Are both sides full of excrement when it comes to climate change?

[IBDaMann]

Sorry if I know more about coal and petroleum than you do.

That has yet to be seen. But the fact remains that you don't know what fossils are. You have to admit that's pretty un-fucking-educated. I know children who know what a "fossil" is, making their elementary school diplomas more meaningful than the PhD that you are claiming you received from some unaccredited school in Tijuana.

It comes with the territory of having gotten 2 graduate degrees in the stuff.

Sorry, any moron can buy a credential. You bought two, you say? Let's see, you still believe in Global Warming. That alone erases any credibility you might have established.

So can you explain all these Iota Beta Psi graphics you always lard every single post with?

Yes, I most certainly can.

Pro Tip: If you are going to claim to be a PhD, don't end your sentences in prepositions. | [ ... graphics with which you lard every single post? ] (no charge).

What's the deal?

Omaha-8 or better.

You seem to lack access to Image-->Resize Image in your graphics program.

I can certainly do that if and when I wish. Would you like me to resize something of yours for you, or perhaps change image formats for you?

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Pro Tip #1: You aren't the genius you have been led to believe.
Pro Tip #2: You aren't anyone's first choice for commentary on what's clever.
Pro Tip #3: You aren't a mind reader; you have no idea what my fantasies are.
Pro Tip #4: I'm waiting for you to grow a pair and debate your Climate Change religion with me. But take your time; I realize that you are thoroughly ashamed of your faith at present.

Bring it on, Mr. PhD. It will be a lot of fun.

OK, let's start off simple:

Just tell me what this image is and why that valley that is circled in red is appropriate to the climate change conversation. Simple enough. I'll get a sense of how much science you ACTUALLY know.

I KNOW FOR A FACT YOU WON'T ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS. I KNOW 100%.

 

[IBDaMann]

OK, let's start off simple:

Whoooaaaaa there tiger. You are not my professor and you will not be giving me any exams. You are the one who needs to explain why you think hydrocarbons are fossils.

Just tell me what this image is and why that valley that is circled in red is appropriate to the climate change conversation.

First, I am an atheist. I don't find anything "appropriate" for Climate Change worship.
Second, your "atmospheric infra-red absorption" chart is as cliché as your conclusions are erroneous.

Stay focused, why do you insist that hydrocarbons are fossils?

Simple enough. I'll get a sense of how much science you ACTUALLY know.

Don't fool yourself. I'm the one who will be grading you.

Answer the question.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Whoooaaaaa there tiger. You are not my professor and you will not be giving me any exams. You are the one who needs to explain why you think hydrocarbons are fossils.


First, I am an atheist. I don't find anything "appropriate" for Climate Change worship.
Second, your "atmospheric infra-red absorption" chart is as cliché as your conclusions are erroneous.

Stay focused, why do you insist that hydrocarbons are fossils?


Don't fool yourself. I'm the one who will be grading you.

Answer the question.

I knew you wouldn't be able to answer the question about the circled peak. But kudos on know it was an IR (thankfully for you it says that on the picture).

You lack sufficient knowledge of the topic to be worth my while talking to you. Sorry you lost.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

I knew you wouldn't be able to answer the question about the circled peak. But kudos on know it was an IR (thankfully for you it says that on the picture).

You lack sufficient knowledge of the topic to be worth my while talking to you. Sorry you lost.

I could, but your graph is answering the wrong question.

 

[IBDaMann]

[terrified EVASION omitted]

You do not get to declare what I do and do not know, and as I said, I'm not taking any exams. We are remaining focused on your affirmative argument of Global Warming and Climate Change and we are currently addressing your insistence that hydrocarbons are somehow fossils, before we get to your explanation of how the earth can somehow spontaneously increase in temperature without additional energy to accomplish Global Warming.

First, to the best of your scientific understanding, why do you believe that hydrocarbons are somehow fossils? This time, please just answer the question without fleeing in panic. After all, it's your claim, and I do want to give you an opportunity to totally throw this whole Climate Change thing in my face such that I am thoroughly humiliated and am forced to publicly concede to your superior understanding. Why do you believe hydrocarbons are fossils?

