Humans CANNOT change the climate of a planet

[reason10]

Here is the evidence.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2014/nov/25/climate-change-is-an-obvious-myth-how-much-more-evidence-do-you-need

Climate change is an obvious myth – how much more evidence do you need?

Quote

Take changes in sea level. They keep banging on about how the warming of the atmosphere causes rising sea levels, but if that was happening we’d have seen it by now! It’s been countless decades since they first started predicting this, but here we still are! But they persist in trying to convince us it’s a real threat, citing places that were supposedly “lost to the waves” and we’re supposed to believe that places like Atlantis, Miami or Skegness actually existed? You believe that rubbish and you probably believe we landed on Ganymede! And you’re an idiot, so there’s no hope for you.

And where does this rise in sea level supposedly come from – melting glacial ice? Like there was at any point massive blocks of ice just floating around in the ocean? You ever leave an ice cube in your drink last longer than five minutes? It melts, and yet we’re meant to believe these “ice caps” lasted millions of years. They’re not even trying to be convincing any more.

https://www.amazon.com/Debunking-Myth-Human-Climate-Change/dp/1914366530

Debunking The Myth Of Human Made Climate Change: Challenging the Construction of a theory which uses manipulation to gain acceptance Paperback – August 27, 2021

 

Quote

 

There has been a deliberate and orchestrated approach to promote the theory of human-made climate change initiated largely by the IPCC which has created alarmist fears about climate and threats of global warming. All such predictions have been wrong and exaggerated and have used manipulated data to do this.

 

These claims have become a dominant theme in world politics aided by the vast funding available for so-called research but really for propaganda purposes. The public has been misled by misinformation.

 

The real scientific data and facts, however, do not support the theory but disprove it and this book attempts to challenge the theory and explain the flaws in it. The main claim of CO₂ causing warming is not true, there is no causal link. Human-produced CO₂ is too small to have any effect anyway.

 

How about that fairy tale that CO2 in the atmosphere is creating a greenhouse effect?

97 percent of all greenhouse gasses is WATER VAPOR.

CO2 represents a percentage point of greenhouse gasses, and a small dot of that is produced by humans.

Termites release more CO2 into the atmosphere than humans.

[reason10]

Here's the deal. Humans cannot warm a small town in winter. They are incapable of warming an ENTIRE PLANET (where most of the surface is WATER.)

Climate is defined as prevailing weather patterns in a particular area over a period of time.

Yes, the planet has undergone climate change in the distant past. There was an ice age that thankfully separated human life from the dinosaurs. There have been warming trends, again LONG before humans have arrived.

The climate change lie was brought about because the earth did NOT warm when Algore predicted it would. The state of Florida is NOT under water, and Algore predicted it happening about ten years ago. The term Climate Change is used because Global Warming has been debunked and there is no money in it. Climate Change is a term that guarantees fundraising.

[herbie]

Your thread title wins the Stupidest Claim of 2022 Award.

[robosmith]

5 hours ago, reason10 said:

Here is the evidence.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2014/nov/25/climate-change-is-an-obvious-myth-how-much-more-evidence-do-you-need

Climate change is an obvious myth – how much more evidence do you need?

https://www.amazon.com/Debunking-Myth-Human-Climate-Change/dp/1914366530

Debunking The Myth Of Human Made Climate Change: Challenging the Construction of a theory which uses manipulation to gain acceptance Paperback – August 27, 2021

 

How about that fairy tale that CO2 in the atmosphere is creating a greenhouse effect?

97 percent of all greenhouse gasses is WATER VAPOR.

CO2 represents a percentage point of greenhouse gasses, and a small dot of that is produced by humans.

Termites release more CO2 into the atmosphere than humans.

Compared to water vapor, CO2 is LONG LASTING in the atmosphere.

Any BIOLOGICAL source of CO2 does NOT change atmospheric concentrations, because that is CONTINUOUSLY RECYCLED by biological processes.

Only GIGA-TONS of FOSSIL FUEL burning increases atmospheric CO2 SIGNIFICANTLY.

