Earth Day 45 Years Ago Today

Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Boilerman demands other people post sources while he rests his case on phantom homework he claims to have read but can never source. Funny aint it? I would be embarrassed.

https://news.discovery.com/earth/climate-change-copenhagen.htm

The researchers point to a gloomy slate of evidence: Carbon dioxide emissions are 40 percent higher than in 1990. Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are melting at an accelerated pace. Sea level crept 80 percent higher over the last 15 years than projected in 2001. It is on track to rise twice as much by 2100 as the IPCC projected in 2007.

Arctic sea ice melted 40 percent more than the average prediction in the IPCC report.

"This stunned the scientific community because it was far greater than any projection," said climate scientist and study co-author Andrew Weaver of the University of Victoria in Canada's British Columbia.

"Things are happening faster and with greater magnitude than when the IPCC was published in 2007," Weaver said.



About 300 or so million years ago the CO2 levels were about 100 times what they are today....neither the arctic nor the antarctic had ice, and man was not even around. How can you explain THAT?????
Quote

Originally posted by: chefantwon
Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Boilerman demands other people post sources while he rests his case on phantom homework he claims to have read but can never source. Funny aint it? I would be embarrassed.

https://news.discovery.com/earth/climate-change-copenhagen.htm

The researchers point to a gloomy slate of evidence: Carbon dioxide emissions are 40 percent higher than in 1990. Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are melting at an accelerated pace. Sea level crept 80 percent higher over the last 15 years than projected in 2001. It is on track to rise twice as much by 2100 as the IPCC projected in 2007.

Arctic sea ice melted 40 percent more than the average prediction in the IPCC report.

"This stunned the scientific community because it was far greater than any projection," said climate scientist and study co-author Andrew Weaver of the University of Victoria in Canada's British Columbia.

"Things are happening faster and with greater magnitude than when the IPCC was published in 2007," Weaver said.



About 300 or so million years ago the CO2 levels were about 100 times what they are today....neither the arctic nor the antarctic had ice, and man was not even around. How can you explain THAT?????
And evolution deniers make scientific sounding noises about intermediate fossil records. But since my knowledge of fossil records isn't very deep, I just rely on overwhelming scientific consensus.

Same thing with global climate change.
Forkie doesn't care, but how did Venus and Mars get warmer while the Earth was getting warmer? Did we actually have Earthlings planted there who caused global warming? If of course could have nothing to do with the sun getting warmer, right?
Quote

Originally posted by: Roulette Man
Forkie doesn't care, but how did Venus and Mars get warmer while the Earth was getting warmer? Did we actually have Earthlings planted there who caused global warming? If of course could have nothing to do with the sun getting warmer, right?
Ya got me. I'm stumped.

And I'm even stumped by the following questions, which were advanced just a few years ago:

"a. Why do mice show no tendency to develop lung cancer in experiments where they live half their lives in smoke filled chambers?
b. Why, in some experiments, do mice show a tendency to develop skin cancer, when painted over a period with tobacco tars - whereas efforts to produce lung cancer in mice, by keeping them immersed in tobacco smoke, have failed?
c. Why has the rise in lung cancer been most marked among men, although the greatest rise in the use of cigarettes in the last years seems to have been among women?
d. Why does the rate of lung cancer vary so greatly between certain cities, although the per capita rate of cigarette consumption in these cities seams approximately the same?
e. What is the correlation, if any, between lung cancer and certain changes in American life — such as steadily increased industrialization, increased urbanization, and the rising problem of atmospheric pollution in many of urban centers?
f. Why is cancer of the lung on the increase whereas no such rise appears in similar illness of the tongue, lip or throat?"

Hey Roulette Man, care for a cigarette?

Quote

Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote

Originally posted by: Roulette Man
Forkie doesn't care, but how did Venus and Mars get warmer while the Earth was getting warmer? Did we actually have Earthlings planted there who caused global warming? If of course could have nothing to do with the sun getting warmer, right?
Ya got me. I'm stumped.