 

[ptif219]

Spoken like somebody who doesn't know what words mean.

My words ring true

 

[Saint Guinefort]

You do not get to declare what I do and do not know, and as I said, I'm not taking any exams. We are remaining focused on your affirmative argument of Global Warming and Climate Change and we are currently addressing your insistence that hydrocarbons are somehow fossils, before we get to your explanation of how the earth can somehow spontaneously increase in temperature without additional energy to accomplish Global Warming.

First, to the best of your scientific understanding, why do you believe that hydrocarbons are somehow fossils? This time, please just answer the question without fleeing in panic. After all, it's your claim, and I do want to give you an opportunity to totally throw this whole Climate Change thing in my face such that I am thoroughly humiliated and am forced to publicly concede to your superior understanding. Why do you believe hydrocarbons are fossils?

Like I said, you don't have enough science behind you to understand the conversation. I could tell by how you couldn't answer simple questions about the FTIR spectrum. That's all I needed to know. Thanks for trying to play.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

I could, but your graph is answering the wrong question.

I'd be interested to know what you think that spectrum infers about AGW. (I won't hold my breath though)

 

[IBDaMann]

Like I said, you don't have enough science behind you to understand the conversation. I could tell by how you couldn't answer simple questions about the FTIR spectrum. That's all I needed to know. Thanks for trying to play.

I'd be interested to know what you think that spectrum infers about AGW. (I won't hold my breath though)

You're not fooling anyone. You are a scientifically illiterate and mathematically incompetent moron. You don't have any PhD. You probably don't even have a high school diploma. You can't even answer a simple question about your own assertions.

I appreciate you not wasting my time.

 

[gfm7175]

Like I said, you don't have enough science behind you to understand the conversation. I could tell by how you couldn't answer simple questions about the FTIR spectrum. That's all I needed to know. Thanks for trying to play.

Are you too scaywd to anthow the quethon athed of you?

Tailbetweenmylegger says: "I've deemed that you aren't smart enough to understand the topic, so I'm not answering any simple questions from you that completely and utterly destroy my nonsensical religious position... neener neener boo boo"...

That's the most pathetic, sniveling, cry baby, five year old type of response to someone asking someone else a question if I ever did witness one.....

Are you not smart enough to teach others about "what you know"? Are you not kind enough??

How "compassionate" of you...

 

[Geeko Sportivo]

The Left has latched onto Gorebal Warming as a means to bring about political and social changes they want. It is an excuse, not science, not a consensus--unless you are a Leftist then it is a consensus that Leftist ideas should be pushed on everyone.

If the Gorebal Warming crowd, like that little Swedish troll and her minions are, were truly concerned about the climate and not Leftist politics, they'd be railing against aircraft contrails that are easily eliminated at little cost. But that would defeat their plan to force social and economic change on the planet.

https://e360.yale.edu/features/how-airplane-contrails-are-helping-make-the-planet-warmer
https://www.rmets.org/metmatters/contrail-clouds-and-climate-change
https://www.bing.com/search?pglt=41...=edge..69i57j0l8.6575j0j1&FORM=ANNTA1&PC=DCTS
https://www.earthdata.nasa.gov/learn/sensing-our-planet/on-the-trail-of-contrails

The science says they have a big effect, possibly greater than anthropogenic CO2, on the atmosphere. But these aren't something that can be used to force societal change, so they are ignored.

Gorebal Warming is about politics, not the environment.

No Sir, making everything political is not the answer. And to be fair, it's not a lopsided blame aimed at one party, as this tends to be a problem of our Old-Fart politicians and a large segment of our public, made up of Old Farts at large, that think that blaming the other side for everything including their Hemorrhoids is the answer for everything.

The truth of the matter is the world changes, the weather changes, and either your country rolls with the changes, OR YOU GET LEFT BEHIND AND SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES.

