Last time Earth hit these CO2 levels there were trees at the South Pole

[Moosakofsky]

LOL!

You know why Venus is warming?

BECAUSE IT HAS A GREENHOUSE EFFECT.

Caused by humans no doubt.

 

[LV426]

Actually I did. I co-authored two papers, one in undergrad and one as a resident

Oh word?

So we can read these papers then!

Link them up...let's check your work, shall we?

 

[Teflon Don]

I don't believe any of this.

I think you're lying because you don't want to have to argue that Climate Change is destroying the planet.

I don’t care if you believe me. You don’t have to

 

[LV426]

With that experience I read these so called climate papers with a little more scrutiny than a politician.

I don't believe your sincerity.

What scrutiny did you apply?

Why do Conservatives have to fake personal histories on anonymous message boards?

 

[Teflon Don]

This is typical Conservatism; when presented with an argument to which you have no credible, valid response, you invent personal backstories, embellishing your given circumstances to lend your shitty argument credibility it doesn't otherwise have.

There is no fucking way in hell you would ever prove these claims about yourself on these boards.

No. Fucking. Chance.

It doesn’t matter if you believe me or not

Regardless. I don’t believe in man made global warming.

For the record. I didn’t buy my cabin for TEOTWAWKI. That wasn’t my original intent. I was just looking for a hunting cabin. Mineral rights have always been important to me. Many people don’t fight for it.

Of course I needed a year round water source. It was fortuitous that I was able to use it for hydroelectricity

 

[Teflon Don]

If you're going to bullshit about yourself, at least have the good sense to make it believable.

What is so unbelievable about owning land in the mountains? You city folk are funny

 

[Moosakofsky]

Oh word?

So we can read these papers then!

Link them up...let's check your work, shall we?

Why don't you ask me my name, age, SSN ? You think I'm as stupid as our dearly departed Frank was?
An alternative is for you to check the criteria for getting published in Compendium then scrutinize most climate papers.
Actually some are very well done and meet stringent requirements for publication but there's no political conclusion in them, only scientific conclusions.

 

[Cypress]

Actually I did. I co-authored two papers, one in undergrad and one as a resident. With that experience I read these so called climate papers with a little more scrutiny than a politician. Well, a lot more actually. I've not seen one of these papers that could pass the criteria needed to get published in Compendium, e.g.
Translation: I can't find one either.

If you have uncovered a vast conspiracy, a climate hoax that has somehow duped the governments of the world, and all of the world's leading prestigious science organizations with expertise in climate, I suggest you report your findings to EPA, IPCC, White House, National Academy of Sciences, et al. Poste haste.

Your findings are truly remarkable, and if true, you need to present your research to science organizations and policy makers before this hoax gets out of hand.

 

[Teflon Don]

It was 80 degrees in Atlanta in January.

The next day, it was 50 degrees.,

The next day, back up to 80.

A couple days later, snow.

A week after that, 80 degrees again.

Stop.

So rapid changes in temperature and ZERO calamity.


Thanks for proving my point.

 

[Teflon Don]

Bizarre. Why would you think that short-term variability would mean we have no problem with long-term changes?

Species, ecosystems, and human societies have ways of dealing with seasonal temperature variations, through short-term coping mechanisms. But that doesn't mean that longer-term changes of that sort can be adapted to the same way.



I see it as more of a general misanthropy, rather than specific to that group. If you cared about ANYONE you'd care about global warming.

If you believe in evolution then you have to believe they will adapt.

You do believe in evolution don’t you? Or do you deny that science?

 

[Teflon Don]

I can't impact weather in a short-term or targeted way. But since that's not what we were talking about, that's wildly off topic.

Why can’t you impact weather in the short term?

But hey I will give you a long term project.

Here is your challenge. Go out and find an iceberg. Once you find it. I want you to melt it. Use anything you want other than bombs but melt it. Make it disappear. Take as much time as you like

Ready? Go.

 

[countryboy]

The impact of runaway emissions is already upon us. Several cities in the northern U.S., such as Buffalo, Cincinnati and Duluth, are already preparing to receive migrants from states like Florida, where residents are beset with increasing flooding, brutal heat waves, more severe and frequent hurricanes, sea level rise, and a worse allergy season. City planners in the aforementioned cities are already preparing by trying to figure out how to create jobs and housing for an influx of new residents.

