Just to clarify, I don't "believe" in anything that is beyond science. For example, I am not the least bit religious. UFO sightings are not proof that Aliens are visiting us, etc. Just science, only science, baby.

I never once said the Earth history of climate change never happened. In fact I even said just the opposite to you the first time you tried to say I said this. I agreed with you on the subject. The point is, is that now the climate is changing faster than it did, because of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere.


"Certain industries" are putting out CO2???? I say AGAIN...the U.S. federal govt. puts out more than ALL industries combined.
So maybe it's the Feds who are trying to take away all of our clean air and water?[/quote]

Again, I agreed with you on this too. My question to do was, Just because the Government is doing it, why should we?

It sure is!

Mark, Mark, Mark...The Earth's climate has changed VERY, VERY quickly in the past.

Do you know anything about Earth's history? Even recently?
The Sahara Desert was a green lush grassland where people hunted roaming animals and grew crops a few thousand years ago for instance.

And why don't you read about The Medieval Warm Period? It was caused by increased solar activity, less volcanic activity, and ocean circulation.
Mankind didn't have a damn thing to do with it. And it came upon the Earth relatively FAST. And lasted from about 950 to 1250 AD

And then...BOOM. The "Little Ice Age" kicked in. 1350 AD to about 1850. Came upon us fast.
And since 1850 guess what the Earth is doing?
WARMING BACK UP FROM THE LITTLE ICE AGE.

Didn't you pay any attention in school EVER. Or have you ever thought about googling topics instead of just googling your beliefs to find articles that only agree with your view?

EDIT: By the way, I was in New Orleans last May for the Internext Show. The Gulf waters HAVE recovered. Also my brother is a fishing Captain in Florida on the Gulf Of Mexico.
Come down from Canada and open your eyes and see for yourself.

the years long extreme drought in Texas and Oklahoma ended quickly and abruptly this past weekend.

didn't take years. didn't take everyone agreeing on footprints.

Yep. But to the Alarmists it was all caused by CO2

:(

and that's because they deny the science behind el nino. :1orglaugh

They ignore EVERYTHING that could contradict the scripted agenda that was based on 15 year old computer models that were founded on bad data that didn't take any of the variables of the Earth into account.

And as you can see here on GFY...their "BELIEFS" are like listening to religious nuts.

Me: "But Mr. Religious Nut, how can you possibly believe the Bible? A book written by primitive superstitious people?"
Religious Nut: "The bible is THE WORD OF GOD!!!!"

Me: "But **********, how can you say that mankind is changing the Earth's climate when the Earth's climate is going to change whether mankind exists or not? And how can you say that a degree or two in temp is going to destroy us?"
**********: "It's SETTLED SCIENCE!!!!"

Dude... I ... nevermind. I give up.


3 Days ago:
http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploa...Together-b.jpg
Record Dolphin Die-Off Linked to Gulf Oil Spill

Sorry Robbie, I will believe what NASA and NOAA say much faster than what anyone else says.

El Nino is not climate change.

many of us already know el nino precedes the climate change period debate by centuries. nevertheless, i'm quite sure i can find a post claiming the drought and heat wave in india is on account of climate change when in fact, it's on account of el nino. and another fact, it's the very same el nino that ended the drought in Texas and OKlahoma. and another fact is it is the very same el nino we hope will end the drought in Cali this upcoming winter.

el nino patterns predate climate change.

Mark! That picture is NOT from 3 days ago.
I just read that article. It's from when the spill actually happened. And it's talking about 1,400 dolphins who were killed from the oil spill from 2011 to 2014.

Of course they don't specify how many died when the oil was in the water like that in 2011 VS how many died in the following years.

You are so full of crap sometimes with your misleading "facts"

I TOLD you my brother is a fishing captain on the Gulf. He would know a lot better than some guy in Canada googling up his "beliefs" instead of actual facts.

My family is in Florida. I was just on the beach in Bradenton with a rented house last July to celebrate my mom's birthday.
The ocean on the Gulf is freakin' beautiful. And the fish (and dolphins) are plentiful.

Stop dramatizing and exaggerating everything.

You TOTALLY ignore history. You totally IGNORE everything that doesn't fit your preconceived notions.
One day you might want to ask yourself why you don't wonder about anything or even question anything...instead of just being spoonfed your info from people with agendas.

Robbie

The article I linked to and that posted the photo is here

Record Dolphin Die-Off Linked to Gulf Oil Spill

It was written on May 21st, 2015. The article talks about a new finding called "drenal Gland and Lung Lesions in Gulf of Mexico Common Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) Found Dead following the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill" That was written on May 20th 2015.

PLOS ONE: Adrenal Gland and Lung Lesions in Gulf of Mexico Common Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) Found Dead following the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

And the more far reaching impacts of the BP oil Spill that was written back in March, 2015

10 Things BP?s New Report Doesn?t Tell You

as well as quotes from Nasa and Noaa.