Here we OLD FARTS are arguing about who is to blame for the weather, to score some cheap political points, instead of just realizing that the weather on Earth is a BITCH! IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN, AND IT ALWAYS WILL BE. There are no safe havens out there in the world.

Us Old Farts are not going to ever get beyond the politics and get out of our own way!

It will take a new generation of our people, and a younger generation of leaders, to get us on the right track, and focus on what track we need to be on to face the weather that we already know is coming.

Our generation of OLD FARTS set in our OLD FART Ways has failed and let politics get in the way of progress to better resolve problems- AND I AM NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT PROBLEMS RELATED TO THE WEATHER!

I am talking about every problem our nation faces today!

 

[Truth Detector]

The conservatives deny human causation,
which is scientifically preposterous.

The way we caused it, however, and this is obvious,
was by excessive procreation and overpopulation.

Everything else is charging the symptoms with being the cause.

It would be stupid to think that humans should live like so many Woodstock hippies
in order to not pollute the planet.

Nobody is willing to address the OVERPOPULATION ISSUE, however.
That's the REAL Inconvenient Truth.

If we don't have the stones to do that,
I favor just living however the hell we want, environment be damned,
because all of the WOKE solutions won't lead to jack shit.

I'm too deep into my life to keep my house at 90º in the summer and 55º in the winter
or to drive some kind of stupid car that I don't want.

Only the left is full of excrement; you being the best example. Man caused warming is a massive hoax that only the ignorant, stupid or dishonest buy into.

 

[Truth Detector]

Actually those two are the same issue. AGW (Climate change) is a function of overuse of fossil fuels and land use changes (eg deforestation) on large scales. Those large scales are a function of the addressable market...in other words: the people.

Either issue will require extreme solutions that few if any actually have the guts for. One of the sets of solutions is more humane overall but harder economically.

At the end of the day, though, we are stupid animals and we'll just go ahead and decimate our societies by ignoring all the science anyway. If the solution didn't have any "costs" we'd do it. If it has even a modest cost we as humans seem incapable of responding rationally.

Dumbest post ever.

 

[Truth Detector]

Global Warning is both man made and destructive to the environment according to valid science.

We do desperately need radical social and economic changes on this planet
but compromises in the standard of living aren't part of the change we need.

The United Nations should be able to ENFORCE China's old one child policy on the entire globe.
That's the REAL answer, and even then, it might be too late.

We've fucked ourselves into dystopia,
when all we really had to do was throw a fucking bag on it.
And the poor, globally, were probably the worst offenders.

Probably too late now.

At my age, I'm going to keep my house at whatever temperature I want,
drive whatever kind of car that I want,
and eat whatever the fuck I want as well.

What's MY downside to doing that?

Second dumbest post on the thread.

 

[Truth Detector]

I'm a reasonable man as always, EyeBee.

Thinks being an ignorant dumbass is "reasonable."

 

[Truth Detector]

Again;

Below is the composition of air in percent by volume, at sea level at 15 C and 101325 Pa.

Nitrogen -- N2 -- 78.084%
Oxygen -- O2 -- 20.9476%
Argon -- Ar -- 0.934%
Carbon Dioxide -- CO2 -- 0.0314%
Neon -- Ne -- 0.001818%
Methane -- CH4 -- 0.0002%
Helium -- He -- 0.000524%
Krypton -- Kr -- 0.000114%
Hydrogen -- H2 -- 0.00005%
Xenon -- Xe -- 0.0000087%
Ozone -- O3 -- 0.000007%
Nitrogen Dioxide -- NO2 -- 0.000002%
Iodine -- I2 -- 0.000001%
Carbon Monoxide -- CO -- trace
Ammonia -- NH3 – trace
https://www.thoughtco.com/chemical-composition-of-air-604288

29% of Earth is land mass. Of that 29% humans occupy less than 2 to 3% of that area. Of the remaining land mass, about 40% is pure wilderness. 14% is true desert and 15% has desert like characteristics. 9% is Antarctica. Most of the remaining 22% are agricultural areas.

https://www.answers.com/Q/What_percentage_of_land_on_earth_is_dominated_by_humans

The notion that man is causing the planet to heat up based on CO2 that amounts to 0.0314% of the gas in oxygen and less than 3% of the land can only be believed by morons.

