Tell me something my little bigoted closed minded bumpkin, are you looking in the mirror when you type out these little bits of mental flatulence? I mean, a regurgitative rebuttal from Lindzen gets your little heart all a flutter? GMAFB! Typical out of context quoting coupled with "guilt by association" prose and lindzen's personal interpretations.
Your boy's rep ain't exactly solid on this subject and hasn't been for a LONG time:
https://skepticalscience.com/lindzen-illusion-7-the-anti-galileo.html
https://www.inverse.com/article/116...chard-lindzen-is-suddenly-popular-still-wrong
But since you're puffing out your chest like you know something, I'll put to you the same questions that I stymied Lord Monckton with a few year's ago:
- With regards to climate change, how can you say that increasing deforestation on a global scale over 2 centuries has either marginal or negligible effect on the environment? Trees produce oxygen, take Co2 out of the air, and release that when burned.
- subsequently the same question goes regarding urbanization. Removal of grass, trees, foliage in general, lakes...replacing them with heat reflective glass & concrete.
- And how can you say that pumping increasing industrial waste into the air and water on a global scale over two centuries has no effect on the environment/climate?
This requires YOUR response, toodles...not a plethora of links from jokers the likes of Lindzen. Hop to it, I'll wait.