Indications of the climate disruption refugee crisis are even more glaring in some other countries.

Large numbers of Guatemalan farmers already have to leave their land due to drought, flooding, and increasingly severe extreme weather events.

In low-lying Bangladesh, hundreds of thousands of people are already in the process of being displaced from coastal homes, and are moving into poverty-stricken areas of cities that are already unprepared to receive the influx of people. Given that 80 percent of the population of the country already lives in a flood plain, the crisis can only escalate with time as sea level rise continues to accelerate.



much more, great links:

https://truthout.org/articles/the-last-time-there-was-this-much-co2-trees-grew-at-the-south-pole/

You're literally too stupid to realize, you just destroyed your own argument. Was man responsible for those CO2 levels, when there were trees at the South Pole? Was it due to "runaway emissions"?

Tell me something, nutsack, is the stupid painful? I mean, does it physically hurt? Just curious.

 

[LV426]

Which one? The one that has 'consensus on consensus' in the title ?

Jesus fucking Christ, are you incapable because you're disabled, or is this who you really are?

The entire revbiew process was two clicks from what I linked you to.

So why are you such a lazy, deficient person? It's because you're a Conservative, isn't it?

 

[LV426]

My reviewer would have crumbled it up in front of me without reading any further if I presented a paper like that.

1. You don't have a reviewer and you never did.
2. You lie about yourself to lend your shit argument credibility it doesn't have on the facts or empirical evidence.
3. Stop posturing; no one buys it and all it does is make you less credible.

Your reviewer would have crumpled up the IPCC Climate Report that was peer reviewed?

Well, sounds to me like you need a new reviewer, or you're making shit up about yourself.

 

[LV426]

My reviewer would have crumbled it up in front of me without reading any further if I presented a paper like that.

This:

^ So when the Climate Deniers are no longer credibly able to argue that there was a vast conspiracy of climate scientists faking the data and perpetrating a hoax, they are left with claiming that they are perfectly fine living with a human-induced climate catastrophe because they can live off the land.

But I actually think you are lying your ass off about being a rugged survivalist fully prepared to survive either climate catastrophe or zombie apocalypse.
When you really think about it, lying is what we have come to expect from the Climate Denier community.

 

[LV426]

Don’t be jealous because I have prepared my children for life’s eventualities and you haven’t

I don't have kids, so strike one.

Strike two, your kids fucking hate you and resent you. They mock you behind your back and they fully intend to stuff you in the cheapest, shittiest, most abusive old folks home they can find because they don't want to deal with you.

Strike three, whenever a Conservative cannot credibly argue their position, they invoke anecdotes they never intend to verify.

 

[LV426]

I don’t care.

Yes you do.

Your entire argument hinges on me believing you.

If your anecdotes are taken off the table, what do you have left to defend yourself? Nothing.

So you make shit up about yourself to paper over the deficits in your arguments.

What a fucking fraud.

 

[LV426]

Caused by humans no doubt.

No, caused by an excess of CARBON in the atmosphere that traps in heat. 96% of Venus' atmosphere is CO2 YOU FUCKING FRAUD.

Some "teacher" you are...what a fucking fraud.

You never taught anywhere, did you?

You're just making that up so your arguments have more credibility.

Be honest...I can tell when you're lying.

 

[Moosakofsky]

If you have uncovered a vast conspiracy, a climate hoax that has somehow duped the governments of the world, and all of the world's leading prestigious science organizations with expertise in climate, I suggest you report your findings to EPA, IPCC, White House, National Academy of Sciences, et al. Poste haste.

I haven't. Never said I did.

Your findings are truly remarkable, and if true, you need to present your research to science organizations and policy makers before this hoax gets out of hand.

The only thing I found was the truly poor criteria required for publication in earth sciences journals. You'd find it too if you bothered to look and compare. Nothing remarkable at all.

 

[Moosakofsky]

No, caused by an excess of CARBON in the atmosphere that traps in heat. 96% of Venus' atmosphere is CO2 YOU FUCKING FRAUD.

Some "teacher" you are...what a fucking fraud.

You never taught anywhere, did you?

You're just making that up so your arguments have more credibility.

Be honest...I can tell when you're lying.

Where'd the 'excess' come from? Venusians driving SUV's?