myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Global Warming vs Peak Oil
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17749
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2024 8:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I will post a series of links that the deniers will not read. The basic science of greenhouse gases—and why they trap heat on the earth and make the earth habitable—was established over a century ago. The theory that human burning of massive amounts of fossil fuels would lead to warming, is also more than 100 years old. Simplistic theories that more C02 will lead to more plant growth are put out there by paid shills, and swallowed whole by people that either failed math, or can’t be bothered. Current CO2 levels are 25 times natural levels. There isn’t enough vegetated land to absorb 25 times as much C02 growing plants. The actual levels of CO2 have been measured for about 50 years. Charle Keeling started that monitoring, and was the first eminent scientist to explain the process to me.

https://www.globalwarmingprimer.com/primer/primer1/

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ac1001492

THIS ONE SHOWS CO2 LEVELS OVER A VERY LONG TIME:

https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/

If you actually want to learn something, the Keeling Curve can be found here: https://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu/

Bard’s bone-headed theory has a very basic flaw. All the heat on earth does come from the sun. But greenhouse gasses determine how much is trapped on earth, rather than reflected or dissipated. Oh, never mind.

Finally, we have been measuring the amount of excess heat on earth, nearly 90% in the ocean. Another Scripps colleague told me about that heat, and the fact that the heat will keep warming the earth for 50 to 200 years. The accuracy of those measurements just gets better all the time.

https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/15/1675/2023/

You can find the same science at Woods Hole. So we have the two most prestigious oceanographic institutions, developing the science. On the other hand, we have two denier idiots who can’t even spell oceanography telling us it is all a plot. Who you gonna believe?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MalibuGuru



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 9300

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2024 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MikeLaRonde wrote:
MalibuGuru wrote:
mac wrote:
As I said, only a complete idiot, who demonstrates no understanding—or curiosity—of climate drivers, would post such nonsense. One of the few amusing things about this forum is that complete idiots sometimes reveal the utter nonsense that they bathe their brains in. Like this “source”. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/free-west-media/

There is a huge amount of money to be made selling fossil fuels that will kill our grandchildren—and kill hundreds of thousands a year now. They can afford to support a complete false narrative—and there are apparently plenty of complete idiots who will swallow it whole. Under the misunderstanding that they are challenging the elites.

A mind is a sad thing to pickle.

Personally, I'm pretty sure that the sun controls 99% of our climate.

I agree. However, that's not the "alternate theory" I'm looking for.

I contend that, in order to call BS on the climate cult's dogma, one must provide a competing explanation for the draconian climate agenda which is soon to be imposed on us all ... or rather, the true reason(s) for the Globalist climate cult's mere existence, if you will.

And, of course, I believe that the most likely reason is in the title of this thread. But I'm not fully convinced, and it is certainly not the only possibility.


I don't think our government cares about us or the planet. You'd have to be a retard to believe that any government cared. The simply want control over assets. Control over everything. That's what they do.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17749
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2024 12:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Didn't I say he wouldn't read any of it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MikeLaRonde



Joined: 11 Jun 2001
Posts: 768

PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2024 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MalibuGuru wrote:
MikeLaRonde wrote:
MalibuGuru wrote:
Personally, I'm pretty sure that the sun controls 99% of our climate.

I agree. However, that's not the "alternate theory" I'm looking for.

I contend that, in order to call BS on the climate cult's dogma, one must provide a competing explanation for the draconian climate agenda which is soon to be imposed on us all ... or rather, the true reason(s) for the Globalist climate cult's mere existence, if you will.

And, of course, I believe that the most likely reason is in the title of this thread. But I'm not fully convinced, and it is certainly not the only possibility.


I don't think our government cares about us or the planet. You'd have to be a retard to believe that any government cared. The simply want control over assets. Control over everything. That's what they do.

Not quite, but the first part is a key point. Here's the thing: if "our" government doesn't care about us, or our world, then neither do competing governments. And so, for a globalist "climate coalition" to form, there must surely be something bigger going on ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17749
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2024 10:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Didn't I say that the conspiracy theorists would ignore science. Of course, they post nonsense about the government, which has little to do with the science they are ignoring.

