He still doesn't seem to know if he thinks there is no global warming, or no man made global warming. Pretty much every moronic chart he posts contradicts the other ones.
He still doesn't seem to know if he thinks there is no global warming, or no man made global warming. Pretty much every moronic chart he posts contradicts the other ones.
Ending it really does seem like a good option. - Feeling Glucky?
Is your head that hard???
I've stated multiple times that there is indeed "Global warming, and Global cooling" did you not see the above chart? It's been occurring since the beginning of recorded history.
The UN and many first world governments have convinced weak minded people, too lazy to do their own research and gullible to believe anything politicians tell them.......... that it's Human Activity that is the main driver of any change in the climate .......... and so much so that they're all to happy to cough up even more tax dollars in the name of saving the planet, when there is no solid measured scientific data to prove it's NOT naturally occurring global warming........ but it's made made global warming.
Goverments and the UN have also blurred the line between pollution (air and water) and GHGs, and many idiots actually thing that CO2 is pollution......... as lying politicians continually tell us about "carbon pollution" when referencing CO2 emissions.
Pollution Myths
Of all the myths quoted, calling carbon dioxide a pollutant is the worst - it simply is not true! Myth: CO2 is a pollutant.
Fact: Totally false. We challenge you to prove otherwise. CO2 is in our every breath, in the carbonated sodas and waters that we drink and in the dry ice that helps us keep our food cold and safe. We breathe in 400 parts per million and then exhale 40,000 parts per million with no ill effects.
We breathe the 40,000 ppm into victims needing CPR and it does not cause them to die!
The monitoring systems in U.S. submarines do not provide an alert until CO2 levels reach 8,000 ppm which is higher that natural CO2 levels have been on Earth in the last 540 million years.
CO2 is a great airborne fertilizer which, as its concentrations rise, causes additional plant growth and causes plants to need less water. Without CO2 there would be no life (food) on Earth. The 120 ppm of CO2 added to the atmosphere since the start of the industrial revolution has caused an average increase in worldwide plant growth of over 12 percent and of 18 percent for trees.
There is not a single instance of CO2 being a pollutant. Ask any chemistry professor. The only thing being polluted is your mind or the minds of your children.
I've stated multiple times that there is indeed "Global warming, and Global cooling" did you not see the above chart? It's been occurring since the beginning of recorded history.
The UN and many first world governments have convinced weak minded people, too lazy to do their own research and gullible to believe anything politicians tell them.......... that it's Human Activity that is the main driver of any change in the climate .......... and so much so that they're all to happy to cough up even more tax dollars in the name of saving the planet, when there is no solid measured scientific data to prove it's NOT naturally occurring global warming........ but it's made made global warming.
Goverments and the UN have also blurred the line between pollution (air and water) and GHGs, and many idiots actually thing that CO2 is pollution......... as lying politicians continually tell us about "carbon pollution" when referencing CO2 emissions.
Pollution Myths
Of all the myths quoted, calling carbon dioxide a pollutant is the worst - it simply is not true! Myth: CO2 is a pollutant.
Fact: Totally false. We challenge you to prove otherwise. CO2 is in our every breath, in the carbonated sodas and waters that we drink and in the dry ice that helps us keep our food cold and safe. We breathe in 400 parts per million and then exhale 40,000 parts per million with no ill effects.
We breathe the 40,000 ppm into victims needing CPR and it does not cause them to die!
The monitoring systems in U.S. submarines do not provide an alert until CO2 levels reach 8,000 ppm which is higher that natural CO2 levels have been on Earth in the last 540 million years.
CO2 is a great airborne fertilizer which, as its concentrations rise, causes additional plant growth and causes plants to need less water. Without CO2 there would be no life (food) on Earth. The 120 ppm of CO2 added to the atmosphere since the start of the industrial revolution has caused an average increase in worldwide plant growth of over 12 percent and of 18 percent for trees.
There is not a single instance of CO2 being a pollutant. Ask any chemistry professor. The only thing being polluted is your mind or the minds of your children.
Location: any donut with a hole in the middle can get (frank)ed right in its hole, NJ Joined: 04.08.2012
Aug 7 @ 4:03 PM ET
Is your head that hard???
I've stated multiple times that there is indeed "Global warming, and Global cooling" did you not see the above chart? It's been occurring since the beginning of recorded history.
The UN and many first world governments have convinced weak minded people, too lazy to do their own research and gullible to believe anything politicians tell them.......... that it's Human Activity that is the main driver of any change in the climate .......... and so much so that they're all to happy to cough up even more tax dollars in the name of saving the planet, when there is no solid measured scientific data to prove it's NOT naturally occurring global warming........ but it's made made global warming.
Goverments and the UN have also blurred the line between pollution (air and water) and GHGs, and many idiots actually thing that CO2 is pollution......... as lying politicians continually tell us about "carbon pollution" when referencing CO2 emissions.
Pollution Myths
Of all the myths quoted, calling carbon dioxide a pollutant is the worst - it simply is not true! Myth: CO2 is a pollutant.
