Extinction Rebellion versus brexit

[philpvfc]

No problem with them protesting as long as it is done lawfully. 

[ginge]

1 hour ago, philpvfc said:

No problem with them protesting as long as it is done lawfully. 

They were peacefully protesting when they were removed before their planned end date. I saw them in Trafalgar Square and they weren't causing any trouble. When the police started removing them they went elsewhere and started being stupid standing on top of tube trains. 

[toyahw]

On 24/09/2019 at 16:59, Paul6754 said:

Child exploitation by Cliimate Activists is unacceptable, period.

 

I would not put it that way myself. But I get your drift on this. Facts are what matter. Not dumb kiddies who know jack moaning.

But you are wrong my friend, very very wrong. On the facts.

[Paul6754]

1 hour ago, toyahw said:

I would not put it that way myself. But I get your drift on this. Facts are what matter. Not dumb kiddies who know jack moaning.

But you are wrong my friend, very very wrong. On the facts.

You posted this on the first page of this thread, "

The geological data shows a 100% correlation over a geological time scale of hundreds of millions of years between atmospheric CO2 levels and mean temperature. And the reason is also obvious, CO2 re-reflects infra red back to the surface of the earth".

As far as I'm aware there is no data or evidence in the scientific literature showing carbon dioxide to be the control knob for global warming, climate change, climate crisis etc. 

Post the data you refer to above and then we can discuss. I will change my opinion if I see evidence, particularly evidence "Over a geological time scale of hundreds of millions of years between atmospheric CO2 levels and mean temperature".

 

[Andyregs]

7 hours ago, Paul6754 said:

You posted this on the first page of this thread, "

The geological data shows a 100% correlation over a geological time scale of hundreds of millions of years between atmospheric CO2 levels and mean temperature. And the reason is also obvious, CO2 re-reflects infra red back to the surface of the earth".

As far as I'm aware there is no data or evidence in the scientific literature showing carbon dioxide to be the control knob for global warming, climate change, climate crisis etc. 

Post the data you refer to above and then we can discuss. I will change my opinion if I see evidence, particularly evidence "Over a geological time scale of hundreds of millions of years between atmospheric CO2 levels and mean temperature".

 

You’ve shown how you have trouble looking at evidence rationally in the trump thread. And here you are demanding sources. You believe YouTube conspiracy theorists on climate change over NASA. 
 

https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

or are these ‘left wing rags’? Are we only allowed to use Fox News? Or is everyone psychotic Marxists and therefore wrong because it doesn’t fit with your conspiracy theories.
 

you never did say what ‘issues’ Greta has that makes her opinion invalid? 

[Doha]

Looks like Puddled Paul has some likeminded contemporaries over in mouthbreather town.

These people are allowed to vote, drive, buy knives and apply for firearms certificates. Jesus fćuking christ. 

 

[Paul6754]

11 hours ago, Andyregs said:

You’ve shown how you have trouble looking at evidence rationally in the trump thread. And here you are demanding sources. You believe YouTube conspiracy theorists on climate change over NASA. 
 

https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

or are these ‘left wing rags’? Are we only allowed to use Fox News? Or is everyone psychotic Marxists and therefore wrong because it doesn’t fit with your conspiracy theories.
 

you never did say what ‘issues’ Greta has that makes her opinion invalid? 

You don't know what evidence is or what constitutes evidence.

I will take the opinions and views of eminent Scientists from prestigious Universities and institutions around the world over a few people at NASA. I have the scientific qualifications and knowledge to make an informed judgement and to form my own opinion on why I am skeptical about CO2 being the control knob for global warming/climate change, unlike yourself who posts articles that you probably haven't read and even if you had don't understand one iota.

You clearly don't have the scientific knowledge to make the judgement if any climate change article is fact or fiction but base your opinions on "Scientists" like Al Gore or a Swedish teenager, a truly stupid thing to do.

NASA's main business is rockets not climate science.

Post the graph/plot that Toyah is referring to or any such evidence showing a correlation between global warming and level's of CO2 or shut the f up,

Politics doesn't belong in science but unfortunately it has taken over the Climate Change world hence it is where it is.

Greta is a 16 year old who almost certainly doesn't know the difference between an atom and an apple.

[Andyregs]

6 minutes ago, Paul6754 said:

You don't know what evidence is or what constitutes evidence.

I will take the opinions and views of eminent Scientists from prestigious Universities and institutions around the world over a few people at NASA. I have the scientific qualifications and knowledge to make an informed judgement and to form my own opinion on why I am skeptical about CO2 being the control knob for global warming/climate change, unlike yourself who posts articles that you probably haven't read and even if you had don't understand one iota.

You clearly don't have the scientific knowledge to make the judgement if any climate change article is fact or fiction but base your opinions on "Scientists" like Al Gore or a Swedish teenager, a truly stupid thing to do.

NASA's main business is rockets not climate science.

Post the graph/plot that Toyah is referring to or any such evidence showing a correlation between global warming and level's of CO2 or shut the f up,

Politics doesn't belong in science but unfortunately it has taken over the Climate Change world hence it is where it is.

Greta is a 16 year old who almost certainly doesn't know the difference between an atom and an apple.

Ok, not nasa? what about all these organisations? Not sure if you bothered checking. Are these ‘scientists’ too?