If you look at the atmospheric CO2 graph, you see seasonal variations due to BIOLOGICAL CO2 along the RISING TREND from fossil fuels, perturbed TEMPORARILY by the largest volcanic eruptions like Mt Pinatubo.

 If you believe man CANNOT change climate, you should research NUCLEAR WINTER.

The last time CO2 exceeded 400ppm, was 800,000 years ago.

[Michael Hardner]

45 minutes ago, herbie said:

Your thread title wins the Stupidest Claim of 2022 Award.

How about redundant claim of the year award? We literally been debating this for 20 years and some newcomer who's literally 15 years old shows up and decides to start a new thread.. thanks for leaving The forum.

[reason10]

32 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Compared to water vapor, CO2 is LONG LASTING in the atmosphere.

Any BIOLOGICAL source of CO2 does NOT change atmospheric concentrations, because that is CONTINUOUSLY RECYCLED by biological processes.

Only GIGA-TONS of FOSSIL FUEL burning increases atmospheric CO2 SIGNIFICANTLY.

If you look at the atmospheric CO2 graph, you see seasonal variations due to BIOLOGICAL CO2 along the RISING TREND from fossil fuels, perturbed TEMPORARILY by the largest volcanic eruptions like Mt Pinatubo.

 If you believe man CANNOT change climate, you should research NUCLEAR WINTER.

The last time CO2 exceeded 400ppm, was 800,000 years ago.

Only the OPINIONS of the scientists who were PAID to say those things.

1. Water vapor comes from MOST OF THE SURFACE OF THE EARTH. CO2 is less than a percentage point, and most of it is produced in nature.

2. Again, the levels of CO2 in the greenhouse layer are produced in NATURE, not man made.

3. If you really believed burning fossil fuel created planet destroying CO2 you'd be wanting Biden impeached for treason, since he and his son are bought and paid for by the largest fossif fuel using country in the world: CHINA. Largest coal user in the world. In any case, ALL that CO2 is a fraction of what is produced by termites.

4. Any idiot (and hack on the payroll of George Soros) can produce a graph.  It is as meaningful as a picture on a cocktail napkin. And again, the labs who produced that map were PAID to produce it, whether it is real or not. And it is not real.

5. For posters here of the average age of this place, (and I'm beginning to believe the average age here is 16 to 22), nuclear winter has to do with the release of so many nuclear weapons create so many fires that the soot from those fires reaches up into the atmosphere and shuts out all the sunlight, causing the earth to enter another ice age. That is quite a stretch to suggest and would be an academic point because any nuclear exchange large enough to cause that would wipe out all human, animal and plant life on the planet anyway, with the blast and radiation poisoning. We'd all be dead long before the first small farm pond froze.

It took the brilliant leadership of President Ronald Reagan to save the world from the dreaded Nuclear Winter, which he did by defeating the Soviet Union without firing a shot. (To paraphrase British Prime Minister Thatcher). You should worry about a senile, racist unelected pedophile in Washington who has allowed Russia to pull us back into a new era of nuclear blackmail and cold war.

[reason10]

10 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

How about redundant claim of the year award? We literally been debating this for 20 years and some newcomer who's literally 15 years old shows up and decides to start a new thread.. thanks for leaving The forum.

Thing is, idiots continue to push the climate change lie, (just like they pushed the global cooling, global warming, population bomb, ozone hoax, and other nutty claims that have all been debunked by real science.

Maybe it's my fault. I probably don't get enough time in the classroom. I just feel the need to educate people, and a lot of people here are in dire need of education.

[ironstone]

44 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Compared to water vapor, CO2 is LONG LASTING in the atmosphere.

Any BIOLOGICAL source of CO2 does NOT change atmospheric concentrations, because that is CONTINUOUSLY RECYCLED by biological processes.

Only GIGA-TONS of FOSSIL FUEL burning increases atmospheric CO2 SIGNIFICANTLY.

