- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: CO2 Levels rise even faster according to UN report
Posted on 9/9/14 at 7:35 pm to Tigah in the ATL
Posted on 9/9/14 at 7:35 pm to Tigah in the ATL
CO2 levels rise despite the US cutting 12%?????
So we are suppose to do what? Cut another 12%? And then what if that doesn't work? Another 12% again and again until we are back in the Stone Age and speaking Chinese???
So we are suppose to do what? Cut another 12%? And then what if that doesn't work? Another 12% again and again until we are back in the Stone Age and speaking Chinese???
2
Posted on 9/9/14 at 7:37 pm to doubleb
quote:
CO2 levels rise despite the US cutting 12%?????
So we are suppose to do what? Cut another 12%? And then what if that doesn't work? Another 12% again and again until we are back in the Stone Age and speaking Chinese???
Wanting us to cut more is like telling the smart kids they need to study more because the slackers are failing.
Posted on 9/9/14 at 7:40 pm to Cruiserhog
Human "ideal" =/= climatological "norm"
Posted on 9/9/14 at 7:48 pm to WeeWee
quote:
Wanting us to cut more is like telling the smart kids they need to study more because the slackers are failing.
Notice how the religious acolytes don't even respond?
Posted on 9/9/14 at 7:53 pm to Cruiserhog
quote:
Cruiserhog
So basically you have nothing.
Aren't you the guy that was asking for feedback on DU for what to post?
Posted on 9/9/14 at 7:53 pm to CptBengal
quote:
Notice how the religious acolytes don't even respond?
I figured they were on DU trying to find a rebuttal
Posted on 9/9/14 at 7:56 pm to Cruiserhog
quote:
bout 270-290 ppm
What a break - FINALLY an answer.
Okay, so they're, what about 400 ppm now.
1. How much of the increase from the ideal 270/290 up to 400 ppm can be attributed to human activity prior to 1970 (I want to see how much guilt I should carry - I mean, I don't want to wring my hands over a time when I had no carbon footprint, right?)
2. How much will it cost to get to 300 ppm in 86 years? I'm just assuming we have to give up air conditioning. Lets just keep it human costs.
A. How many people will have to freeze?
B. How many people will have to starve?
This post was edited on 9/9/14 at 7:58 pm
Posted on 9/9/14 at 7:58 pm to Srbtiger06
quote:
Aren't you the guy that was asking for feedback on DU for what to post?
That would be WaveHog and it wasn't DU thankfully.
Posted on 9/9/14 at 8:36 pm to Tigah in the ATL
Are these levels higher everywhere or higher on certain points of the globe?
Posted on 9/9/14 at 9:14 pm to Sentrius
quote:
That would be WaveHog and it wasn't DU thankfully.
I stand corrected. I knew it was ____hog.
What site was it? I remember reading it and having plenty of lolz.
Posted on 9/9/14 at 9:18 pm to wickowick
quote:another gotcha question!
Are these levels higher everywhere or higher on certain points of the globe?
Woo Hoo!! you've figured it out.
USA Conservatives understand science like no one else!!!
Posted on 9/9/14 at 9:19 pm to Tigah in the ATL
I notice you don't actually engage in any debate. You sure do love science.
Posted on 9/9/14 at 9:28 pm to Tigah in the ATL
quote:
another gotcha question!
Woo Hoo!! you've figured it out.
USA Conservatives understand science like no one else!!!
Is that not a legitimate question? If it is higher in the US, or Africa or over China and India, or Greenland, wouldn't that be important. If it was higher but spread evenly across the globe wouldn't that also be important...
Posted on 9/9/14 at 9:30 pm to wickowick
quote:they are different in different places. It's an average I believe.
Are these levels higher everywhere or higher on certain points of the globe?
Posted on 9/9/14 at 9:33 pm to CptBengal
quote:no, 800,000 is 800,000 years.
He doesn't know.
He thinks:
2014 - 1750 = 800,000
We have more co2 in the atmosphere than there has been for 800,000 years. You knew that probably, being the science god you are, but probably wanted to stalk me more than be true to your science.
Probably more communist scientists. This took 10 seconds on google
Go to the 3 minute mark, Robert Hooke reincarnate.
Posted on 9/9/14 at 9:36 pm to Tigah in the ATL
quote:
Tigah in the ATL
care to address my comments that USA CO2 levels have dropped 12% since 2007
ETA: I read it later I am going to bed
This post was edited on 9/9/14 at 9:37 pm
Posted on 9/9/14 at 9:37 pm to Tigah in the ATL
quote:
Tigah in the ATL
Stick to racism.....that's your bread and butter
Posted on 9/9/14 at 9:37 pm to wickowick
quote:sorry, it is. I'm so used to inane questions on the board I twitched.
Is that not a legitimate question? If it is higher in the US, or Africa or over China and India, or Greenland, wouldn't that be important. If it was higher but spread evenly across the globe wouldn't that also be important...
Posted on 9/9/14 at 9:38 pm to Tigah in the ATL
quote:
sorry, it is. I'm so used to inane questions on the board I twitched.
Get over yourself.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News