The co2 lies
- Thread starter Devo
- Start date
I agree global warming is a scam the planet goes through heating and cooling cycles of 60 years iirc do your own research. To all those that think we are causing co2 let me ask you. What do plants do? The more co2 the more plants thrive the more oxegon they produce.
However the fact that they found a way to get people get accept paying a new tax "carbon tax" because the lemmings are stupid enough to think they are really helping the enviroment .... is pure genius!
However the fact that they found a way to get people get accept paying a new tax "carbon tax" because the lemmings are stupid enough to think they are really helping the enviroment .... is pure genius!
I will say the idea of carbon credits is the biggest lie I have heard of outside of the "green shift" election plan by dion a few years back.....money changes hands and company A that produces very little sells off the carbon credits to company B who produces a lot but because company B has the carbon credits everything is perfectly OK.....meanwhile nothing acutally gets done.
SR
It is very embarrassing for me to admit but 15-20 years ago I was actually open to the idea that man was altering the climate. Over the years however the dire predictions of the man made global warming scammers just wasn't occurring. When their dire predictions didn't come true they simply moved the goal posts or renamed the crisis in an attempt to remain credible.
Over the years the lies and cover ups began to rise to the surface. Add to the mix the con artists like Gore and Suzuki who substantially profit from the scam. They refuse to debate the issue saying that the science is settled and use ridiculous analogy's like "do you believe that the earth is flat"? Science is anything but settled.
Here we are today at a point where no rational person actually believes the scam.
Over the years the lies and cover ups began to rise to the surface. Add to the mix the con artists like Gore and Suzuki who substantially profit from the scam. They refuse to debate the issue saying that the science is settled and use ridiculous analogy's like "do you believe that the earth is flat"? Science is anything but settled.
Here we are today at a point where no rational person actually believes the scam.
=So what is the solution then? In you own words, since there is a problem and it is clear that climate change is happening, what's the cause? In your own words, what is this scam? What's to be gained? Don't you think that the millions of tonnes of CO2 and other hothouse gases that are pumped into the atmosphere is not having an effect at all? Do you think that as a species with the kind of industrial works going on around the world...there isn't an impact on climate on a local, regional and global scale?
Simple test you can do at home. Cook some bacon, and see if there isn't an impact on your immediate enviroment....this stuff we pump into the air, water and dump on the earth has an impact on our world. Were do you think it goes? Magically disappears into...thin air? Of course the sun has an impact, and as we alter our atmosphere, the impact grows, weather patterns change, gulfstreams alter, rains less here, more there...drought increases in some areas, wetter an colder else where, more change to gulfstreams due to changing weather patterns, gets drier, colder....etc.
Don't believe everything you read on the internet....or hwat you hear from interest groups. The science is the truth, the reality. Wake up.
Still waiting for somebody, anybody to advise what fossil fuels mankind (and which mankind at that or was it aliens) was burning to cause the Tropical wonderland of Alberta to disapepar in an ice age, and then what caused the ice age to recede
This is as close as I can figure out through the political rhetoric
.jpg)
Climate change has been and will be constant. Mankind may indeed add to it, but being responsible for it...
This is as close as I can figure out through the political rhetoric
Climate change has been and will be constant. Mankind may indeed add to it, but being responsible for it...
Al Gore's great,great,great,great,great Grandfather invented that. It was called the Tyrannosaurus rex hybrid.Still waiting for somebody, anybody to advise what fossil fuels mankind (and which mankind at that or was it aliens) was burning to cause the Tropical wonderland of Alberta to disapepar in an ice age, and then what caused the ice age to recede
This is as close as I can figure out through the political rhetoric
Climate change has been and will be constant. Mankind may indeed add to it, but being responsible for it...
I am not the grammar police but if you are going to edit my post at least make it intelligible. I guess simple sentence structure was not included in your science PhD.
Don't Feed The Troll!
Every now and then it is good to remind people of this. Every message board is littered full of sad lonely people who crave attention. They do this by posting messages that are bound to get them some of that attention that they are sorely lacking in their miserable lives.
Every now and then it is good to remind people of this. Every message board is littered full of sad lonely people who crave attention. They do this by posting messages that are bound to get them some of that attention that they are sorely lacking in their miserable lives.
Here we go again; time for the deniers to come out of their basements.
CptKirk, your photo is from The Daily Mail; that rag is as biased as Fox News/Canada's Sun Papers/Harper and his cast of idiots.