If you look at the atmospheric CO2 graph, you see seasonal variations due to BIOLOGICAL CO2 along the RISING TREND from fossil fuels, perturbed TEMPORARILY by the largest volcanic eruptions like Mt Pinatubo.

 If you believe man CANNOT change climate, you should research NUCLEAR WINTER.

The last time CO2 exceeded 400ppm, was 800,000 years ago.

What caused CO2 to rise to that high level over 800,000 years ago? You can't blame it on man-made emissions.

Apparently the planet survived that event.

[robosmith]

3 minutes ago, ironstone said:

What caused CO2 to rise to that high level over 800,000 years ago? You can't blame it on man-made emissions.

Apparently the planet survived that event.

Prehistoric CO2 has been increased by several mechanisms, esp MEGA-VOLCANOES. AND those which ignite coal deposits.

Natural occurrence certainly DOES NOT demonstrate man CANNOT do the SAME or WORSE.

And the PLANET will "survive" since it's made of rock. Man needs MUCH MORE than rock to survive. 

[robosmith]

14 minutes ago, reason10 said:

Only the OPINIONS of the scientists who were PAID to say those things.

1. Water vapor comes from MOST OF THE SURFACE OF THE EARTH. CO2 is less than a percentage point, and most of it is produced in nature.

2. Again, the levels of CO2 in the greenhouse layer are produced in NATURE, not man made.

3. If you really believed burning fossil fuel created planet destroying CO2 you'd be wanting Biden impeached for treason, since he and his son are bought and paid for by the largest fossif fuel using country in the world: CHINA. Largest coal user in the world. In any case, ALL that CO2 is a fraction of what is produced by termites.

4. Any idiot (and hack on the payroll of George Soros) can produce a graph.  It is as meaningful as a picture on a cocktail napkin. And again, the labs who produced that map were PAID to produce it, whether it is real or not. And it is not real.

5. For posters here of the average age of this place, (and I'm beginning to believe the average age here is 16 to 22), nuclear winter has to do with the release of so many nuclear weapons create so many fires that the soot from those fires reaches up into the atmosphere and shuts out all the sunlight, causing the earth to enter another ice age. That is quite a stretch to suggest and would be an academic point because any nuclear exchange large enough to cause that would wipe out all human, animal and plant life on the planet anyway, with the blast and radiation poisoning. We'd all be dead long before the first small farm pond froze.

It took the brilliant leadership of President Ronald Reagan to save the world from the dreaded Nuclear Winter, which he did by defeating the Soviet Union without firing a shot. (To paraphrase British Prime Minister Thatcher). You should worry about a senile, racist unelected pedophile in Washington who has allowed Russia to pull us back into a new era of nuclear blackmail and cold war.

The fossil fuel industry pays "scientists" to say the things YOU post here.

[Infidel Dog]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

 

Only GIGA-TONS of FOSSIL FUEL burning increases atmospheric CO2 SIGNIFICANTLY.

 If you believe man CANNOT change climate, you should research NUCLEAR WINTER.

The last time CO2 exceeded 400ppm, was 800,000 years ago.

You Gore and Greta guys crack me up. There's all this basic stuff you don't seem to know yet somehow somebody has convinced you you're the masters of science.

Ocean out-gassing. Ocean conveyor belt. Look it up. Start there for other atmospheric sources of CO2.

While your at it and if you think human emissions will bring about warmagedon because there's a science experiment showing warming increasing a degree per doubling of CO2, look again. That won't bring about the sort of climate catastrophe you're hoping for. For that you have to invent a new process in your head that there is no science experiment for. Try "climate sensitivity" on your Google machine. That's a term you should make yourself familiar with if you really want to puff your chest out and pretend you're "the science."

And yes, the earth has been CO2 starved for an epoch or so. Technically we're in an ice age. You knew that, didn't you, Science Boy? Did they tell you over on the progressive journal you get your information from that life on earth needs CO2 to survive? We came close to going below the line where everything dies. I think it's 150 ppm. I believe at one point we were 180.

