Have you looked at the North Pole lately?

FFS, its the same as the global warming scare of the 20s and 30s "were all going to fry"
that was followed by the global cooling scare "were all going to freeze to death" of the 50s to the 70s
Now we are back to frying, give it another 10-20 years and we will be back to freezing to death again.

bloody scientists can't make up their minds

[YOUTUBEIF]FBF6F4Bi6Sg[/YOUTUBEIF]





potholer54 addresses all your denialist claims. i've been posting his page in this thread since i started posting in here and no one will challenge the information. lol.

Cannavore said:

[youtubeif]FBF6F4Bi6Sg[/youtubeif]





potholer54 addresses all your denialist claims. i've been posting his page in this thread since i started posting in here and no one will challenge the information. lol.

Click to expand...

and so it will remain
reason and logic to the back seat, emotion takes over the wheel on the road to ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwvVephTIHU


[YOUTUBEIF]pwvVephTIHU[/YOUTUBEIF]

Cannavore said:

[YOUTUBEIF]FBF6F4Bi6Sg[/YOUTUBEIF]





potholer54 addresses all your denialist claims. i've been posting his page in this thread since i started posting in here and no one will challenge the information. lol.

Click to expand...

Yeah ok, apparently the sun is hotter these days, and we heading for a ice age in 16000 thousand years, and the last ice age was 10000 years ago.

So we are almost in the middle of two ice ages, only another 3000 years of warming to go, and we should start to cool down.

kickarse said:

Yeah ok, apparently the sun is hotter these days, and we heading for a ice age in 16000 thousand years, and the last ice age was 10000 years ago.

So we are almost in the middle of two ice ages, only another 3000 years of warming to go, and we should start to cool down.

Click to expand...

the sun isn't hotter these days

you clearly didn't watch or understand the video as this claim about the sun is the first one he addresses.

https://www.fireengineering.com/art...ue-7/features/the-miramichi-fire-of-1825.html

interesting description of a huge fire north of Maine.

in 1825.

Cannavore said:

the sun isn't hotter these days

you clearly didn't watch or understand the video as this claim about the sun is the first one he addresses.

Click to expand...

you apparently didn't either as the first one he discussed was "global warming was changed to climate change".


he then goes on to say in his debunking that the sun was 4% cooler in the periods he was comparing in #2...
if the sun was cooler then, that is an indication of earth being in a different orbital pattern than now...milankovitch cycles as well as being in a grand solar minimum.


you must be smoking rope.

and accumulation over geologic time-frames is bollocks. CO2s half-life is 27years and that sequestration takes place constantly.
smh

Why is it so important to you that you be right about this stuff?
It’s obviously not an emotionally-neutral subject for you

is the truth not important?


“In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act”
;George Orwell

trich 'the prophet' rider.... riding high on his white steed in the name of honesty and civil service

well aren't you cute?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZKI40d5YHs


[youtubeif]4ZKI40d5YHs[/youtubeif]


This video is the first in a series which will outline the scientific reasons why a new null hypothesis of climate change is needed, and what is wrong with the current one, which assumes a 33c surface enhancement from the so-called "Greenhouse Effect" of "Greenhouse Gases". it will be shown that there is another cause of this surface thermal enhancement, and that the so-called "Greenhouse Gases" cannot be responsible for it. The 'greenhouse effect' is where a 33c atmospheric thermal enhancement at the Earth's surface, is alleged to be caused by a class of gases called 'greenhouse gases'. I will show, in this series, that the claimed 33c enhancement from those gases does not exist. References; Holmes, R. I. (2018). Thermal Enhancement on Planetary Bodies and the Relevance of the Molar Mass Version of the Ideal Gas Law to the Null Hypothesis of Climate Change. Earth, 7(3), 107-123.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3biTbgx_l3c


[youtubeif]3biTbgx_l3c[/youtubeif]