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

American association for the advancement of science

American chemical society 

American geophysical union

American medical association 

American meteorological society

The geological society of America 

 The us national society of sciences 

the us global change research program 

The IPCC (“The industrial activities that our modern civilization depends upon have raised atmospheric carbon dioxide levels from 280 parts per million to 400 parts per million in the last 150 years. The panel also concluded there's a better than 95 percent probability that human-produced greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have caused much of the observed increase in Earth's temperatures over the past 50 years.”)

These 200 worldwide scientific organisations 

http://www.opr.ca.gov/facts/list-of-scientific-organizations.html

Remind me which YouTube channel you use again?

 

 

[Paul6754]

4 hours ago, Doha said:

Looks like Puddled Paul has some likeminded contemporaries over in mouthbreather town.

These people are allowed to vote, drive, buy knives and apply for firearms certificates. Jesus fćuking christ. 

 

When you post irrelevance and rubbish like the above it shows you have nothing to offer.

This Paul has schooled you on climate science, corrected you on a simple science fact and now you're posting posting crap like the above so you are obviously puddled, stupid and a piece of d*g s**t crap to boot. You need a psychologist and quick.

[Doha]

Schooled 

[Paul6754]

1 hour ago, Andyregs said:

Ok, not nasa? what about all these organisations? Not sure if you bothered checking. Are these ‘scientists’ too?

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

American association for the advancement of science

American chemical society 

American geophysical union

American medical association 

American meteorological society

The geological society of America 

 The us national society of sciences 

the us global change research program 

The IPCC (“The industrial activities that our modern civilization depends upon have raised atmospheric carbon dioxide levels from 280 parts per million to 400 parts per million in the last 150 years. The panel also concluded there's a better than 95 percent probability that human-produced greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have caused much of the observed increase in Earth's temperatures over the past 50 years.”)

These 200 worldwide scientific organisations 

http://www.opr.ca.gov/facts/list-of-scientific-organizations.html

Remind me which YouTube channel you use again?

 

 

Ahh the IPCC, The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, set up to to prove the link between CO2 and global warming/climate change and still hasn't been able to so and you drink it all in like a little puppy as you're unable to make an informed judgement  for yourself on the topic.  Show the data/evidence on which they base that conclusion rather than just copy and paste an abstract.

So now you and the IPCC are saying it isn't just CO2 but NO and CH4 as well and to be pedantic thhere's a couple of others that are usually cited.  Also,the IPCC and you omitted the most prevalent and one of the most powerful green house gas of them all in their conclusion which is............, who's greenhouse gas effect dwarfs all those cited by the IPCC.

The same UN IPCC who's secretary general stood up at the recent UN conference on Climate Change and told bare faced lies about a pacific island group and sea level rise among other climate lies.

I like this Youtube Chanel as I'm a Member of the American Chemical Society and two British equivalents.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodward–Hoffmann_rules

Now let's have you post the graph/evidence of the corellation between CO2 and average global temperature over millions of years which Toyah alluded to since you wish to get into the discussion.

[Andyregs]

11 minutes ago, Paul6754 said:

Ahh the IPCC, The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, set up to to prove the link between CO2 and global warming/climate change and still hasn't been able to so and you drink it all in like a little puppy as you're unable to make an informed judgement  for yourself on the topic.  Show the data/evidence on which they base that conclusion rather than just copy and paste an abstract.

So now you and the IPCC are saying it isn't just CO2 but NO and CH4 as well and to be pedantic thhere's a couple of others that are usually cited.  Also,the IPCC and you omitted the most prevalent and one of the most powerful green house gas of them all in their conclusion which is............, who's greenhouse gas effect dwarfs all those cited by the IPCC.

The same UN IPCC who's secretary general stood up at the recent UN conference on Climate Change and told bare faced lies about a pacific island group and sea level rise among other climate lies.

I like this Youtube Chanel as I'm a Member of the American Chemical Society and two British equivalents.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodward–Hoffmann_rules

Now let's have you post the graph/evidence of the corellation between CO2 and average global temperature over millions of years which Toyah alluded to since you wish to get into the discussion.

So just to be clear. All 200+ scientific organisations are liars? Or perhaps psychotic Marxists? Like every Jews agency bar Fox News. 

[toyahw]

I don't know why I waste my breath on rabid ignorant idiots. Upper case is the last refuge of the internet scoundrels.

Let me take this slowly. Your argument is there is no evidence of cause and effect. There was a massive increase in C02 and temp increase. Clearly demonstrated in the records. This coincided with mass volcanic eruptions. So your logic says, increased C02  led to volcanic eruptions. Not vice versa? Nuts.

Why you are so rabid over this defies me. Agree to disagree and call it a draw that pumping <ovf censored> in the atmosphere is a bad plan.

You made a ridiculous comment about the amount of C02. A small part of the atmosphere. But the largest part, Nitrogen is passive. So double the amount of C02, by your reckoning this makes bugger all difference. Still a very small proportion of the atmosphere. But it doubles the amount causing, or potentially causing, the problem.

Do you want to take the risk? Or does it make sense to cut it down?  Seeing as with a few changes to our life styles this is easily done? 

 

[Andyregs]

https://ams.confex.com/ams/Annual2006/techprogram/paper_100737.htm

[Paul6754]

21 hours ago, Andyregs said:

So just to be clear. All 200+ scientific organisations are liars? Or perhaps psychotic Marxists? Like every Jews agency bar Fox News. 

No, some have different opinions as I do.

The Chem. Form for Nitrous Oxide is N2O....lol.