Edited October 16, 2022 by Infidel Dog

[robosmith]

20 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

You Gore and Greta guys crack me up. There's all this basic stuff you don't seem to know yet somehow somebody has convinced you you're the masters of science.

Ocean out-gassing. Ocean conveyor belt. Look it up. Start there for other atmospheric sources of CO2.

While your at it and if you think human emissions will bring about warmagedon because there's a science experiment showing warming increasing a degree per doubling of CO2, look again. That won't bring about the sort of climate catastrophe you're hoping for. For that you have to invent a new process in your head that there is no science experiment for. Try "climate sensitivity" on your Google machine. That's a term you should make yourself familiar with if you really want to puff your chest out and pretend you're "the science."

And yes, the earth has been CO2 starved for an epoch or so. Technically we're in an ice age. You knew that, didn't you, Science Boy? Did they tell you over on the progressive journal you get your information from that life on earth needs CO2 to survive? We came close to going below the line where everything dies. I think it's 150 ppm. I believe at one point we were 180.

The consensus of CLIMATE SCIENTISTS says you're wrong. I don't need to be a "master of science" (even though I have that degree) to LISTEN TO THE EXPERTS.

And that's probably why you keep saying "look it up" instead of posting YOUR SOURCES.

Are you really DENYING the effect of GIGA-TONS of fossil fuel CO2 being released EVERY YEAR?

Your "sources" have not changed in 800,000 years, but CO2 in the atmosphere HAS.

Head in the sand, much?

[Moonlight Graham]

MLW is a scholarly source.

[Infidel Dog]

28 minutes ago, robosmith said:

The consensus of CLIMATE SCIENTISTS says you're wrong.

The consensus of climate scientist say there's an inevitable warmageddon coming caused by the burning of fossil fuels? Is that what you're saying? If so, Bullshit.

Show it to me.

[Michael Hardner]

55 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

You Gore and Greta guys crack me up.  

Hahahaha... Citing a little girl and ex VP as Climate Scientists, nice.

You know, you and I were actually discussing the science at one point and I believe you left the conversation after my last post explaining some aspect of the science. I invite you to find my post and respond to it.

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, Infidel Dog said:

 

Show it to me.

Why are you pretending that you've never discussed this before?

[reason10]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

Prehistoric CO2 has been increased by several mechanisms, esp MEGA-VOLCANOES. AND those which ignite coal deposits.

Natural occurrence certainly DOES NOT demonstrate man CANNOT do the SAME or WORSE.

And the PLANET will "survive" since it's made of rock. Man needs MUCH MORE than rock to survive. 

Man can do NOTHING to either hurt or save the planet. Man can barely manage our own regular environment.

Most of the surface of the earth is WATER. Most of the land surface of the earth is wilderness. Only a small portion of that land is inhabited by humans. And all industry factories (coal fired plants, oil fired plants etc) physically would fit into an area not much larger than Rhode Island.

What will save mankind and give us the highest standard of living that we have now is free market capitalism. Without that, we are just animals.

[robosmith]

15 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

The consensus of climate scientist say there's an inevitable warmageddon coming caused by the burning of fossil fuels? Is that what you're saying? If so, Bullshit.

Show it to me.

You made many more claims than ^this.

"warmageddon" is not even a word, so climate scientists likely don't know what it is, let alone that it's "inevitable." LMAO

Edited October 16, 2022 by robosmith

[reason10]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

The fossil fuel industry pays "scientists" to say the things YOU post here.

I've never received a check from the fossil fuel industry for my postings on political message boards, so right away you're lying. But I've got an open mind. You have a choice:

A.  Produce ACTUAL PROOF that money is being funneled from the fossil fuel industry to posters like me, or

B. Admit you just made that up.

 

We do know that George Soros paid Algore to make up that global warming lie.

https://www.winterwatch.net/2016/11/did-george-soros-bribe-al-gore-millions-to-lie-about-global-warming/

Quote

NEON NETTLE — Newly leaked documents from whistleblowing website, DC Leaks, reveal that Liberal billionaire, George Soros, used his Open Society Institute to pay Al Gore $10 million dollars per year to lie to the public about the effects man-made global warming has on the planet.

