|
|
Post by sheepy on Jun 28, 2023 18:02:00 GMT
It's so full of holes Zany I find you arguing with yourself, where will all the commodities come from and the infrastructure to create all these new homes? Who is going to pay for it and sustain it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Jun 28, 2023 18:05:07 GMT
I don't pay heed to them, I instruct them. When I'm not too busy running the EU. Well no wonder they have got it so wrong.....Maybe your bit of seaweed hung over you back door is due replacing.
You are on about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that was founded in Switzerald and a 100% record of getting it wrong.
Oh and NASSA read and weep...
Fact Check-NASA did not announce that climate change is only driven by variations to Earth’s orbital position relative to the sun....
NASA has announced that CO-2 emissions have zero to do with climate change. It is solely caused by earth's changing positioning as it orbits around the sun.
I've made this point on more than one occasion, always denied. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 28, 2023 18:19:24 GMT
Well no wonder they have got it so wrong.....Maybe your bit of seaweed hung over you back door is due replacing.
You are on about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that was founded in Switzerald and a 100% record of getting it wrong.
Oh and NASSA read and weep...
Fact Check-NASA did not announce that climate change is only driven by variations to Earth’s orbital position relative to the sun....
NASA has announced that CO-2 emissions have zero to do with climate change. It is solely caused by earth's changing positioning as it orbits around the sun.
Yep I know where you are coming from mate. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 28, 2023 18:57:06 GMT
Nope. You got it wrong, now you are scrabbling around. Would have been better to just fess up straight away. You stated that trees cool the atmosphere by photosynthesis. You were wrong. You stated that urbanisation causes global warming, you are wrong again. The difference between us is that I didn't try to make you look a fool for your mistake. You always say that when you have been caught out, it is a pattern you follow. Nope, you got it wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 28, 2023 19:07:18 GMT
I don't pay heed to them, I instruct them. When I'm not too busy running the EU. Well no wonder they have got it so wrong.....Maybe your bit of seaweed hung over you back door is due replacing.
You are on about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that was founded in Switzerald and a 100% record of getting it wrong.
Oh and NASSA read and weep...
Fact Check-NASA did not announce that climate change is only driven by variations to Earth’s orbital position relative to the sun....
NASA has announced that CO-2 emissions have zero to do with climate change. It is solely caused by earth's changing positioning as it orbits around the sun.
Its good to see you admitting to this, a step forward. The National Aeronautical and Space Agency (NASA) did not announce that climate change is only driven by the Earth’s orbital position around the sun, |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2023 19:07:24 GMT
Almost all real scientists are convinced of the facts that man made global warming is a reality. But certain clowns think they look intelligent by ignoring them and pretending it is all rubbish The thing is SRB, tax isn't the answer to it. Reforestation is, as well as clean energy. Accepting the reality of it as you do is a good start. There is then plenty of room for debate about what the solutions should be. One thing is clear.....if we keep adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere faster than we remove it, it is going to get warmer. Most of our staple food supplies rely on current climate conditions and a large degree of climate stability. Heating the climate up is playing Russian roulette with our food supplies. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 28, 2023 19:09:31 GMT
Well no wonder they have got it so wrong.....Maybe your bit of seaweed hung over you back door is due replacing.
You are on about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that was founded in Switzerald and a 100% record of getting it wrong.
Oh and NASSA read and weep...
Fact Check-NASA did not announce that climate change is only driven by variations to Earth’s orbital position relative to the sun....
NASA has announced that CO-2 emissions have zero to do with climate change. It is solely caused by earth's changing positioning as it orbits around the sun.
I've made this point on more than one occasion, always denied. You as well. Thank you. The National Aeronautical and Space Agency (NASA) did not announce that climate change is only driven by the Earth’s orbital position around the sun, |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2023 19:15:26 GMT
Well no wonder they have got it so wrong.....Maybe your bit of seaweed hung over you back door is due replacing.
You are on about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that was founded in Switzerald and a 100% record of getting it wrong.
Oh and NASSA read and weep...