Fact: Totally false. We challenge you to prove otherwise. CO2 is in our every breath, in the carbonated sodas and waters that we drink and in the dry ice that helps us keep our food cold and safe. We breathe in 400 parts per million and then exhale 40,000 parts per million with no ill effects.
We breathe the 40,000 ppm into victims needing CPR and it does not cause them to die!
The monitoring systems in U.S. submarines do not provide an alert until CO2 levels reach 8,000 ppm which is higher that natural CO2 levels have been on Earth in the last 540 million years.
CO2 is a great airborne fertilizer which, as its concentrations rise, causes additional plant growth and causes plants to need less water. Without CO2 there would be no life (food) on Earth. The 120 ppm of CO2 added to the atmosphere since the start of the industrial revolution has caused an average increase in worldwide plant growth of over 12 percent and of 18 percent for trees.
There is not a single instance of CO2 being a pollutant. Ask any chemistry professor. The only thing being polluted is your mind or the minds of your children.
I've stated multiple times that there is indeed "Global warming, and Global cooling" did you not see the above chart? It's been occurring since the beginning of recorded history.
The UN and many first world governments have convinced weak minded people, too lazy to do their own research and gullible to believe anything politicians tell them.......... that it's Human Activity that is the main driver of any change in the climate .......... and so much so that they're all to happy to cough up even more tax dollars in the name of saving the planet, when there is no solid measured scientific data to prove it's NOT naturally occurring global warming........ but it's made made global warming.
Goverments and the UN have also blurred the line between pollution (air and water) and GHGs, and many idiots actually thing that CO2 is pollution......... as lying politicians continually tell us about "carbon pollution" when referencing CO2 emissions.
Pollution Myths
Of all the myths quoted, calling carbon dioxide a pollutant is the worst - it simply is not true! Myth: CO2 is a pollutant.
Fact: Totally false. We challenge you to prove otherwise. CO2 is in our every breath, in the carbonated sodas and waters that we drink and in the dry ice that helps us keep our food cold and safe. We breathe in 400 parts per million and then exhale 40,000 parts per million with no ill effects.
We breathe the 40,000 ppm into victims needing CPR and it does not cause them to die!
The monitoring systems in U.S. submarines do not provide an alert until CO2 levels reach 8,000 ppm which is higher that natural CO2 levels have been on Earth in the last 540 million years.
CO2 is a great airborne fertilizer which, as its concentrations rise, causes additional plant growth and causes plants to need less water. Without CO2 there would be no life (food) on Earth. The 120 ppm of CO2 added to the atmosphere since the start of the industrial revolution has caused an average increase in worldwide plant growth of over 12 percent and of 18 percent for trees.
There is not a single instance of CO2 being a pollutant. Ask any chemistry professor. The only thing being polluted is your mind or the minds of your children.
You should go into a room and fill it with only CO2 in order to prove us wrong - PhillySportsGuy
Are you confusing Carbon Dioxide with Carbon Monoxide???. Do you know that what you exhale is Carbon Dioxide? Plants "inhale" Carbon Dioxide and "exhale" Oxygen. Without Carbon Dioxide there would be now life on this planet.
Carbon dioxide is a colourless and odourless gas vital to life on Earth. This naturally occurring chemical compound is composed of a carbon atom covalently double bonded to two oxygen atoms.
Thanks for proving my above point that politicians and the UN have blurred the lines between CO2 and pollution......... and feeble minded sheeple actually believe that CO2 is now pollution, that is harmful to humans.
The Maunder Minimum occurred during the depths of the Little Ice Age, a period of feeble summers and bitingly cold winters, war, pestilence and famine. It wasn’t all bad: rivers like the Thames in London froze so thickly they could accommodate Ice Fairs; and it’s said that the slow tree growth induced by the cold gave the wood in Stradivarius violins their special timbre. On the whole, though, a descent into a new mini Ice Age would be massively debilitating both to the global economy and people’s living standards. Since the Little Ice Age ended in the middle of the Nineteenth century, we have all got used to the comforts and agricultural advantages (such as being able to grow wheat in more northerly latitudes) of living through a period of global warming. A second Little Ice Age will come as a very nasty shock.
That shock will be felt most especially by the world’s climate alarmist Establishment, whose scientists and learned institutions have staked their reputation on the idea that CO2, not solar activity, is the prime driver of climate and that the planet is on a warming trend not a cooling one.
This explains why when Professor Zharkova first released her findings last year, various climate alarmists went behind her back to the Royal Astronomical Society to try to persuade them to withdraw the press release.
Professor Valentina Zharkova:
We will see it from 2020 to 2053, when the three next cycles will be very reduced magnetic field of the sun. Basically what happens is these two waves, they separate into the opposite hemispheres and they will not be interacting with each other, which means that resulting magnetic field will drop dramatically nearly to zero. And this will be a similar conditions like in Maunder Minimum.
What will happen to the Earth remains to be seen and predicted because nobody has developed any program or any models of terrestrial response – they are based on this period when the sun has maximum activity — when the sun has these nice fluctuations, and its magnetic field [is] very strong. But we’re approaching to the stage when the magnetic field of the sun is going to be very, very small.