While I'm sure your brother is a fine fishing captain in the Gulf, he is no scientist that is actually studying the waters and the marine life in the Gulf and the effect that the BP oil spill has had.

Then there were the 600 Turtles and 150 Dolphins and Whales killed by the BP oil disaster, plus lots of other bad news, again, all according to NOAA scientists

2010 Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill: Sea Turtles, Dolphins, and Whales :: NOAA Fisheries

So again sorry dude, but there's no chance in hell that I'll believe that anyone on some forum is smarter than scientists at NASA and NOAA.

You shoot porn and have lots of experience in porn? Great - that I will listen to and believe. But you telling me that science is bullshit? Nope nope nope.

Mark...the PICTURE you posted is NOT from 3 days ago.
The ARTICLE you linked to was written 3 days ago about an incident from FOUR years ago.

You are misleading.

And for the rest of your post...you can not prove anything about global warming that a simple look at temps through the Earth's history that I was taught in elementary school can't show you.

Sorry, but there's "no chance in hell" that a guy on a forum who doesn't even know basic history or understand it is going to tell me about REAL science when he is a firm BELIEVER in paid for "science" based on faulty computer models from 15 years ago.

Agonize over it. Cry for the polar bears. Run out and hug a tree if it makes you feel better.
Because in the final analysis...that is ALL you are doing: making yourself feel better.

See Robbie that's what you don't get. It's YOU that is making yourself feel better by denying the facts and ignoring what Scientists say.

But hey, don't worry about it. I'll care enough for the both of us, so you won't have to.

Here is a real simple test for those that deny climate change... pull your car in to the garage and shut the door and leave it running... wait an hour and then come back and tell us if it had any effect on the atmosphere or the air quality inside the garage.

You cannot have industry in the 10's of thousands and cars and ships and trucks in the 10's of thousands burning oil.gas,coal,wood for OVER 100 continuous years and not expect it to affect ANYTHING... It don't make you a denier it makes you fucking stupid. :thumbsup

Here's a real simple quiz for clueless idiots. Define: carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide.

Went ahead and linked them for ya in case you couldn't spell google.

Both compounds contain carbon and oxygen, the difference lies in their toxicity. Carbon dioxide (CO2) contains one molecule of carbon and two molecules of oxygen. Carbon Monoxide (CO) contains only one atom of oxygen and two atoms of carbon.

Sit in closed garage with a gasoline engine car running and you will pass out and then die because you are taking in too much CO.

Put your head in a plastic bag and seal it around your neck and in a few seconds you will pass out and die because you are taking in too much CO2.

Now... Dihydrogen monoxide, that's a real killer, right Robbie? ;)

So if you put your head in a plastic bag hooked to a muffler one cancels out the other? :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh BTW you got CO wrong.

Great analogy

</not>

I know ********** means well.

But posting "3 Days Ago" above an old picture of dolphins swimming near an oil slick was just like all the Alarmists bullshit: totally deceptive in every way.

He should be ashamed of himself that he can't compete in the arena of ideas and has to resort to deception and exaggerations.
Just one more reason to NOT listen to the religious-fervor-like insanity of Alarmists.

They remind me of Evangelical Christians. So DETERMINED to "save" your soul from fire and brimstone. They become obsessed and think they can somehow make everyone else "believe" too. :(

Actually it is you dumb fuck... I am not comparing Carbon dioxide (CO2) and Carbon Monoxide (CO)... I am talking about AIR QUALITY... I stated that in the post...:thumbsup

No. You will die because you are not getting enough oxygen.

I thought you were a science guy.


.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh
:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Dude... why bother... and no i didn't get it wrong. Carbon Monoxide is expressed as CO. Carbon Dioxide is expressed as CO2.


Geezuz, are you sure you're not mad? What's with the condesending attitude? And clearly you did not read the article. While the photo may be a couple of years old, the article was written only a few days ago and references others that are only a few days to a few months old.

(I know you're just trying to hold on hard to what Fox News has taught you, but... )



Robbie a question for you: Nasa is telling us that the earth is warming up. NOAA is telling us the oceans are warming up. Both are predicting big problems unless we find a way to stop the process. Are they lying? Do they have this wrong?

Robbie - what pleasure do you get from being a man-made-climate-change denier?

You are just being a shill for big oil and the Republican Party (which is simply the law creation branch of big oil).

10 years from now you are going to realize you got this one wrong so you really should just quit while you're behind.

actually, you alarmists should quit needing everyone to agree with you.

fill us all in, what's going to happen in 10 years?

the truly bizarre part of the alarmist's pitch here is we're all supposed to agree and sing kumbayaya with them as they call peeps stupid, wrong, dumbfuck, etc.




ahahahahahahahahahahah.

