Ah well we have already been there with gender identity, so no.
The Climate Is So Bad..........
- Thread starter Misfit
- Start date
Authentic Nouveau
Well-known member
That is all you have.
Can you name the documented liar that said Jesus did NOT speak with the Devil in the wilderness?
You don’t want to provide me more proof
Are you afraid I will just keep refuting it I appreciate the vote of confidence 
???Tell me what you know about a fallacious question.
First, let’s hear you define a fallacy.
You commit fallacies so often and you wear them so well
????Authentic Nouveau
Well-known member
Well. 80% of the greenhouse gas effect is attributed to water vapor. I can't pin down a single science groupie who has tools to measure cloud cover, water vapor etc from 300 years ago.
christ_undivided
Well-known member
You don't care about majority of anything and you don't know all scientists nor vetted their position.
Glaciers increases.... climate change..... Glaciers melt.... climate change.
Authentic Nouveau
Well-known member
I discussed the totally fraudulent "study" where a non scientist wrote a "97% consensus" conclusion without contact with the scientists.
Cook the crook.
They had to dump the global warming label.
CO2 is a greenhouse gas that is just as necessary for life as water. They can dig down and pull up ice core samples that show CO2 levels that were tens of thousands of times greater than what we have today which is dangerously close to extinction levels.
No one denies that CO2 is around 440 parts per million (ppm) or that when CO2 gets down to 100 ppm all life on the planet becomes extinct, and yet we're supposed to be doing whatever we can to prevent CO2 levels from rising to levels they've attained repeatedly without any significant loss of life whatsoever.
Crops grown out on open ground are STARVING for CO2 and don't produce anything close to what is produced in greenhouses.
Reformedguy
Well-known member
Irrelevant to my questions.
The Climate Action Button
Clicking the button won't solve the climate crisis. But it'll help.www.climatehotmap.org
Between 1966 and 2015, all of the 25 glaciers in the park got smaller. Some lost as much as 80% of their area, with average loss of 40%.
How can you deny that this is a major loss of glacier number and size?
If you have alternative numbers, post them.
That the projected date of the complete loss of all glaciers was off is not the major failing you think it is as we are clearly on the path to that result.
Reformedguy
Well-known member
If you don't know what normal is then how can you know what abnormal is??
I deny stupidity, absolutely.
Authentic Nouveau
Well-known member
My wheat fields need 17,000 pounds of CO2 per acre.
Most wheat grown in the US today isn't actually wheat anymore. If you pull one up, how long are the roots? How much water are they getting per week per acre?
Ironically, but not surprisingly, those pressing the panic button while they point to glaciers melting don't seem to notice higher than normal snowpacks on the other side of the planet. They don't seem to notice that there's less snow at the north pole and more at the south.
Authentic Nouveau
Well-known member
Craziest thing I have read today.
We Mennonites brought red winter wheat over from Russia.
You have no clue what you are talking about.
You are just guessing that.
No, not all of the climate scientists feel that way.
We don't deny this, we just believe that it is happening as part of the normal cycle of the planet. It is happening now just like it happened a million years ago, and a million years before that. It is impossible to calculate how many times it has happened during the 4.5 billion years of the earth's existence.
Hypatia_Alexandria
Well-known member
It is not about normal and abnormal it is about the impact of anthropogenic activities on the planet . The argument that "Oh well the planet has been hot and cold before" is ludicrous because human beings did not exist at very early periods in the earth's history and only a few million [if that] were around during the last Ice Age. As a matter of interest does the life-style of our hunter-gather ancestors appeal? After all human beings lived at that level for the longest period of our existence. Settled communities and agriculture are a much later development.
There have also been at least five mass extinctions of life on the planet in the past as well. If humans carry on in the same way as we have been doing for the past one hundred years in industrialised nations, we may see something similar in the next century as habitat and ecosystems are destroyed and flora and fauna go with them.
Hypatia_Alexandria
Well-known member
So despite requests to provide attested scientific evidence to support your claims, you cannot do [because there is none] you instead resort to personal attacks. A clear indication you have lost any credibility.Tell me what you know about a fallacious question.
First, let’s hear you define a fallacy.
You commit fallacies so often and you wear them so well
Hypatia_Alexandria
Well-known member
Again clear evidence you have lost any credibility.You don’t want to provide me more proof
Hypatia_Alexandria
Well-known member
Some here do not see the implications of that
Point of information there were no humans around then.
Perhaps you could try and explain that to some here
I agree on seasonal vegetables but the issue is slightly more complicated than just cutting down on meat consumption - although the barbarity of intense/industrial/factory farming is something I would gladly see gone.
Including some, whom I suspect, hold religious beliefs.
Reformedguy
Well-known member
That us exactly what it's about. If your going to claim the planet is abnormally warm because of human activity then I would simply ask is how do you know its abnormal if you have no idea what a normal climate is supposed to look like?