This the second in my Climate Science series debunking the greenhouse effect. Climate Science 1 revealed that our atmosphere is not like a greenhouse; instead it's the exact opposite - it's capable of expansion and convection. Here we explore the science and the climate cycles which the IPCC forgot to mention, and how they are totally controlling all current climate change. We find that there actually is no 'extra' warming that we need to invoke a supposed 'greenhouse effect' from CO2 or other 'greenhouse gases' to fill. References; Shaviv, N. J. (2003). The spiral structure of the Milky Way, cosmic rays, and ice age epochs on Earth. New Astronomy, 8(1), 39-77. Cederlöf, M. (2014). Using seasonal variations to estimate earth's response to radiative forcing. Shaviv, N. J. (2003). The spiral structure of the Milky Way, cosmic rays, and ice age epochs on Earth. New Astronomy, 8(1), 39-77. 65 million years of climate change (WIKI Commons) 5 million years of climate change (WIKI Commons) Loehle, C. (2007). A 2000-year global temperature reconstruction based on non-treering proxies. Energy & Environment, 18(7), 1049-1058. Usoskin, I. G., Solanki, S., & Kovaltsov, G. (2007). Grand minima and maxima of solar activity: new observational constraints. Astronomy & Astrophysics, 471(1), 301-309. Steinhilber, F., Abreu, J. A., Beer, J., Brunner, I., Christl, M., Fischer, H., . . . McCracken, K. G. (2012). 9,400 years of cosmic radiation and solar activity from ice cores and tree rings. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(16), 5967-5971. Lüdecke, H.-J. (2011). Long-term instrumental and reconstructed temperature records contradict anthropogenic global warming. Energy & Environment, 22(6), 723-745. C-14 record from the USGA Lüdecke, H.-J., Hempelmann, A., & Weiss, C. (2013). Multi-periodic climate dynamics: spectral analysis of long-term instrumental and proxy temperature records. Climate of the Past, 9(1), 447-452. Sromovsky, L., Fry, P., Limaye, S., & Baines, K. (2003). The nature of Neptune’s increasing brightness: Evidence for a seasonal response. Icarus, 163(1), 256-261. Schmude Jr, R. W., Baker, R. E., Fox, J., Krobusek, B. A., Pavlov, H., & Mallama, A. (2016). The secular and rotational brightness variations of Neptune. arXiv preprint arXiv:1604.00518.

Who cares tbh. This issue is only a issue if you wish to have children. If not well it doesn't matter one bit. The boomers and zoomers got a free ride so why should we younger generations have to pick up the pieces just because we have the intelligence to look beyond what we are told via newspapaers, tv and radio.


Whether this is a climate issue or just the slow decline of our species it won't matter to those who don't/haven't cared for years and years.


All i have to say is if you wish to have children? Well done on fucking their' and their childrens futures. Deny/support it won't matter in 100 years.



Continue with your silly arguments as you were before...

pick up the pieces of what pray tell?
since you have the intelligence to look past the mockingbird media, tell us what you found....and please don't play that victim card again, no-one is forcing you to be here.


'in 100 years'...go ahead Nostradamus, give up your prediction.


and blame us 'old' folk...see where the 'guilt' statement made earlier manifests.

imagine siding with oil companies over a near scientific consensus

.

Cannavore said:

imagine siding with oil companies over a near scientific consensus

Click to expand...

he might work for one/own stock. who knows? as long as one person holds out, they have someone to point to and say "see? HE doesn't believe it, so neither do i..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Y_n283fYbc


[youtubeif]1Y_n283fYbc[/youtubeif]


This the third in my Climate Science series debunking the so-called 'greenhouse effect'. Climate Science 1 revealed that our atmosphere is not like a greenhouse; instead it's the exact opposite - it's capable of expansion and convection. Climate Science 2 explored the science and the climate cycles which the IPCC forgot to mention, and how they are totally controlling all current climate change. We find that there actually is no 'extra' warming that we need to invoke a supposed 'greenhouse effect' from CO2 or other 'greenhouse gases' to fill. Climate Science 3 looks into the claim that Venus is hot because of the 'greenhouse effect' of carbon dioxide. References; Hollingsworth, J., Young, R., Schubert, G., Covey, C., & Grossman, A. (2007). A simple‐physics global circulation model for Venus: Sensitivity assessments of atmospheric superrotation. Geophysical Research Letters, 34(5). Svedhem, H., Titov, D. V., Taylor, F. W., & Witasse, O. (2007). Venus as a more Earth-like planet. Nature, 450(7170), 629-632. Landis, G., Dyson, R., McGuire, M., Oleson, S., Schmidt, G., Grantier, J., . . . Fincannon, J. (2011). Human Telerobotic Exploration of Venus: A Flexible Path Design Study. Paper presented at the 49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition. Moroz, V., Ekonomov, A., Moshkin, B., Revercomb, H., Sromovsky, L., Schofield, J., . . . Tomasko, M. G. (1985). Solar and thermal radiation in the Venus atmosphere. Advances in Space Research, 5(11), 197-232. Jelbring, H. (2003). The “Greenhouse Effect” as a Function of Atmospheric Mass. Energy & Environment, 14(2), 351-356. Pauli, W. (1988). Exclusion principle, Lorentz group and reflection of space-time and charge Wolfgang Pauli (pp. 459-479): Springer.


oh hell, you caught me there hipster.
natural gas dominates my portfolio... amazing returns since orangemanbad elected.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFc3Kt_lZek


[youtubeif]aFc3Kt_lZek[/youtubeif]

trichrider said:

oh hell, you caught me there hipster.
natural gas dominates my portfolio... amazing returns since orangemanbad elected.

Click to expand...

dude... you mean you aren't on the coal train? natural gas IS the present and future, coal is the 18th century.

never been a fan of coal.
my fathers house had a coal-fired furnace, nasty, dirty, smelly. when he got a gas furnace i had to clean up the room the coal was stored in. the dust was horrific.

i'm more of a hydrogen fuel guy, but it's not making much of a debut yet.
lpg is the next cleanest burning fuel, so i banked on it.


were there some Tesla tech available, i would sink my savings into that...