According to the documents, George Soros gave former Vice President, Al Gore’s environmental group millions of dollars in the space of three years to create a “political space for aggressive U.S. action” on global warming.

YNW reports: “U.S. Programs Global Warming Grants U.S. Programs became engaged on the global warming issue about four years ago, at George Soros’s suggestion,” reads a leaked OSI memo.

“There has been a budget of $11 million for global warming grants in the U.S. Programs budget for the last several years,” the memo reads. “This budget item captures George Soros’s commitment of $10 million per year for three years to Al Gore’s Alliance for Climate Protection, which conducts public education on the climate issue in pursuit of creating political space for aggressive U.S. action in line with what scientists say is necessary to put our nation on a path to reducing its outsize carbon dioxide emissions.”

There's my evidence. Where's yours?

[Infidel Dog]

Quote

And that's probably why you keep saying "look it up" instead of posting YOUR SOURCES.

Are you really DENYING the effect of GIGA-TONS of fossil fuel CO2 being released EVERY YEAR?

Your "sources" have not changed in 800,000 years, but CO2 in the atmosphere HAS.

Head in the sand, much?

I say look it up because ocean out-gassing, ocean conveyor belt, climate sensitivity. This is all basic stuff. If you want to present yourself as knowledgeable on the issue you should know it.

I wouldn't get overly impressed by word "gigaton" if I were you. It's a big planet with lots of atmosphere.

Any of your "consensus" scientists ever tell you about this?

AN INTRODUCTION TO THE CARBON CYCLE

 

 

[Infidel Dog]

10 minutes ago, robosmith said:

You made many more claims than ^this.

"warmageddon" is not even a word, so climate scientists likely don't know what it is, let alone that it's "inevitable." LMAO

I'll play your little game. You said there is a consensus of climate scientists behind your claim of a Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming that is inevitable. Show it to me.

Can't do it can you? Would you like to know why? Such a specific "Consensus" doesn't exist.

Edited October 16, 2022 by Infidel Dog

[Infidel Dog]

26 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Hahahaha... Citing a little girl and ex VP as Climate Scientists, nice.

 

No I didn't. 

I cite them as the kind of prophets of a global warming catastrophe religion supported by the PTB that for some reason otherwise sensible humans are too willing to fall in line behind.

If you didn't have Gore this whole warming scare would never have happened.

If you didn't have Greta nicompoop teenage girls wouldn't be throwing tomato soup on priceless works of art.

 

[robosmith]

36 minutes ago, reason10 said:

I've never received a check from the fossil fuel industry for my postings on political message boards, so right away you're lying. But I've got an open mind. You have a choice:

A.  Produce ACTUAL PROOF that money is being funneled from the fossil fuel industry to posters like me, or

B. Admit you just made that up.

You're NOT a climate scientist of whom I spoke, and certainly not worth paying for your OPINIONS.

36 minutes ago, reason10 said:

 

We do know that George Soros paid Algore to make up that global warming lie.

https://www.winterwatch.net/2016/11/did-george-soros-bribe-al-gore-millions-to-lie-about-global-warming/

There's my evidence. Where's yours?

Gore learned about GW theories from Roger Revelle PhD, and is NOT a climate scientist either.

So strike 2.

[robosmith]

33 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

I'll play your little game. You said there is a consensus of climate scientists behind your claim of a Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming that is inevitable. Show it to me.

Can't do it can you? Would you like to know why? Such a specific "Consensus" doesn't exist.

Take it up with NASA.

Scientific Consensus: Earth's Climate Is Warming

[herbie]

Look, these guys are such nincompoops they confuse Greta with art defacing idiots. If 30 years of evidence right in their faces doesn't convince them nothing will.
if they had the Internet 40 years ago they'd be denying the link between smoking and cancer as loud as they do about climate change.

Eight billion humans can't damage the Earth....  that's so stupid it's beyond belief.