The Forum > Article Comments > The Carbon-Civilization Combustion Complex > Comments
The Carbon-Civilization Combustion Complex : Comments
By Evaggelos Vallianatos, published 16/4/2015A recent book, The Collapse of Western Civilization: A View From the Future by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway shines light on this perplexing question.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Page 9
-
- All
Posted by Leo Lane, Tuesday, 28 April 2015 11:23:51 PM
| |
You're a joke, Leo.
It's always fascinating that those who squeal so loud about "ad hom" seem to enjoy tossing it about like confetti. Your last post was entirely ad hom. Posting garbage from WUWT (guffaw!) and running up and down threads calling your opponents "dishonest" proves....what? ...something?...anything? Boring.... Posted by Poirot, Tuesday, 28 April 2015 11:55:58 PM
| |
This is whatWilliam Happer, Professor of Physics at Princeton University says about carbon dioxide:
” We conclude that atmospheric CO2 levels should be above about 150 ppm to avoid harming green plants and below about 5000 ppm to avoid harming people.” http://www.au.agwscam.com/pdf/happer%20the%20truth%20about%20greenhouse%20gases.pdf Poirot will avoid informing herself abut CO2, as it might interfere with her support of the climate change fraud. The current increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which IPCC computer modelling showed would result in global warming, has been accompanied by a cessation of global warming. The science upon which the IPCC relied to obtain the dud result is the science relied upon by Max Green to show an effect by humans on climate. In fact, a measurable effect on climate by human emissions has not been scientifically demonstrated. Posted by Leo Lane, Wednesday, 29 April 2015 11:16:37 AM
|
When he had conclusively demonstrated his dishonesty, he posted a final ad hom in which he asserted that I was a troll, and departed.
The first sentence of his first post was, “Wow, the Tea-Party echo chamber is strong in here today!” He posted no science or facts to back his dishonest assertions, answered questions with questions, or ignored them. He is a troll.
A spin off from his nonsense is that Poirot, who when she put herself in a position where she had proven her dishonesty, posted a final baseless ad hom, and departed. She has now returned, inspired by Max’s dishonesty, which she thought was working.
I wonder what she will do now that Max has made a fool of himself, and departed.
Poirot has no grasp of science or fact, as evidenced by he comment on carbon dioxide. Her sole basis for support of the AGW fraud is her dishonesty.
ybgirp, there is no crisis, and there will not be one,unless action is taken based on the climate fraud, which, of course, would have serious consequences..