IBDaMann
Well-known member
Is this why there is no human life at or near the equator? Is this why Panama is a deserted wasteland?
You are smarter than a pit bull on steroids.
Climate Change - Yet another UN report
- Thread starter Into the Night
- Start date
You are smarter than a pit bull on steroids.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Absolutely. I may very well be the second stupidest poster on JPP.
As of now there is ice on the poles. There have never been humans when there was no ice on the poles.
Dood... I remember when we only had 8 years in 1995.
The reality: China will surpass the US in total emissions in 2050, this means that they will surpass every emission the US has EVER put out at that time. If you do nothing about China and this is true we will all die.
Did you know that in 2022 (we had a slight increase in carbon emissions last year) we had decreased carbon emissions in the US below 2005 levels by 15.5%?* We actually have reduced our emissions every year except the year 2022.*
*True statement.
The reality: China will surpass the US in total emissions in 2050, this means that they will surpass every emission the US has EVER put out at that time. If you do nothing about China and this is true we will all die.
Did you know that in 2022 (we had a slight increase in carbon emissions last year) we had decreased carbon emissions in the US below 2005 levels by 15.5%?* We actually have reduced our emissions every year except the year 2022.*
*True statement.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Of course you know this because you are omniscient, yes?
IBDaMann
Well-known member
You show great restraint by not taking your future-vision superpowers to the stock market and unfairly corner it.
... I'm waiting for the punchline.
Of course. You could just look up into the atmosphere and note the obvious slight increase.
Of course. You could just look up into the atmosphere and note how the annual carbon emissions had dropped below 2005 levels.
Of course. You can just look up into the atmosphere and it's totally obvious.
Thank the gods I have teh googles. It does make things like that obvious. I thought you'd be posting how it would take even more deep cutting to get us below the 35% in 2030 that we "agreed to" in France. Each item I noted was true simply is true. Even if you don't like them they are still true. If you do nothing about China, then all of this "work" we've done to decrease emissions is useless. Nothing we do is cutting back how much China is putting into the air nowadays.
Into the Night
Verified User
Define 'climate change'. Climate has no value associated with it. What is 'changing'?
Omniscience fallacy. Buzzword fallacy. Argument from randU fallacy.
Why? What is your reasoning?
Into the Night
Verified User
Heh. Some Christians have no problem with defining God. Others don't seem to be able to.
Apparently there IS someone at the equator. I can clearly see a couple of humans in the background here, and SOMEONE built that building and put up that sign!
Into the Night
Verified User
Really?? Where is all this extra energy coming from? The Sun puts out the same energy, and the distance from the Earth to the Sun is pretty constant.
Into the Night
Verified User
It's worse than useless. It's fascism and tyranny, and no gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. CO2 has no magickal property to falsify the 1st or 2nd laws of thermodynamics or the Stefan-Boltzmann law.
The Church of Global Warming is a fundamentalist style religion.
I really don't care if China builds coal plants and puts out CO2. At least they are starting to modernize some of them so they don't put out so much soot.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Nope. It takes a scientifically illiterate person to think along the lines you do. No substance can cause the earth's average temperature to increase. CO2 is plant food and we can use more of it.
All governments will seek increased power until tyranny is achieved. Global Warming, Climate Change and greenhouse effect provide governments the fear-mongering that helps them seize greater control over the people, confiscate more wealth in the form of needless taxes and fines, obliterate more and more individual liberties of the people, and to help them attain additional terms in office.
Nope. You have no way of knowing whether it is true or not. You gullibly delude yourself into believing it's true, ... because you were told to believe it by someone else who is doing your thinking for you, ...and you OBEY.
I hate to break it to you, but you are not omniscient. Nobody knows what you are claiming to know is true. That does not reflect well on your ability to apply critical reasoning.
You are gullible. You allow others to do your thinking for you. You shouldn't be proud of that.
Do you rehearse this in front of the mirror? How do you reconcile the fact that someone else controls how you think and what you believe?
Just for laughs, what have you been told to believe will happen if China keeps pumping CO2 into the atmosphere? Please connect the dots with how everyone will die. Please explain how providing global plantlife additional food is somehow a bad thing. If you don't know the appropriate explanations, please ask the people who do your thinking for you.
Have you ever considered learning some science? ... like maybe the science related to this topic of which you express intense personal interest?
Ever hear of currents or the jet stream? They regulate climate, and as of now both have been disrupted. Parts of Earth are already becoming uninhabitable because of drought or flooding. If polar ice continues to melt, it will be too hot for humans in many areas of the world.
Now pull some more bullshit out of your ass and pretend it's science.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Nope. You pulled the rug out from under your dogma by leaving the climate totally undefined. You need an unambiguous definition just to get out of the starting gate.
Then you screwed up royally by not defining a "disruption" wrt currents or jet streams, in such a way that it didn't happen every day of the Earth's existence.
You didn't identify any "parts" that are becoming uninhabitable ... because there aren't any.
Explain. This sounds totally stupid ... but I'm happy to give you a chance to detail how this would happen.
... or you can pull some more bullshit out of your ass and pretend it's science.
Do a search on drought or flooding and get back to me with how many hits you get.
Into the Night
Verified User
Currents and the jet stream (which is just a current) is NOT additional energy. Try again.
Climate has no value associated with it. It can't be 'regulated'.
Really? Link? How do you define 'disrupted'? This isn't additional energy either.
Lame. So-called 'climate change' causing opposite effects all due the same 'effect'. Paradox.
The polar ice isn't melting (other than the usual seasonal thaw).
Inversion fallacy. Religion is not science.
A theory of science you are ignoring is the 1st law of thermodynamics. You cannot create energy out of nothing.
A theory of science you are ignoring is the 2nd law of thermodynamics. You cannot heat a warmer surface using a colder gas. You cannot decrease entropy...ever. You cannot trap heat. You cannot trap thermal energy. There is always heat.
A theory of science you are ignoring is the Stefan-Boltzmann law. You cannot trap light. You cannot prevent any substance from emitting light according to it's temperature.
Making up shit isn't science. Random numbers are not science, not even if you are using them as 'data'. Argument from randU fallacy.
Into the Night
Verified User
People live through droughts. People live through floods. You STILL haven't described any part that has become inhabitable.
Saint Guinefort
Verified User
Multidecadal droughts have been known to destroy societies. Just look at the Maya.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
But, they do eventually end. What would happen to the Gorebal Warming crowd if temperatures suddenly levelled off for a few decades?
People have never lived without polar ice. What does your talking ass have to say about that?