1st Part: YOU deliberately posted that pic saying "3 days ago" to try and make it appear that the gulf waters are still full of oil. You were being deceptive. Which makes you a liar.

2nd Part: I DO agree that the Earth is warming up. Maybe by a couple of degrees by the time it's said and done.
I've even said it over and over when I keep pointing out what you choose to ignore: The Earth has been warming back up since 1850 after the end of "The Little Ice Age"
"We" CAN'T "find a way to stop that process". It's called nature.

Again...I'm starting to realize your education may not have been that good. But I have actually pointed this out to you over and over. I'll try one more time:

Huge warm up in global temps in the middle ages. Actually led to the Renaissance as people were no longer freezing to death in Europe and could grow more crops with the warmth and led better lives.
Big freeze followed called "The Little Ice Age". Global temps dropped down for a few hundred years.
Earth came out of the "Little Ice Age" in 1850 and the world started warming back up.

Mankind had nothing to do with ANY of that.

Take off your blinders.

Fuck you man, I'm not a liar. I said "3 days ago" because thats what the article said, which I clarified twice already. Don't you fucking call me a liar again. I've been trying to engage you in CONVERSATION and DEBATE about the issue very politely, and even extended an offer to dinner on me in Montreal if you could change my mind, and you have done nothing but insult me non-fucking stop.

You did't answer my question about Nasa and Noaa. Do you believe what they say? If you believe what right-wing media morons tell you over what Nasa tells you then there's absolutely no point in continuing the conversation with you.

You posted that pic as a way to deceive. That is lying.

And I DID answer "your" question: The Earth has been warming up since 1850. Has nothing to do with propaganda and everything to do with REAL science.
Learn to read.

You are so typical of alamists. You ignore everything except your pre-scripted agenda. And then you try to deceive and exaggerate because you can't debate the topic.

In 10 years, there will be another vague threat, the last failed prediction will be ignored and to cover up the fact that it failed to come to pass, you'll just be attacked personally and called a brainwashed idiot along with the obligatory references to Fox News and Republicans as being the source of all ills.

Go fart in a closed garage and see if it affects air quality. Cook dinner in the garage; go take a shit. Then :321GFY

Robbie:

I didn't lie, I quoted the article which you clearly did not read. You don't care for my correction that I made twice? You think I'm lying? Fine. Too bad for me I guess.

I asked you if you believe what Nasa and Noaa say. Since you're avoiding the question 3 times now, I'll assume that you believe anyone and anything else except real science, so there's no point in continuing the conversation.

Yep.

The creation of the "Boogeyman" has been very profitable for people.

They saw how much profit could be made by a "Cold War". And starting in 1970 they tried to make a new one with "Man Made Global Warming"
People didn't fall for that shit then either.

Of course the money is rolling in on "Terrorism". But so far, they haven't quite figured out a way to scare people with "Man Made Climate Change".

But you got to give them credit for their persistence.
The Alarmists have been making predictions since 1970. And they've all been 100% WRONG.

But they argue now that you can't judge the "science" by what happened in the past...even though their "science" is based on 15 year old faulty computer models. lol

Nasa says you're wrong.

No they don't. They say that the Earth has warmed over the last 150 + years.

Just like HISTORY shows us when the Earth began warming after The Little Ice Age.

How many times do I have to tell you that before you open your eyes and do some real research into history and REAL science?

NASA is doing what it's told to do by the govt. that funds it (US govt.). In case you didn't know...since the end of the Space Shuttle program, NASA has been scrambling to find relevancy as people are getting laid off and funding is running dry.

Good thing that "Man Made Global Warming" came along! :)

By the way...here is a 3 year old article in The Huffington Post (Liberal enough for you?) about NASA and their "Science"

NASA Global Warming Stance Blasted By 49 Astronauts, Scientists Who Once Worked At Agency

Read over that real quick Mark. And take your Alarmist's blinders off when you do.
If you actually THINK for a minute. Take Earth's climate history into account. And then READ that story...you might actually ponder this subject for just a second.

EDIT: Also Mark....it was just a few years back that NASA had the OPPOSITE view. And Alarmist's were saying that NASA's view meant nothing because they weren't experts in the climate.
But once the govt. got NASA on board? Guys like you are holding them up as the "proof". lol

Here's another one for you Mark, I can keep finding these all day.

"A former NASA scientist described global warming as "nonsense," dismissing the theory that climate change is a man-made problem, and advocated that it is "absolutely stupid" to blame recent UK floods on human activity, the latest reports indicate.

Going against reams of peer-reviewed scientific research that overwhelmingly states man has had a hand in climate change in our lifetime, Les Woodcock, an emeritus professor of chemical thermodynamics at the University of Manchester, told the Yorkshire Evening Post:

"The term 'climate change' is meaningless. The Earth's climate has been changing since time immemorial, that is since the Earth was formed 1,000 million years ago. The theory of 'man-made climate change' is an unsubstantiated hypothesis."

