To "AssHat, WCGrouch, LadyT, and All Who Profess to "Care"

jollie

New member
Instead of attacking me, as LadyT, or just typing a sarcastic, meaningless sentence, don't you think it would BOLSTER your viewpoint, if you at least ADDRESSED these Facts Below, about CO2, the Sun, Volcanoes, and the absolutely Ridiculous percentages of pollution that MAN creates, as opposed to NATURE? (The oceans, volcanoes, biological decay, etc.?) Don't you think anyone who TRULY "cared" about the Earth would show the slightest interest?
*************************************************
Don't you just love "fun facts"?

Of the 186 billion tons of CO2 that enter earth's atmosphere each year from all sources, only 6 billion tons are from human activity. Approximately 90 billion tons come from biologic activity in earth's oceans and another 90 billion tons from such sources as volcanoes and decaying land plants.



At 368 parts per million CO2 is a minor constituent of earth's atmosphere-- less than 4/100ths of 1% of all gases present. Compared to former geologic times, earth's current atmosphere is CO2- impoverished.

CO2 is odorless, colorless, and tasteless. Plants absorb CO2 and emit oxygen as a waste product. Humans and animals breathe oxygen and emit CO2 as a waste product. Carbon dioxide is a nutrient, not a pollutant, and all life-- plants and animals alike-- benefit from more of it. All life on earth is carbon-based and CO2 is an essential ingredient. When plant-growers want to stimulate plant growth, they introduce more carbon dioxide.



CO2 that goes into the atmosphere does not stay there but is continually recycled by terrestrial plant life and earth's oceans-- the great retirement home for most terrestrial carbon dioxide.

Sine 1955 atmospheric CO2 has gone from about 315 ppm to about 370 ppm.

If we are in a global warming crisis today, even the most aggressive and costly proposals for limiting industrial carbon dioxide emissions would have a negligible effect on global climate!



The case for a "greenhouse problem" is made by environmentalists, news anchormen , and special interests who make inaccurate and misleading statements about global warming and climate change. Even though people may be skeptical of such rhetoric initially, after awhile people start believing it must be true because we hear it so often.



"We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."

Stephen Schneider (leading advocate of the global warming theory)
************************************************** *******



"In the long run, the replacement of the precise and disciplined language of science by the misleading language of litigation and advocacy may be one of the more important sources of damage to society incurred in the current debate over global warming."

Dr. Richard S. Lindzen
(leading climate and atmospheric science expert- MIT)
************************************************** *******


"Researchers pound the global-warming drum because they know there is politics and, therefore, money behind it. . . I've been critical of global warming and am persona non grata."
************************************************** ******
Dr. William Gray
(Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado and leading expert of hurricane prediction )
************************************************** ******

"Scientists who want to attract attention to themselves, who want to attract great funding to themselves, have to (find a) way to scare the public . . . and this you can achieve only by making things bigger and more dangerous than they really are."

Petr Chylek
(Professor of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia)
 
Instead of attacking me, as LadyT, or just typing a sarcastic, meaningless sentence, don't you think it would BOLSTER your viewpoint, if you at least ADDRESSED these Facts Below, about CO2, the Sun, Volcanoes, and the absolutely Ridiculous percentages of pollution that MAN creates, as opposed to NATURE? (The oceans, volcanoes, biological decay, etc.?) Don't you think anyone who TRULY "cared" about the Earth would show the slightest interest?
*************************************************
Don't you just love "fun facts"?

Of the 186 billion tons of CO2 that enter earth's atmosphere each year from all sources, only 6 billion tons are from human activity. Approximately 90 billion tons come from biologic activity in earth's oceans and another 90 billion tons from such sources as volcanoes and decaying land plants.



At 368 parts per million CO2 is a minor constituent of earth's atmosphere-- less than 4/100ths of 1% of all gases present. Compared to former geologic times, earth's current atmosphere is CO2- impoverished.

CO2 is odorless, colorless, and tasteless. Plants absorb CO2 and emit oxygen as a waste product. Humans and animals breathe oxygen and emit CO2 as a waste product. Carbon dioxide is a nutrient, not a pollutant, and all life-- plants and animals alike-- benefit from more of it. All life on earth is carbon-based and CO2 is an essential ingredient. When plant-growers want to stimulate plant growth, they introduce more carbon dioxide.



CO2 that goes into the atmosphere does not stay there but is continually recycled by terrestrial plant life and earth's oceans-- the great retirement home for most terrestrial carbon dioxide.

Sine 1955 atmospheric CO2 has gone from about 315 ppm to about 370 ppm.

If we are in a global warming crisis today, even the most aggressive and costly proposals for limiting industrial carbon dioxide emissions would have a negligible effect on global climate!



The case for a "greenhouse problem" is made by environmentalists, news anchormen , and special interests who make inaccurate and misleading statements about global warming and climate change. Even though people may be skeptical of such rhetoric initially, after awhile people start believing it must be true because we hear it so often.



"We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."

Stephen Schneider (leading advocate of the global warming theory)
************************************************** *******



"In the long run, the replacement of the precise and disciplined language of science by the misleading language of litigation and advocacy may be one of the more important sources of damage to society incurred in the current debate over global warming."