Try a real scientific site: http://www.climate.gov/
CptKirk, your photo is from The Daily Mail; that rag is as biased as Fox News/Canada's Sun Papers/Harper and his cast of idiots.
Try a real scientific site: http://www.climate.gov/
thanks for the link mik
i like the graphics on page 1. they've got a nifty chart showing co2 content of the atmosphere... i think
what are those numbers on the 'y' axis? they must be parts per million, mik
let's see, almost 400 parts per million. so if we could shove all the co2 into bottles with just co2 in 'em, there would be 400 bottles of co2 in one million bottles of air! jeez, that doesn't sound like very much
so 400 parts per million co2 is causing all this commotion? put another way that's 0.04% of the atmosphere is co2 and it's wreaking all this havoc? wow!!
and they say this has increased by 40% since the industrial revolution... double wow!! you mean somebody during the industrial revolution was able to accurately measure 240 parts per million of co2 in the air? remarkable :nod:
dang, yer right, mik... that sure is a 'real scientific site'
can you imagine if nitrogen was the baddie? we'd be fucked fer sure!! :fear:
They measure past CO2 content by analysing trees, since it higher levels correlate with more photosynthesis/growth. Science!
At only 100ppm, CO exposure leads to brain damage, coma, or death. Tiny amounts of things can have a great effect. Science!
thanks for the link mik
i like the graphics on page 1. they've got a nifty chart showing co2 content of the atmosphere... i think
what are those numbers on the 'y' axis? they must be parts per million, mik
let's see, almost 400 parts per million. so if we could shove all the co2 into bottles with just co2 in 'em, there would be 400 bottles of co2 in one million bottles of air! jeez, that doesn't sound like very much
so 400 parts per million co2 is causing all this commotion? put another way that's 0.04% of the atmosphere is co2 and it's wreaking all this havoc? wow!!
and they say this has increased by 40% since the industrial revolution... double wow!! you mean somebody during the industrial revolution was able to accurately measure 240 parts per million of co2 in the air? remarkable :nod:
dang, yer right, mik... that sure is a 'real scientific site'
can you imagine if nitrogen was the baddie? we'd be fucked fer sure!! :fear:
I think it's time to bring in your cows for milking, pardner. You are exactly the type that Harper wishes to keep in the dark with all of the cuts to science research he has made and will continue to make.
OH, and FYI www.climate.gov is part of NOAA. I know for you NOAA brings to mind an ark and a flood..........
well, no... actually noaa brings to mind a hurricane and some flooding... some flooding during which it might have been possible to save lives if the blessed noaa had gotten off their stick and actually predicted something. no pardner, i think if you look into it you'll find that the noaa is actually a u.s. federal government beaurocracy, not a scientific organization
Last edited:
because the C in CO has an unsatisfied bond, it has an affinity for oxygen that is 2,500 times stronger than hemoglobin, the agent that normally captures and carries oxygen in the blood stream for use in body cells. if CO is present in the blood, then it bonds with most or all the oxygen, robbing the tissues of needed oxygen, leading, as you say, to 'brain damage, coma, or death'
however, CO2 leads to no such poisoning - we breathe it all the time... every breath we take from birth to death. if the amount of CO2 gets too great, then of course we start to suffer and eventually die. just as we would if the amount of nitrogen we breathed increased too rapidly. 40,000 parts per million CO2 in the air is immediately harmful to us - not because of poisoning, but because at those levels oxygen is displaced from the air and we succomb to oxygen starvation. note i said 40,000 parts per million, not 400 parts per million - that's 100 times more. science!
and you're right about analyzing tree ring thickness to guage photosynthesis levels. but photosynthesis levels depend on a number of things: amount of sunlight, amount of water, the temperature, and yes the CO2 content in the air. these limiting factors can easily be independent of each other. science!
climate change has nothing to do with anthropogenic (or 'originated by mankind') climate change
for the record, i'm an informed believer in the former, and an informed denier of the latter
I think this debate is largely academic. Even if everyone agreed that humankind caused/contributed to climate change through ghg emissions, there's no stopping the train now. That would require getting the large population centers of the world to make huge economic sacrifices, something that most nations lack the political will to do for outcomes many election-cycles in the future. Even if Canada went 100% carbon free, it only produces 1.5% of the world's CO2 emissions, and doing so would cost so much that Canadians probably wouldn't be able to afford air conditioners when things eventually heated up despite their best efforts.