 

[Into the Night]

The conservatives deny human causation,
which is scientifically preposterous.

The way we caused it, however, and this is obvious,
was by excessive procreation and overpopulation.

Everything else is charging the symptoms with being the cause.

It would be stupid to think that humans should live like so many Woodstock hippies
in order to not pollute the planet.

Nobody is willing to address the OVERPOPULATION ISSUE, however.
That's the REAL Inconvenient Truth.

If we don't have the stones to do that,
I favor just living however the hell we want, environment be damned,
because all of the WOKE solutions won't lead to jack shit.

I'm too deep into my life to keep my house at 90º in the summer and 55º in the winter
or to drive some kind of stupid car that I don't want.

Climate cannot change. There is no value associated with climate that can change. Climate isn't science either.
The Church of Global Warming uses the phrase 'climate change' instead of 'global warming' to try to rebrand the chant. Lately, 'climate crisis' has been added to the chant.

There is no cause for what does not exist. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. The Church of Global Warming routinely discards and denies the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

You say denying human 'causation' is scientifically preposterous, but It is YOU ignoring theories of science here, and indeed science itself. Science has no politics. Science has no religion.

 

[Into the Night]

The Left has latched onto Gorebal Warming as a means to bring about political and social changes they want. It is an excuse, not science, not a consensus--unless you are a Leftist then it is a consensus that Leftist ideas should be pushed on everyone.

If the Gorebal Warming crowd, like that little Swedish troll and her minions are, were truly concerned about the climate and not Leftist politics, they'd be railing against aircraft contrails that are easily eliminated at little cost. But that would defeat their plan to force social and economic change on the planet.

https://e360.yale.edu/features/how-airplane-contrails-are-helping-make-the-planet-warmer
https://www.rmets.org/metmatters/contrail-clouds-and-climate-change
https://www.bing.com/search?pglt=41...=edge..69i57j0l8.6575j0j1&FORM=ANNTA1&PC=DCTS
https://www.earthdata.nasa.gov/learn/sensing-our-planet/on-the-trail-of-contrails

The science says they have a big effect, possibly greater than anthropogenic CO2, on the atmosphere. But these aren't something that can be used to force societal change, so they are ignored.

Gorebal Warming is about politics, not the environment.

Global Warming is a consensus of it's believers. It is not science and even denies science and mathematics as a matter of routine.
Aircraft contrails are not easily eliminated since the primary exhaust from jet engines is water vapor, and any water vapor around the wingtip will be 'squeezed out' of the air into visible water as the plane passes. Contrails are not capable of warming the Earth.

No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. You cannot create energy out of nothing.
You cannot trap light.
You cannot trap heat.
You cannot trap thermal energy. There is always heat.

No science says anything about contrails or CO2 warming the Earth. Science says otherwise, in fact. You cannot create energy out of nothing.

See the 1st law of thermodynamics.

You cannot trap heat. You cannot trap thermal energy. See the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

You cannot trap light. See the Stefan-Boltzmann law and Planck's laws.

Ignoring these laws is no different than ignoring ohms law.

 

[Into the Night]

Actually those two are the same issue. AGW (Climate change) is a function of overuse of fossil fuels and land use changes (eg deforestation) on large scales. Those large scales are a function of the addressable market...in other words: the people.

Either issue will require extreme solutions that few if any actually have the guts for. One of the sets of solutions is more humane overall but harder economically.

At the end of the day, though, we are stupid animals and we'll just go ahead and decimate our societies by ignoring all the science anyway. If the solution didn't have any "costs" we'd do it. If it has even a modest cost we as humans seem incapable of responding rationally.

Fossils aren't used as fuel. Fossils don't burn. There is no such thing as a 'fossil fuel'. There is no science of global warming. You are again ignoring the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth.