosphere and reverse a downward trend that was threatening to diminish plant life world-wide. We were in real danger of dipping below 200ppm and starving the biosphere.

The predominate causes of global warming are 1) the Sun and 2) water vapor.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas with logarithmic efficiency. It requires a doubling of concentration to have the same thermal impact. So the effect we see now will require 800 ppm to replicate the effect. Then we we need to go to 1600 ppm for the effect again. So no, CO2 is not a boogey-man that will kill us all. Sorry to disappoint you (but not really sorry).


Again, I don't care one way or the other. What difference does it make? People will continue to buy cars and burn fossil fuel whether or not sea levels rise 1 or 2 feet. Why do you care so much what the peer review science is saying?

I don't get it. I'm not disappointed at all. If the scientists say burning fossil fuels is polluting I believe them. Why don't you?


It doesn't matter if they are right or wrong! What matters is what are they doing about it? They are trying to make money off of it, not save the planet!



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: dfnj2015
Burning fossil fuel pollutes the atmosphere and is the predominate cause of global warming.


Burning fossil fuels allowed sequestered CO2 that had been locked up in the earth back into the atmosphere and reverse a downward trend that was threatening to diminish plant life world-wide. We were in real danger of dipping below 200ppm and starving the biosphere.

The predominate causes of global warming are 1) the Sun and 2) water vapor.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas with logarithmic efficiency. It requires a doubling of concentration to have the same thermal impact. So the effect we see now will require 800 ppm to replicate the effect. Then we we need to go to 1600 ppm for the effect again. So no, CO2 is not a boogey-man that will kill us all. Sorry to disappoint you (but not really sorry).


Again, I don't care one way or the other. What difference does it make? People will continue to buy cars and burn fossil fuel whether or not sea levels rise 1 or 2 feet. Why do you care so much what the peer review science is saying?

I don't get it. I'm not disappointed at all. If the scientists say burning fossil fuels is polluting I believe them. Why don't you?


It doesn't matter if they are right or wrong! What matters is what are they doing about it? They are trying to make money off of it, not save the planet!



I disagree. Using fraud as science to enact law is serious.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

People with PhDs get paid lost of money regardless of politics. They really don't care about what the facts are. They are just presenting the facts.


And many get a lot more when political payoffs are ever-present 😃



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

We burn the fuel. The mean temperature of the planet is rising. Most people know how to read a thermometer.



Then why does the temperature go down drastically in Winter ? 😃



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12
Kids..... I know just the place for them.....



It's a shame hey... the democrats should never have started that.. so terrible.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:45 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

I agree with a lot of what you said ,but the issue is that there is enough conflict of interest inside politics and academia for the public to be righfully skeptical. Then you add the hypocrisy of the leaders preaching to everyone about how dire things are and how one person can make a difference, as they fly and take their super yachts around their wor,ld to visit all their 50 mc mansion water front properties.

Then you add the bs ,fear nongering and tax extortion solutions being proposed by the left , its no wonder people have tuned out climate change and the left all together.

Sadly The only way to really see the truth in todays world when it comes to climate change is to not only look at the raw data but the actual equipment and how,when,and where the readings were taken and by who. In otherwords most people dont have the time,interest, or ability to analyze the raw data so it becomes a political issue where people pick a side, right wrong or indifferent. Thats where we are on most issues.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:46 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Greta ? Greta ? ....... GRETA !!

31,000 scientists say "no convincing evidence".


31,000 scientists reject global warming and say "no convincing evidence" that humans can or will cause global warming? But polls show that of scientists working in the field of climate science, and publishing papers on the topic: 97% of the climate scientists surveyed believe “global average temperatures have increased” during the past century; and 97% think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures. What is the significance of these statistics?

While polls of scientists actively working in the filed of climate science indicate strong general agreement that Earth is warming and human activity is a significant factor, 31,000 scientists say there is "no convincing evidence" that humans can or will cause "catastrophic" heating of the atmosphere.
😃



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

They already know this, it's been pointed out over and over and over and over and over and over and..... well, you get the point.

They just don't care. It's gonna drag someone clueless into their grasp and then, as if by asexual reproduction, another offspring appears, ready to take on the raysis, fashis, natsy evil white monsters... complete with.. that picture.



posted on Sep, 23 2019 @ 11:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: dfnj2015

We burn the fuel. The mean temperature of the planet is rising. Most people know how to read a thermometer.



Then why does the temperature go down drastically in Winter ? 😃



I didn't realise we had a globally universal winter!


I'm not on either side, but the Earth is warming up.. has to be, we're leaving the last ice age. Means we're in for a lot of summer days and deserts where loads of green leafy things used to be... but that's ok. It's not for a few million years, give of take a few million years, and I'll be pushing up the last of the daisies by then.. Or the corn, and the future generations will be eating the essence of my body... wow, almost christ like, in a way..



posted on Sep, 24 2019 @ 12:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: CrawlingChaos

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: dfnj2015
Burning fossil fuel pollutes the atmosphere and is the predominate cause of global warming.


Burning fossil fuels allowed sequestered CO2 that had been locked up in the earth back into the atmosphere and reverse a downward trend that was threatening to diminish plant life world-wide. We were in real danger of dipping below 200ppm and starving the biosphere.

The predominate causes of global warming are 1) the Sun and 2) water vapor.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas with logarithmic efficiency. It requires a doubling of concentration to have the same thermal impact. So the effect we see now will require 800 ppm to replicate the effect. Then we we need to go to 1600 ppm for the effect again. So no, CO2 is not a boogey-man that will kill us all. Sorry to disappoint you (but not really sorry).


Again, I don't care one way or the other. What difference does it make? People will continue to buy cars and burn fossil fuel whether or not sea levels rise 1 or 2 feet. Why do you care so much what the peer review science is saying?

I don't get it. I'm not disappointed at all. If the scientists say burning fossil fuels is polluting I believe them. Why don't you?


It doesn't matter if they are right or wrong! What matters is what are they doing about it? They are trying to make money off of it, not save the planet!



I disagree. Using fraud as science to enact law is serious.


Um yeah, that was my point. But they also aren't doing it to save anyone or the planet, just make money and campaign contributions and political power judge by their actions across the board.



new topics

top topics



 
85
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join