The Forum > General Discussion > Climate change is dead, but talk about a bum fight.
Climate change is dead, but talk about a bum fight.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Page 9
-
- All
Haaaa hahaha Haz! ( :>)
Posted by Ludwig, Friday, 27 September 2013 9:59:37 PM
| |
Methinks it is time for you to concede that your abject denial of anthropogenic climate change was a baaaaad call!
Posted by Ludwig, Friday, 27 September 2013 10:02:47 PM
| |
Hasbeen thinks he's Alan Jones ..... ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. That's the price of freedom of speech ....... ignorance.
Posted by PJack, Saturday, 28 September 2013 8:10:16 PM
| |
Hasbeen, give it up, "God, think of your reputation.", and fall in behind the last IPCC report (AR5).
I posted this on the other current climate thread, Hasbeen, and you might wish to at least read my final paragraph. In seeking info about global cooling events I came a across this series of links that were interesting because there is reference to parts of Australia. http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap01/icecore.html http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap15/lgm.html http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap15/natl_osc.html I just want to bring back the point that in the ice ages global average temperature reached only 5 to 6 degrees below today's average, with massive glaciation over now civilized parts of the planet. This puts a projected 3-4 degree rise in perspective. We (our descendants) won't simply cope with such a high global average temperature increase by turning up the air-con. It's much, much more serious than that. Interestingly, for those interested in following the last link, there is the conclusion: "The moral is that global warming is unlikely to be uniform. Also, cooling in one area does not disprove global warming generally". Anyway, I am now 95% confident that there is a big A in front of the GW. Whether or not there is a C before the A is up to us. Posted by Luciferase, Sunday, 29 September 2013 10:23:10 AM
| |
Hasbeen, I reached my limit on the other climate thread wasting good posts trying to reason with you or make you accountable for your assertions.
On ocean acidification you wrote: "Come off it Luci. The moment someone starts on this ocean acidification, we know they are a con man, or the dupe of a con man. The ocean is so alkaline that we could not even bring it anywhere neutral with all the CO2 in the solar system. You are just laying a huge trap for yourself with this bullsh1t. Even not very well educated people, who may be fooled by the greenhouse gas confidence trick, aren't going to fall for this one" A term for ocean pH decreasing is "acidification". Nobody is claiming the ocean will become acidic (pH < 7). If I did I'd be laying a huge trap for myself and you could call me a confidence trickster. Instead, let me not waste any more keystrokes as you are unreasonable and unaccountable. Just read about acidification and its effects at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_acidification Posted by Luciferase, Monday, 30 September 2013 11:09:33 PM
| |
Luciferase,
You might like this comprehensive article from The Seattle Times on ocean acidification. http://apps.seattletimes.com/reports/sea-change/2013/sep/11/pacific-ocean-perilous-turn-overview/ Posted by Poirot, Monday, 30 September 2013 11:48:42 PM
|