- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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: Increased CO2 levels produced no negative effects on GW-signed by 31,847 scientists
Posted on 3/20/19 at 2:05 am to texridder
Posted on 3/20/19 at 2:05 am to texridder
quote:
quote:
31,487 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs
It's a complete LIE that "there is a consensus among scientists that GW is caused by man". This proves the LIE.
This petition has been circulating since 1998. You'll notice that there in no on the signature page of the petition.
The original petition was circulated and known as the "Oregon Petition Project", but the name now has been shortened to the "Petition Project" in order to distance it from the negative comments it has received.
quote:
The Petition Project has no funding from energy industries or other parties with special financial interests in the "global warming" debate. Funding for the project comes entirely from private non-tax deductible donations by interested individuals.
One of the main financial contributors is Robert Mercer, Steve Bannon's benefactor, and a founder of Cambridge Analytics.
Google the Oregon Petition Project and the Institute of Science and Medicine, and its founder/head Arthur B. Robinson, if you want to get a flavor of how far afield these "scientists" are.
You guys should know better than to question the religion of these clowns.
See here, exhibit 1
2
Posted on 3/20/19 at 2:12 am to gthog61
Under the Paris accord, who was to pay a trillion $$$ to a some vague group who is completely unaccountable to anyone? Stupid deal. Furthermore, the accord does not require anyting of China or India. Stupid arse fricking deal!!!
Posted on 3/20/19 at 3:20 am to gthog61
quote:
Google the Oregon Petition Project and the Institute of Science and Medicine, and its founder/head Arthur B. Robinson, if you want to get a flavor of how far afield these "scientists" are.
quote:
You guys should know better than to question the religion of these clowns.See here, exhibit 1
You forgot to post what you thought about the fact that this same petition has been circulated since 1998; or that the person signing the petition's field of study was "physics"; or that one of the main financial contributors to the petition project is Robert Mercer, Steve Bannon's benefactor, and a founder of Cambridge Analytics.
I guess you're just too ignorant to discuss any of that. Probably a good idea for you not to discuss that and make a bigger fool of yourself.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 3:35 am to Chuker
quote:
That list is garbage at best.
Go find 10 real live scientists with legitimate degrees and ask them if increased C02 levels has a negative affect on the global environment. See what they have to say. You might be SHOCKED at the results.
I have a PhD in Mechanical Engineering with a focus in Thermodynamics. You and all you climate change pushers are full of shite. Theres no proof from a independent source(non government funded) that an increase in CO2 negatively impacts the environment.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 4:41 am to TenWheelsForJesus
quote:it would be so great if the right would stop getting their information from facebook memes.
“CO2 = Life. CO2 is in fact the most important airborne fertilizer in the world, and without it there would be no green plants at all."
for the sake of simplicity lets pretend that increasing CO2 is good for plants. its more complicated than that but whatever. you know what its not good for?
people.
so assuming youre a person and not a plant, you do not want our CO2 levels rocketing up. actually rising CO2 also brings more heat and droughts so its bad for the plants too, theyre still gonna die if they have no water. theyre also gonna be less nutritious, so "good for them" DOES NOT MEAN "good for us".
This post was edited on 3/20/19 at 5:05 am
Posted on 3/20/19 at 4:43 am to Muleriderhog
quote:I see it being stated that there has been an increase in CO2 in recent years.
I have a PhD in Mechanical Engineering with a focus in Thermodynamics. You and all you climate change pushers are full of shite. Theres no proof from a independent source(non government funded) that an increase in CO2 negatively impacts the environment.
Also, I see this statement being made:
quote:
An increase in the amount of carbon dioxide creates an overabundance of greenhouse gases that trap additional heat.
Your comments?
Posted on 3/20/19 at 6:48 am to BamaChemE
quote:
CO2 has been made the scapegoat chemical because it's really easy to measure, and because it's a product of complete combustion. The other product of a combustion reaction is 10x better at heat absorption, but since it's water, nobody really cares. The Earth is not going to turn into Venus. Plastic dumping into the oceans rom Asia, India, and Central America are of much more pressing concern than burning fossil fuels for power.
Yep.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 8:44 am to texridder
quote:CO2 is a greenhouse gas. So is SF6. So is CH4. Of course H2O is far and away the most significant GHA. Right?
Your comments?
The funny thing about water vapor is, the more water vapor, the more clouds. The more clouds, the more albedo effect. The more albedo, the less solar transmission and relative atmospheric radiative forcing. The less terrestrial exposure and relative atmospheric radiative forcing, the cooler the planet.