She suggests it could be a repeat of the so-called Maunder Minimum – a period in the 17th century with little solar activity that may have influenced a cooling on Earth.
Whatever we do to the planet, if everything is done only by the sun, then the temperature should drop similar like it was in the Maunder Minimum. At least in the Northern hemisphere, where this temperature is well protocoled and written. We didn’t have many measurements in the Southern hemisphere, we don’t know what will happen with that, but in the Northern hemisphere, we know it’s very well protocoled. The rivers are frozen. There are winters and no summers, and so on.
So we only hope because these Maunder Minima will be shorter, the Maunder Minimum of the 17th century was about 65 years, the Maunder Minimum which we expect will be lasting not longer than 30-35 years.
Of course things are not the same as they were in the 17th century – we have a lot more greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. And it will be interesting to see how the terrestrial and the solar influences play out.
This is promising research – a new insight into our sun with predictions as to its future behavior, yet Professor Zharkova relates than some climatologists resented her discovery.
Location: Supreme Manager of the Johnny Boychuk to EDM Thread Joined: 07.14.2016
Aug 16 @ 12:41 PM ET
Are you confusing Carbon Dioxide with Carbon Monoxide???. Do you know that what you exhale is Carbon Dioxide? Plants "inhale" Carbon Dioxide and "exhale" Oxygen. Without Carbon Dioxide there would be now life on this planet.
Carbon dioxide is a colourless and odourless gas vital to life on Earth. This naturally occurring chemical compound is composed of a carbon atom covalently double bonded to two oxygen atoms.
Thanks for proving my above point that politicians and the UN have blurred the lines between CO2 and pollution......... and feeble minded sheeple actually believe that CO2 is now pollution, that is harmful to humans.
- D0PPELGANGER
If you take a room full of standard air (21% Oxygen, 78% Nitrogen, 1% other gases), and fill it with more CO2 then the Oxygen % content is lowered and you breath in a lower proportion of oxygen with each breath
Furthermore if its sealed airtight and you stay in that room like the fat lazy lard you are and continue to breathe eventually all the oxygen will be replaced with CO2 and you will die
If you take a room full of standard air (21% Oxygen, 78% Nitrogen, 1% other gases), and fill it with more CO2 then the Oxygen % content is lowered and you breath in a lower proportion of oxygen with each breath
Furthermore if its sealed airtight and you stay in that room like the fat lazy lard you are and continue to breathe eventually all the oxygen will be replaced with CO2 and you will die
He's telling you to die. - AustonPowers
WOW, if you fill a room with more of any kind of gas, other than Oxygen, eventually all oxygen will be inhaled and will run out.
I'll bet the same thing would also work with liquid.
Did you take physics in high school, captain obvious??
Location: Supreme Manager of the Johnny Boychuk to EDM Thread Joined: 07.14.2016
Aug 16 @ 1:03 PM ET
WOW, if you fill a room with more of any kind of gas, than Oxygen, eventually all oxygen will be inhaled and will run out.
I'll bet the same thing would also work with liquid.
Did you take physics in high school, captain obvious?? - D0PPELGANGER
Yes,he could have used any other gas. We could have not added any gas and you would have died. Obviously we don't want to wait that long and so we accelerated the process a little bit.
Then was correct you (frank)ing twit
If we wanted to correct it, then it was missing a comma before the "then"
Location: i love how not saying dumb things on the internet was never an option. Joined: 09.29.2005
Aug 16 @ 1:11 PM ET
Yes,he could have used any other gas. We could have not added any gas and you would have died. Obviously we don't want to wait that long and so we accelerated the process a little bit.
Then was correct you (frank)ing twit
If we wanted to correct it, then it was missing a comma before the "then"
Yes,he could have used any other gas. We could have not added any gas and you would have died. Obviously we don't want to wait that long and so we accelerated the process a little bit.
Then was correct you (frank)ing twit
If we wanted to correct it, then it was missing a comma before the "then"
See how that works? - AustonPowers
Wrong my friend.
People get tripped up on then and than all the time—and why not? They look and sound so similar. The way to keep the pair straight is to focus on this basic difference: than is used when you're talking about comparisons; then is used when you're talking about something relating to time.
Location: Supreme Manager of the Johnny Boychuk to EDM Thread Joined: 07.14.2016
Aug 16 @ 1:22 PM ET
Wrong my friend.
People get tripped up on then and than all the time—and why not? They look and sound so similar. The way to keep the pair straight is to focus on this basic difference: than is used when you're talking about comparisons; then is used when you're talking about something relating to time. - D0PPELGANGER
We are talking about a sequence of events you (frank)ing moron
If we add more CO2 to the air, THEN the oxygen % content is lowered
Jesus (frank)ing Christ I'm wrong. When the (frank) did this happen?
"In a handful of cases, though, than is used to say that something happens immediately after something else—that is, it's used when you're talking about something relating to time. So in "No sooner had I explained the rule than an exception came to mind,""