Fact Check-NASA did not announce that climate change is only driven by variations to Earth’s orbital position relative to the sun....
NASA has announced that CO-2 emissions have zero to do with climate change. It is solely caused by earth's changing positioning as it orbits around the sun.
Its good to see you admitting to this, a step forward. The National Aeronautical and Space Agency (NASA) did not announce that climate change is only driven by the Earth’s orbital position around the sun, He probably read it in the Daily Mail which in his mind is far more reliable than the global scientific community because it tells him stuff he wants to believe. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Jun 28, 2023 19:17:48 GMT
And they wonder how we ended up in the deep mire in the first place. For myself it hasn't been a surprise for a very longtime.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2023 19:25:22 GMT
Indeed. Its almost as if all the climatologists of the world are part of a conspiracy. Well the ones you pay heed too are....Have you ever thought about listening to real ones? You mean the ones the Daily Mail tell you about? Lol |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jun 28, 2023 19:41:37 GMT
But that is not what has happened. A blip in the trend, of a multitude of results, both upwards and then downwards indicates that the direct link between CO2 and temperature was not working. This is the very basis of the hypothesis and the graph that was constructed was the end result of all the figures and numbers crunched and did not show exactly what was expected, best to find out why, not hide the result. No it doesn't. In this case it showed a flaw in data collection during a world war. The temperature did not get colder the measuring changed as explained. If you wished to prove the temperature actually dropped you need to show that it dropped in just the American method of collecting temperatures. You might go further and compare it to other temperatures taken around the world at the time to see if they also varied downwards. But you wont because all you do is find an anomaly and say "See". You're not really interested in the science just casting doubt. So a change in the method of measurement resulted in an anomaly of temperature readings. Do you think that is possible for other changes as in mercury/spirit to probe? The blip is all the measurements, it is not a select few. This is why it is a problem as it is the official planetary temperature with all the corrections made for change in procedures etc. It is also present in the land temperatures which kind of blows a hole in the change of procedure. We also have which encourages the tangled web. realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Screen-Shot-2017-01-10-at-7.27.04-AM.gif![]() |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 28, 2023 19:42:45 GMT
Its good to see you admitting to this, a step forward. The National Aeronautical and Space Agency (NASA) did not announce that climate change is only driven by the Earth’s orbital position around the sun, He probably read it in the Daily Mail which in his mind is far more reliable than the global scientific community because it tells him stuff he wants to believe. Nope. The link is his. I guess he's seen the light.  |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jun 28, 2023 19:44:05 GMT
We wouldn't have heard about if it was successfully suppressed Indeed. Its almost as if all the climatologists of the world are part of a conspiracy. So you see the fact that they were conspiring as strong, indirect evidence they aren't? I'm beginning to suspect you only have a faint familiarity with the scientific method. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 28, 2023 19:45:47 GMT
No it doesn't. In this case it showed a flaw in data collection during a world war. The temperature did not get colder the measuring changed as explained. If you wished to prove the temperature actually dropped you need to show that it dropped in just the American method of collecting temperatures. You might go further and compare it to other temperatures taken around the world at the time to see if they also varied downwards. But you wont because all you do is find an anomaly and say "See". You're not really interested in the science just casting doubt. So a change in the method of measurement resulted in an anomaly of temperature readings. Do you think that is possible for other changes as in mercury/spirit to probe? The blip is all the measurements, it is not a select few. This is why it is a problem as it is the official planetary temperature with all the corrections made for change in procedures etc. It is also present in the land temperatures which kind of blows a hole in the change of procedure. We also have which encourages the tangled web. ![]() Oh yes possible, but the fact that we measure across the globe in a hundred different ways form a million points means the odds of the overall message being wrong is zero. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 28, 2023 19:46:18 GMT
Indeed. Its almost as if all the climatologists of the world are part of a conspiracy. So you see the fact that they were conspiring as strong, indirect evidence they aren't? I'm beginning to suspect you only have a faint familiarity with the scientific method. No I was being sarcastic. |
|