Calling you idiots is merely a description.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MikeLaRonde



Joined: 11 Jun 2001
Posts: 768

PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2024 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac wrote:

The actual levels of CO2 have been measured for about 50 years.

Thanks for making that clear. That should inspire confidence in charts spanning hundreds of thousands of years! Rolling Eyes
mac wrote:

THIS ONE SHOWS CO2 LEVELS OVER A VERY LONG TIME:
https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/

Like most of what we get from NASA: an artist's conception! Laughing

No wait, I think I get it now: Right about at the time we started measuring Co2 more accurately, that was right when its atmospheric concentration starting skyrocketing! How convenient ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17749
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2024 11:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As I said, the excess CO2 is not all going into plant growth, Most of it is going into the oceans—acidifying the water with pretty scary impacts. Here’s where the rest of it is. Contrary to the claims of paranoid idiots who wouldn’t know a fact if it crawled up their ass, this data was not collected by the government.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MikeLaRonde



Joined: 11 Jun 2001
Posts: 768

PostPosted: Wed Jan 17, 2024 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hmm, so I'm guessing that this chart is intended to prove that somehow, between about 1850 and 1960 (starting where the bold graph lines are understood to represent the new measurement method), the "old" method clearly shows an increase.

Now, take this supposed increase over a ridiculously short time, and compare it to the regular long cyclical changes shown by the NASA chart, prior to the sudden (fake) increases ... yup, but a small fraction.

OOPS, nothing proved (or even demonstrated, except the eagerness of the climate cult to "prove" something).

Truly, why must you keep trying to distract from the actual question? You think the Q should not even exist?

I'm gonna repeat it now, for the sake of the other participants and lurkers of this forum: IF there is no solid evidence of Global WARMING (why can't they keep the original wording? Which happens to be the only wording that makes sense), then what is TRULY at stake, such that the Globalists have all these dire plans for us?

Do I really need to describe these plans for someone to recognize the need for answers?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17749
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Thu Jan 18, 2024 12:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The piano has been drinking again. Scientists—who don’t subscribe to bitchute—have figured out how to determine what CO2 levels were in past times. They’ve been able to collect, and date ice cores from glaciers and permanent ice that show what CO2 levels were before EXXON. About 250 ppm. Now at 420 + ppm. The amount of excess heat on the planet is known—measured, not modeled.

The tragedy of really stupid people—beside being drunk and too lazy to check facts—is that they think they are smart.

Go back to bitchute and your alcoholic daze.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MikeLaRonde



Joined: 11 Jun 2001
Posts: 768

PostPosted: Thu Jan 18, 2024 2:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac wrote:
The piano has been drinking again. Scientists—who don’t subscribe to bitchute—have figured out how to determine what CO2 levels were in past times. They’ve been able to collect, and date ice cores from glaciers and permanent ice that show what CO2 levels were before EXXON. About 250 ppm. Now at 420 + ppm. The amount of excess heat on the planet is known—measured, not modeled.

The tragedy of really stupid people—beside being drunk and too lazy to check facts—is that they think they are smart.

Go back to bitchute and your alcoholic daze.

Jim McGrath, from Bezerkley, CA, former director of US Windsurfing, plays the "science as a religion" card yet again, while issuing unoriginal insults ad infinitum. What a surprise Shocked

Now, if I may (explain the un-fathomable, if the Globalist psychopaths are allowed to have their way):

1. Private automobile ownership will be limited, practically abolished;
2. Private farming and ranching operations will be overtaken and limited;
3. Consumption of real meat will be severely limited;
4. Air travel will be severely restricted;
5. Local travel will be restricted based on "necessary" travel or approved itineraries.

All of the above happens as the population is naturally reduced in harmony with world energy output. Remind me again who's "killing your grandchildren"? Did you forget to Google "population before oil" ?

Some of the above has begun already in Europe. Best of luck to the USA.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 2 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group