Despite overwhelming evidence from the scientific community backing the climate change claim, Woodcock stands by his argument.

"This is not the way science works," he continued to tell the Yorkshire Evening Post. "If you tell me that you have a theory there is a teapot in orbit between the Earth and the Moon, it's not up to me to prove it does not exist, it's up to you to provide the reproducible scientific evidence for your theory.""

Never mind Robbie. I never once called you any names for the positions you take, and thought it would be fun to get together for some beers with you to have the conversation in person. What did you do in return? Shit all over me. Thanks but no thanks - I'm not really interested in debating anything with you anymore.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh
:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Study Predicts Decades Of Global Cooling Ahead | The Daily Caller

how long until the hysterical left starts implying that THESE scientists aren't REAL scientists because they're not part of the global warming cult?

I'm not calling you names. You DID post that pic with the words "3 days ago" to lead people into thinking that the picture was taken 3 days ago.
You COULD have posted the link to the article and said this was WRITTEN 3 days ago about the aftermath of the events of 4 years ago.
But you CHOSE to deceive.
Deception is lying in my book.

And I think you did it because you are so fervent in your "beliefs" that you will go to any extremes to try and "prove" them...no matter what.

I do think you want to be a "good" person. I don't find fault in you for that. And I'm not trying to "shit all over you".
And "yes", having beers with me is fun. And as an added plus...some of my natural coolness would rub off on you. :1orglaugh

I think you fucked up when you posted that pic. You thought it was okay to try and be deceptive because it was for the "good".
Well, you were wrong about that. The ends never justify the means.

Let's just put that behind us.

I have to go on location now to shoot some porn. So take a day to cool off before you banish me from your life. :)

Living in the San Fernando Valley, I know it's history, I would like to know if anyone can debate this, that the air quality is better now than it was a century ago here. Before all the cars.
Here's why
When Juan Cabrillo first entered Santa Monica Bay in 1542 , he and his crew observed great clouds of smoke over our part of Southern California. He referred to it as the "Baya de los Fumos" or "Bay of Smokes". It is said that Native Americans actually set fires periodically to control the overgrowth of vegetation.

Juan Cabrillo is my favorite explorer!

:1orglaugh

That senile old fuck also believes in Noahs Ark and claims CO2 levels have not increased in the past 100 years.

?We can go back to great floods and Noah?s Ark in the Middle East regions which are now deserts,? he said.

"There is no reproducible scientific evidence CO2 gas even slightly increased in the last 100 years," he argued.

The latter statement is easily disproven with basic instruments. There are no complicated computer models involved in calculating atmospheric CO2. You just measure it. For pre-modern data, you use ice cores. That's it. Two centuries ago, the atmospheric concentration of CO2 was about 280 ppm. Last year it crossed the 400 ppm mark.

No wonder he is a FORMER NASA scientist.


http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_co2_history.jpg

CO is 1+1 hence the C+O. Your description would be C2O which is DiCarbon Monoxide.

Nice try on recovering but I would venture to guess 75% or more of people who believe in global warming confuse the two.

Are you aware of where the term "greenhouse gas" comes from? Let me help you out. They pump co2 into a greenhouse to increase growth. So if I had a bunch of plants in my garage and pumped CO2 in they would grow faster/better.

Robbie you do this all the time.. you throw out examples which fit your agenda but never look at the full picture.. The Earth's climate doesn't just change rapidly with out a "cause".

The Medieval Warm Period, You claim it was due to increased solar activity and less volcanic activity. We don't know for certain what caused it but lets say you are right.. lets say it's cause was more solar activity and less volcanic activity. Well gues what that is a "cause" the effect was a warming period. However it wasn't as warm as it is right now. In fact for the last 25 years our current climate has been higher than MWP.


You throw out the little ice age.. It didn't just get cold for no reason. They can't say for 100% what caused the little Ice age but the leading theory was several large volcano eruptions which took place in the tropic. It could have also been a meteor strike or excessive solar flares..

One thing is certain there was a "cause" and the effect was a rapid onset of a mini ice age. It didn't just happen "because".


Now this brings me to my point.. Right now we have no excessive solar activity, we have normal volcanic activity. Yet the Earth is warming at a very fast pace and it's not just happening "because". It's not just "happening" There is a cause.. That cause is "greenhouse gasses".


I mean seriously it's like you put half the context into your theories with out looking at the full picture.. Issac Newton said.. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. He was talking about physics but it's much the same..

It doesn't get hot or cold just "because". There is "ALWAYS" a reason.

http://i.imgur.com/mlzq2Bw.jpg


.

Back to bed gramps... Some shit is just over your fucking head... In fact MOST SHIT is over your head... :thumbsup