Where have I insulted you exactly?
Clearly you do object to other people's opinions, and clearly you don't even realise you're being insulting as you've just done it again.
German Police
- Thread starter transam
- Start date
Where have I insulted you exactly?
Clearly you do object to other people's opinions, and clearly you don't even realise you're being insulting as you've just done it again.
Sponsored Links
It is massively hypocritical. And it also distracts from the much more important discussion to be had about the science.
Lots of people still claim global warming is all a con, but sometimes go quiet when asked to go into specifics. A couple of days ago you and I were having a decent discussion, where we had agreed that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was one of the greenhouse gases, without which the earth would be a giant ball of ice. Do you also agree that the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased by about 50% since pre-industrial times?
I didn't say that you had
And not objecting to someone's opinion and being insulting are not mutually exclusive conditions.
Apparently some studies suggest that (some of course do not) but it's impossible to prove that burning fossil fuels was the primary cause of that when a) it was already on an upward trend and b) the population increased by a factor of eight since the early 1800s and c) the amount of rainforest was absolutely decimated
Sponsored Links
Are you for real? You accused them of having inferiority complexes simply for expressing their opinions, you then threw the same term at me, and called them "Karens" for not ignoring the hypocrisy!
Examples?
Look them up yourself...
Where do you think all the carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels has gone, if not into the atmosphere?
I've tried before. Never found any. Are you saying the current measurements of carbon dioxide levels might be wrong?
It's getting increasingly difficult seeing as the likes of google are censoring so many studies these days, and promoting the same ones which fit the "agenda"...
I doubt the current measurements are inaccurate, but those in the past (and those in the future) are all a matter of mathematical modelling and, as we saw during covid, that is something which can be laughably inaccurate.
Do you agree that the measurements taken with instruments (over the past 60+ years) are accurate?
Undoubtedly todays are more accurate than those of 60 years ago, but I'd have thought they were accurate enough...
Quite WHY they are at the levels they are at is impossible to tell of course, especially as we now have a population which is more than double what it was in 1960...
It's not hard to tell. We have a pretty good idea about how much carbon dioxide is due to human activity, in one form or another. When instrument measurements began in 1958 it was 315ppm, by 2002 it was 365ppm, now it's 425ppm.
I don't get the point you are making about increased population. Do you simply mean because humans breathe in oxygen and breathe out carbon dioxide?
Last edited:
Well there are some people in Greenland that are now able to grow strawberries in there gardens
Bloke on the radio a while back was as happy as a pig in watsit as he has never been able to grow fruit in his garden
Been living on seal and husky meat best part of his life
Plus he could well end up as a millionaire over this warming caper
He don’t want hear all this over the top BS bandied around by let’s face it
Hysterical fruit cakes
Bloke on the radio a while back was as happy as a pig in watsit as he has never been able to grow fruit in his garden
Been living on seal and husky meat best part of his life
Plus he could well end up as a millionaire over this warming caper
He don’t want hear all this over the top BS bandied around by let’s face it
Hysterical fruit cakes
Actually water absorbs a lot but then when used in hydro electric it then gets released back into the atmosphere by the billion tons. So much for green energy
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