It's almost as if it is a multifactorial equation assessed with unifactorial modeling, isn't it though?
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:01 am to MastrShake
quote:
Because yes, ALL of those people are on that list of signatures. It's the Oregan Petition Project. It's been around since the 90s, in case you couldn't tell by the sites amazing graphics. It's a joke. Stop embarrassing yourself
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:11 am to Fat Bastard
quote:
Increased CO2 levels produced no negative effects on GW
Agreed. Increased CO2 levels are POSITIVELY correlated with AGW, not negatively. CO2 is the principal force behind the Earth running a fever.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:18 am to bmy
Ah yes. It's a bit like the John Cook 97% global warming consensus surveys conducted by a nonscientist out of his Australian garage. Turns out John's lack of background was a bit of an embarrassment once it surfaced. So the community bestowed a PhD on him a couple of years ago. That does make his work on the duplicitously titled "Skeptical Science" site seem more official, yeah?
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:19 am to MastrShake
quote:
so assuming youre a person and not a plant, you do not want our CO2 levels rocketing up. actually rising CO2 also brings more heat and droughts so its bad for the plants too, theyre still gonna die if they have no water. theyre also gonna be less nutritious, so "good for them" DOES NOT MEAN "good for us".
Wrong. Idso proved that increased absorption of CO2 increases agricultural yield. It isn't a theory. He did it in a lab. There are not more droughts from CO2. The water cycle remains the same regardless of temp.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:38 am to Zach
quote:and if the world grew all our crops in the controlled conditions of a lab, that might be relevant. but even then they would lose proteins and minerals. "more" does not equal "better".
Wrong. Idso proved that increased absorption of CO2 increases agricultural yield. It isn't a theory. He did it in a lab
quote:did you just say heat doesn't effect water?
There are not more droughts from CO2. The water cycle remains the same regardless of temp.
out of curiosity, what do you think is happening when you put a pot of water on a stove? what do you think that smoky stuff is?
This post was edited on 3/20/19 at 9:40 am
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:41 am to BamaChemE
I approve of your message and would like to extend it a bit. If every ocean grant and fund solicitor for the plastic in Ocean problem (real issue) were required to buy just one garbage truck for a province in east asia, the problem could be easily fixed at the source. East asia simply needs current tech garbage disposal.
lsu chem engr 70
lsu chem engr 70
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:45 am to MastrShake
quote:
and if the world grew all our crops in the controlled conditions of a lab, that might be relevant. but even then they would lose proteins and minerals. "more" does not equal "better".
Wrong again. The only way to determine CO2 effects is in a lab. The other alternative is to get some 'expert' to say 'Oh, I think it would be bad.'
Q: 'How do you know it would be bad if you can't test it?'
Expert: 'I have no fricking clue.'
quote:
did you just say heat doesn't effect water? out of curiosity, what do you think is happening when you put a pot of water on a stove? what do you think that smoky stuff is?
You don't know what the water cycle is! Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:46 am to MastrShake
quote:And rising seas too. Don't forget those rising seas.
actually rising CO2 also brings more heat and droughts
In this month's Fed testimony a Congressman actually asked Jay Powell how banks and lending companies planned to survive the spate of foreclosures in the next 20-30yrs when sea levels rise 8 feet "as scientists predict", and all of our coastal property is under water.
I was hoping Powell would respond that an 8-foot sea level rise is slightly less likely than the prospect of Guam tipping over, but he was very polite in his answer.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:53 am to MastrShake
quote:How do plants "lose" proteins when provided more carbon as a metabolic substrate? For that matter, how do they "lose" minerals while growing prolifically? The answer is they don't. You got snookered.
they would lose proteins and minerals
quote:The basis for clouds. Guess what pretty white clouds do.
what do you think that smoky stuff is?
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:54 am to djmicrobe
Looks like there are about to be 31847 completely random robberies in which nothing of value are taken.
Aka, suicided
Aka, suicided
Posted on 3/20/19 at 9:58 am to Zach
quote:oh my dear god, you're somehow even dumber than your avatar makes it seem like you're gonna be.
You don't know what the water cycle is!
Here. This is actually for children, because usually that's who would be asking about this, but I can try to find something less complicated if you need me to.
The Water Cycle for Kids
This post was edited on 3/20/19 at 9:59 am
Posted on 3/20/19 at 10:09 am to djmicrobe
quote:
entirely from private non-tax deductible donations
that comes from science deniers. Am I right?
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News