Openmind
Well-Known Member
Let's see some facts that CO2 makes any difference.
Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Causes - NASA Climate ...
https://climate.nasa.gov/causes
Let's see some facts that CO2 makes any difference.
I asked for facts, not theory.
I asked for facts, not theory.
Real science in other words.
Co2 increasedan for 20 years yet the UN doctored Temps did not rise. Why ?
I asked for facts, not theory.
Real science in other words.
Co2 increasedan for 20 years yet the UN doctored Temps did not rise. Why ?
Climate change is real, it changes all the time and has for as long as there has been atmosphere. But there is no proof that CO2 can do what's claimed.Why don't YOU provide FACTS?
Why don't you show that there is no possible way that Climate change is real and that excess CO2 provoked by human use of fossile fuel has no influence on climate and pollution?
Go for it. . .I'm pretty sure you can find SOME support in the 3% of scientists who deny Climate change!
Dodtowner you do not provide the names of scientists that support your claim. Opermind has . Several sites like Skeptical Science and Scientific America have debunked the claim by Judith Curey and David R ose that there is still a pause. Temps are increasing now the pause is over.
http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/01...warming-temperature-pause-still-going-strong/
Perhaps this will help you understand the nature of pause vs warming.
In short the pause is supported by satellite temperature readings that have not been manipulated vs land (and sea surface) temp readings that have been constantly being manipulated in an effort to dramatist the purported effect.
For man to have an effect, co2 has to be blamed. That's why it's very significant to ask for verifiable, repeatable scientific experimentation that demonstrates that CO2 will do what it's claimed to do. Palerider has asked other posters for such evidence and gotten none. It's not the fault of those fine posters as Palerider already knew there was no proof.
http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/01...warming-temperature-pause-still-going-strong/
Perhaps this will help you understand the nature of pause vs warming.
In short the pause is supported by satellite temperature readings that have not been manipulated vs land (and sea surface) temp readings that have been constantly being manipulated in an effort to dramatist the purported effect.
For man to have an effect, co2 has to be blamed. That's why it's very significant to ask for verifiable, repeatable scientific experimentation that demonstrates that CO2 will do what it's claimed to do. Palerider has asked other posters for such evidence and gotten none. It's not the fault of those fine posters as Palerider already knew there was no proof.
Again. . .you keep on repeating the same denial crap from a very small minority. What about providing PROOF that the huge CO2 increase has no part in climate change. Yes, climate has changed many times in millions of years. . .but the speed of this change and the fact that NOW is what we are concerned about because the world is over-populated and any small change in sea level and warming/cooling on life will have much more dramatic result on OUR LIVES, than it did on the lives of dinosaurs and primitive mankind!
Why continue to push what we KNOW causes more CO2 emissions (i.e., fossile fuel, greenhouse gas from life stocks, etc. . .) instead of working toward healthier means of production (both to meet our energy needs AND to meet our food needs)?
And, yes, live stock is having a much greater effect on the environment today than it did even 50 years ago!
There is no chance co2 will cause the planet harm. There is no science to prove it can. We do know co2 has increased over the past 20 years but undoctored satellite Temps have remained constant.Again. . .you keep on repeating the same denial crap from a very small minority. What about providing PROOF that the huge CO2 increase has no part in climate change. Yes, climate has changed many times in millions of years. . .but the speed of this change and the fact that NOW is what we are concerned about because the world is over-populated and any small change in sea level and warming/cooling on life will have much more dramatic result on OUR LIVES, than it did on the lives of dinosaurs and primitive mankind!
Why continue to push what we KNOW causes more CO2 emissions (i.e., fossile fuel, greenhouse gas from life stocks, etc. . .) instead of working toward healthier means of production (both to meet our energy needs AND to meet our food needs)?
And, yes, live stock is having a much greater effect on the environment today than it did even 50 years ago!
Greenhouse gas emissions from livestock can be cut by 30%, says ...
https://www.theguardian.com › World › Development › Greenhouse gas emissions
Sep 26, 2013 - Greenhouse gas emissions associated with livestock add up to 7.1 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year, the FAO says
So. . .IF you knew that there is a 97% chance that, by visiting San Francisco in the next 2 weeks, you would experience the "big one," would you still decide to fly there and take your chance? or would you decide to postpone your trip or go to a different destination?
There is no chance co2 will cause the planet harm. There is no science to prove it can. We do know co2 has increased over the past 20 years but undoctored satellite Temps have remained constant.
We do know sanfran lies on a fault line but science has not determined how to predict it's actions so I would not be concerned.
Do you not find it odd that there is no science to prove co2 is terrible and that every "scientist" involved with the alarmist has been walking it back ?
There is no chance co2 will cause the planet harm. There is no science to prove it can. We do know co2 has increased over the past 20 years but undoctored satellite Temps have remained constant.
We do know sanfran lies on a fault line but science has not determined how to predict it's actions so I would not be concerned.
Do you not find it odd that there is no science to prove co2 is terrible and that every "scientist" involved with the alarmist has been walking it back ?
Huge increase, Temps the same. Already did this. So show me proof co2 does what they claim.So. . .you should have no problem showing factual sources stating that the huge increase in CO2 is not harmful to life on this earth and is not influencing climate change, right? Why does it take you so long to provide those sources?
By the way, I know plenty about the San Andreas fault. I was living 4 miles from the epicentre of the 1989 "big one."