Thirty Years On, How Well Do Global Warming Predictions Stand Up?

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

As someone who has routinely demolished every argument of yours that I choose to take on, I know that of which I speak.

Yawn. I'm sure you believe every word of that. You're just God-like, at least to you.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

All your reference to this sign shows is that you have no concept of the difference between geologic time and human time.

Sure I do. Geologic time is actually a thing. "Human time" is not...unless of course you're referring to folks pictured on this site:

https://humanclock.com/

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Yawn. I'm sure you believe every word of that. You're just God-like, at least to you.

Nah, just better informed than our resident MAGAMoron. No great feat, actually. 😜

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Sure I do. Geologic time is actually a thing. "Human time" is not...unless of course you're referring to folks pictured on this site:

https://humanclock.com/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergl...ogic-time/amp/

[finnbow]

Herschel Walker on the federal climate change bill:
They continue to try to fool you that they are helping you out. But they're not. Because a lot of money it's going to trees. Don't we have enough trees around here?

https://www.ajc.com/politics/politic...MICA3IOB5DASA/

It seems we've now found out where Whell is getting his climate change talking points.

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Herschel Walker on the federal climate change bill:
They continue to try to fool you that they are helping you out. But they're not. Because a lot of money it's going to trees. Don't we have enough trees around here?

https://www.ajc.com/politics/politic...MICA3IOB5DASA/

It seems we've now found out where Whell is getting his climate change talking points.

IIRC the tree theory was postulated by none other than Limbaugh, that we now have more trees than before. I even remember using GA as an example.

There is now an alt right theory that plants flourish when engulfed with carbon dioxide and therefore burning fossil fuels promotes plant growth. This is NI's per theory on AK, burn baby burn.

Postulating a theory to fit your ......................

[GChief]

Originally Posted by Rajoo

IIRC the tree theory was postulated by none other than Limbaugh, that we now have more trees than before. I even remember using GA as an example.

There is now an alt right theory that plants flourish when engulfed with carbon dioxide and therefore burning fossil fuels promotes plant growth. This is NI's per theory on AK, burn baby burn.

Postulating a theory to fit your ......................

I have even seen that brought up as a real thing on that audioplhile site

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

It seems we've now found out where Whell is getting his climate change talking points.

No, I get it from research like this.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0812721106

Irreversible climate changes due to carbon dioxide emissions have already taken place, and future carbon dioxide emissions would imply further irreversible effects on the planet, with attendant long legacies for choices made by contemporary society.

See? We're already done for. We irrecoverably screwed Mother Earth, and we continue to do so, with effects that are irreversible.

So, fire up the SUV, driver over to the Piggly Wiggly, buy some charcoal and cook up some steaks and wash it down with a few beers 'cuz we might as well go out happy.

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by GChief

I have even seen that brought up as a real thing on that audioplhile site

Its a sign of ignorance of science, grab on to one scientific phenomena (photosynthesis here) and misapply it. If this is their logic, no one should overdose on drugs, prescription or otherwise.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

No, I get it from research like this.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0812721106

Irreversible climate changes due to carbon dioxide emissions have already taken place, and future carbon dioxide emissions would imply further irreversible effects on the planet, with attendant long legacies for choices made by contemporary society.

See? We're already done for. We irrecoverably screwed Mother Earth, and we continue to do so, with effects that are irreversible.

So, fire up the SUV, driver over to the Piggly Wiggly, buy some charcoal and cook up some steaks and wash it down with a few beers 'cuz we might as well go out happy.

So, the wingnut argument concerning global warming is as follows:

1. Global warming is a hoax (a Chinese hoax per your Dear Leader), so we should do nothing about it.

2. Since we haven't done enough about it in the past, it's too late to do anything now or in the future.

And you wonder why I call many of your arguments bad faith.