And I'm even stumped by the following questions, which were advanced just a few years ago:

"a. Why do mice show no tendency to develop lung cancer in experiments where they live half their lives in smoke filled chambers?
b. Why, in some experiments, do mice show a tendency to develop skin cancer, when painted over a period with tobacco tars - whereas efforts to produce lung cancer in mice, by keeping them immersed in tobacco smoke, have failed?
c. Why has the rise in lung cancer been most marked among men, although the greatest rise in the use of cigarettes in the last years seems to have been among women?
d. Why does the rate of lung cancer vary so greatly between certain cities, although the per capita rate of cigarette consumption in these cities seams approximately the same?
e. What is the correlation, if any, between lung cancer and certain changes in American life — such as steadily increased industrialization, increased urbanization, and the rising problem of atmospheric pollution in many of urban centers?
f. Why is cancer of the lung on the increase whereas no such rise appears in similar illness of the tongue, lip or throat?"

Hey Roulette Man, care for a cigarette?


When logic kills your rhetoric, you must dodge and divert. Nice going Forkie.
Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
What happens to ice when it gets warmer?
I pointed to the IPCC and cited a source. Boilerman pointed to an evolution denier - with no source - and calls the IPCC a bunch of bullshit.
We've officially left the thoughtful debate stage of this thread. Now its simply time to point and laugh.

Your ultimate source of climate change information (IPCC) not only changes, corrects and modifies previous reports (exact and confirmed science is it?), their annual Summary for Policymakers is edited by government delegates. Information is removed from the IPCC SPM that some governments think would be damaging to their specific countries.

None of this is about human-caused climate change. It is all about money...the transfer of wealth...additional taxes placed upon Americans.

Plenty of info here about the fraud of climate change
Quote

Originally posted by: Roulette Man
Quote

Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote

Originally posted by: Roulette Man
Forkie doesn't care, but how did Venus and Mars get warmer while the Earth was getting warmer? Did we actually have Earthlings planted there who caused global warming? If of course could have nothing to do with the sun getting warmer, right?
Ya got me. I'm stumped.

And I'm even stumped by the following questions, which were advanced just a few years ago:

"a. Why do mice show no tendency to develop lung cancer in experiments where they live half their lives in smoke filled chambers?
b. Why, in some experiments, do mice show a tendency to develop skin cancer, when painted over a period with tobacco tars - whereas efforts to produce lung cancer in mice, by keeping them immersed in tobacco smoke, have failed?
c. Why has the rise in lung cancer been most marked among men, although the greatest rise in the use of cigarettes in the last years seems to have been among women?
d. Why does the rate of lung cancer vary so greatly between certain cities, although the per capita rate of cigarette consumption in these cities seams approximately the same?
e. What is the correlation, if any, between lung cancer and certain changes in American life — such as steadily increased industrialization, increased urbanization, and the rising problem of atmospheric pollution in many of urban centers?
f. Why is cancer of the lung on the increase whereas no such rise appears in similar illness of the tongue, lip or throat?"

Hey Roulette Man, care for a cigarette?


When logic kills your rhetoric, you must dodge and divert. Nice going Forkie.
Dodge? I answered your question in the first three words. It's hard to imagine how I could have been more direct.

And divert? Actually, I used something called argument by analogy, to show how the tobacco-cancer deniers employed scientific sounding gotcha questions just like...you. Care to deal with the substance of my argument, Roulette Man? Of course just spewing labels and insults really is your style, isn't it?
Forkie and his dissapearing act. Its too bad he was born in the wrong century. He would have made a wonderful traveling medicine man in the old west.
Hell I'm old enough to remember the original gloom & doom forecast:

"The sky is falling, the sky is falling !".... <Chicken Little>

Just sayin'
Quote

Originally posted by: BobOrme
Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
What happens to ice when it gets warmer?
I pointed to the IPCC and cited a source. Boilerman pointed to an evolution denier - with no source - and calls the IPCC a bunch of bullshit.
We've officially left the thoughtful debate stage of this thread. Now its simply time to point and laugh.

Your ultimate source of climate change information (IPCC) not only changes, corrects and modifies previous reports (exact and confirmed science is it?), their annual Summary for Policymakers is edited by government delegates. Information is removed from the IPCC SPM that some governments think would be damaging to their specific countries.

None of this is about human-caused climate change. It is all about money...the transfer of wealth...additional taxes placed upon Americans.

Plenty of info here about the fraud of climate change


more than 1 scientist in there that doesn't believe in Goreable warming, Forkie..
Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now