Belly the hoax was started by the UN to bring successful western economies countries to share their wealth with third world mainly Muslim countries. Their idea is ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT, who has all the answers and administers all the wealth, and population. It will be a World much like China and their human record. They will say who lives and dies. That is the World view; so the population has to be scared into accepting this by education and media propagation. World catastrophe is the best means of submission to achieving their goal. This programme has been foretold as the attempted unification of the world population under a false Messiah. It is all based on the rule of strict laws and is ruthless in its administration. Many before have attempted at World control of population, [false Messiahs] and again this is another attempt!

Josephus,
"old a different opinion to you"
Are you kidding? You linked to Monckton, the Bozo the Clown of the denier world. This after asking me a previous question and just ignoring the answer. And now you've just loaded Shell 3.

You're not here for a real adult conversation.
You're a cliche.

If I was to mimic your online pattern Josephus, I would ignore everything you've said till now and just say:

Disprove this!

In the 1820's, a quarter century before the Communist Manifesto was published, Joseph Fourier discovered something in the atmosphere traps the suns heat. In 1856 Eunice Foote discovered CO2 traps heat very effectively. John Tyndall confirmed it in 1859. The power of CO2 as a heat trapper can be tested in any decent physics lab on the planet. Trap some CO2, shine various wavelengths of energy through it, and see what "shadows" form on the other side. The shadows indicate what wavelengths didn't make it and were redirected by the gases.
Even simple thermal cameras can confirm it. Watch the candle at 90 seconds in! (1 minute) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6Un69RMNSw It's SUCH basic physics that even Mythbusters could set up a backyard test that demonstrated how CO2 traps heat. (3 minutes) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5GT0v0I CO2 traps heat. This is known. It's in physics textbooks over a century old. Warnings to the public started over 60 years ago, as this 1958 Bell Telephone Company "Science Hour" shows. (2 minutes). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-AXBbuDxRY&t=4s

Just for one post let me talk about the layers around our world and some impacts
Us [dying breed] ham radio buffs, like the active part of the sunspot cycle
We get brilliant conversations from just about any place in the world
The Ironisation of the E layer is Christmas
We love that, [when sunspots effect that layer bring rare Ironisation great radio contacts
Remember when we stopped using that gas? the one in our old fridges? it we know, did damage
It is a fact the Atmospheric layers around our planet make it possible for life here
And lack of one on other planets stops any form of life
Thanks, Josephus very much for the very funny joke about who and why is behind it

Afghanistan has nothing, ABSOLUTELY nothing , to do with oil. There's no oil there and even if there was, the US is now an oil exporter, is completely self-sufficient in oil and has no need for any Middle-Eastern oil.

Afghanistan is all about trying to ensure that it doesn't revert to being a haven for international terrorists.

But the plan to make it a civil society has utterly failed, so it should be abandoned. Not a single western life should be wasted on the project.

Instead, leave and leave them to their own devices. If they then do revert to being a haven for international terrorists, go in, bomb them back to the stone age and leave them again. Treat it like a vaccine boost that you have to do every 20 years or so.

Leaving Afghanistan wouldn't leave it to the Russian. They had more than their fill in the 1980's. It was one of the main reasons the USSR fell. They don't want anything to do with the place.
And even if they did go back, who cares

oops....previous post - wrong thread.

Max,

"sorry but please show me where I lied".

Let me count the ways. I'll take one example....
When you started this whole'do the math' malarkey, you believed that the maths had been done. I pointed out that if that were so, then it was invalid because of the ranges in the sensitivity numbers. You couldn't work out how to counter that point, particularly since you couldn't find anywhere which showed how the maths had been done.

Sooooo....you just made up this little piece of utter rubbish.."Bill McKibben did the math on the highest probability ". But he didn't did he? He didn't do any maths at all. No one did the maths. You just made it up. JUST MADE IT UP because you needed to explain the inexplicable. Show me anywhere were your claim is supported. Another way of saying you just made it up is to say you lied....QED.

Now you're on this "highest probability" rubbish. Again you completely misunderstand the science and the maths. Nowhere does anyone say they took the "highest probability", because they didn't because no such thing exists. Again, you just made it up although its probably you just failed to fathom the truth. The graph you think is a probability curve is in fact a histogram of simulation outcomes. The highest point isn't more probable than those around it, it just had more simulations run on it. You probably won't understand this but check here... http://www.gci.org.uk/images/IPCC_AR5_CS.pdf . The very first line reads..."No best estimate for equilibrium climate sensitivity can now be given because of a lack of agreement on values across assessed lines of evidence and studies." Which shows that your claim that "The verdict is in. 3 degrees" is about as wrong as wrong can be. People saying the moon is made of cheese are more correct than that.

(Don't worry...its from the IPCC so you won't catch denierism by reading it....but you might if you understand it).

/cont