Dr. Richard S. Lindzen
(leading climate and atmospheric science expert- MIT)
************************************************** *******


"Researchers pound the global-warming drum because they know there is politics and, therefore, money behind it. . . I've been critical of global warming and am persona non grata."
************************************************** ******
Dr. William Gray
(Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado and leading expert of hurricane prediction )
************************************************** ******

"Scientists who want to attract attention to themselves, who want to attract great funding to themselves, have to (find a) way to scare the public . . . and this you can achieve only by making things bigger and more dangerous than they really are."

Petr Chylek
(Professor of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia)

no.
 
"Instead of attacking me, as LadyT, or just typing a sarcastic, meaningless sentence, don't you think it would BOLSTER your viewpoint, if you at least ADDRESSED these Facts Below"

No.
 
Or is it as I suspect, and are Liberals AFRAID to address FACTS, when they are put in front of them, as Al Gore is AFRAID to attend the conference, if you read my first post.
 
Ho-hum. I guess it's like most people say, Liberals can only screech like wet hens, but they don't SAY anything that's TRUE. And when you hit them with FACTS, or MORALITY, they run and hide in the corner, like AlGore, or you lightweights, here. I HAVE to find a website where there are Liberals who can at LEAST respond, even if they don't make a point. But here, as on fullpolitics, and others, I guess I just scare all the Socialists away! GOOD, Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahaha! ALL people RECOGNIZE LOSERS, when they run away, Hahahaha!
 
Hey "superstar", is that YOU? You look just like Democrat U.S.Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, who asked NASA scientists in a TELEVISED HEARING, when the buggy lands on Mars, will we be able to see the UNITED STATES FLAG, THAT OUR ASTRONAUTS PLANTED THERE, IN THE 70'S? Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

What a MORON, Hahaha! She even got the YEAR wrong!
 
Instead of attacking me, as LadyT, or just typing a sarcastic, meaningless sentence, don't you think it would BOLSTER your viewpoint, if you at least ADDRESSED these Facts Below, about CO2, the Sun, Volcanoes, and the absolutely Ridiculous percentages of pollution that MAN creates, as opposed to NATURE? (The oceans, volcanoes, biological decay, etc.?) Don't you think anyone who TRULY "cared" about the Earth would show the slightest interest?
*************************************************
Don't you just love "fun facts"?

Of the 186 billion tons of CO2 that enter earth's atmosphere each year from all sources, only 6 billion tons are from human activity. Approximately 90 billion tons come from biologic activity in earth's oceans and another 90 billion tons from such sources as volcanoes and decaying land plants.



At 368 parts per million CO2 is a minor constituent of earth's atmosphere-- less than 4/100ths of 1% of all gases present. Compared to former geologic times, earth's current atmosphere is CO2- impoverished.

CO2 is odorless, colorless, and tasteless. Plants absorb CO2 and emit oxygen as a waste product. Humans and animals breathe oxygen and emit CO2 as a waste product. Carbon dioxide is a nutrient, not a pollutant, and all life-- plants and animals alike-- benefit from more of it. All life on earth is carbon-based and CO2 is an essential ingredient. When plant-growers want to stimulate plant growth, they introduce more carbon dioxide.



CO2 that goes into the atmosphere does not stay there but is continually recycled by terrestrial plant life and earth's oceans-- the great retirement home for most terrestrial carbon dioxide.

Sine 1955 atmospheric CO2 has gone from about 315 ppm to about 370 ppm.

If we are in a global warming crisis today, even the most aggressive and costly proposals for limiting industrial carbon dioxide emissions would have a negligible effect on global climate!



The case for a "greenhouse problem" is made by environmentalists, news anchormen , and special interests who make inaccurate and misleading statements about global warming and climate change. Even though people may be skeptical of such rhetoric initially, after awhile people start believing it must be true because we hear it so often.



"We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."

Stephen Schneider (leading advocate of the global warming theory)
************************************************** *******



"In the long run, the replacement of the precise and disciplined language of science by the misleading language of litigation and advocacy may be one of the more important sources of damage to society incurred in the current debate over global warming."

Dr. Richard S. Lindzen
(leading climate and atmospheric science expert- MIT)
************************************************** *******


"Researchers pound the global-warming drum because they know there is politics and, therefore, money behind it. . . I've been critical of global warming and am persona non grata."
************************************************** ******
Dr. William Gray
(Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado and leading expert of hurricane prediction )
************************************************** ******

"Scientists who want to attract attention to themselves, who want to attract great funding to themselves, have to (find a) way to scare the public . . . and this you can achieve only by making things bigger and more dangerous than they really are."

Petr Chylek
(Professor of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia)

Yep.
 
Those of us who really do care about pollution have been sidelined by the CO2 scam. There's big bucks in the carbon credits business!
 
The earth is a fragile balance. No one really knows what it will take to trip the balance. Once tripped I suspect it will be hard to rebalance.
I prefer to err on the side of caution where my planet and life on it is concerned.
 
The earth is a fragile balance. No one really knows what it will take to trip the balance. Once tripped I suspect it will be hard to rebalance.
I prefer to err on the side of caution where my planet and life on it is concerned.


Believing out an out lies is not "the side of caution". Damn, you're a real dumbfuck today.
 
Back
Top