climate change

[Ununionized]

And as far as us all being stoners... I've got some pretty decent sat/hybrid smoke, I take a few puffs and I'm on. That's all I can say about it LoL

 

[Ununionized]

As SOON as one of you who believes in this comes up with your own step by step process in which the light blocking freezing cold bath becomes a heater, you'll be able to put all this

FEAR and
UNCERTAINTY and
DOUBT

behind.

I don't
FEAR a biodiverse, warm, green world.

I'm not
UNCERTAIN about that at ALL. ICE ages KILL. END-0-of-STORY-0.

And I don't
DOUBT
that you're WRONG, because every word you say, from the point when you say ''assume the sky is a heater'' to ''And if this WORLD gets any WARMER and GREENER it's going to be an ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEM'' is DEMONSTRABLY falsehood.

People who have been fed FAKE PHYSICS all come around - wondering why everyone won't just GIVE IN

to their FEAR.
to their UNCERTAINTY.
to their DOUBT.

It's GuBMuNT F.U.D. from the GuBMuNT ScKooL. Where the CHIEF PROFESSOR got CANNED when HE and MANAGEMENT of FOUR SEPARATE RESEARCH CAMPUS/ WEATHER ORGANIZATIONS, got caught SCAMMING FAKE WEATHER/CLIMATE reports. ***FOR T W E L V E YEARS.***

Demonstrably so, - their NAME is ALL OVER it.

Just like it's ALL OVER every bit of science saying POT is like HEROIN.

Pot isn't like heroin. Pot isn't worse for you than methamphetamine(s) The sky isn't a heater.

The sky is a LIGHT BLOCKING BATH which then conductively distributes the COOLED planet's REMAINING ENERGY, - the energy left after the GREEN HOUSE GASES COOL it - to a LARGER radiating SURFACE than if there was no atmosphere making the surface cooler

by blocking light arriving, scrubbing what energy does arrive off, before it can glow off at a higher unwashed temp.

 

[Adze]

Definitive proof: "Brevity is the soul of wit"

 

[Ununionized]

Hence TRUE thermodynamics' eternal challenge to these Therm-0-Billies:

''Show everyone another sun lit rock made hotter by immersion IN a frigid bath of sun blocking refrigerant, than NOT in that bath or YOU'RE a FRAUD.''

Definitive proof: "Brevity is the soul of wit"

 

[Dropped Cat]

Climate scientists aren't claiming that humans are creating energy.

Humans are trapping more energy by increasing the concentration
of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

 

[Dropped Cat]

...link?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/131118193127.htm

 

[Ununionized]

The earth's a rotating sphere in vacuum lit by a light. Without an atmosphere it gets 100% available light at that distance.
Energy in is radiant mode gain
Energy out is radiant mode loss.

As soon as you add an atmosphere
you have to start processing changes in energy handling.

The FIRST thing you have to do is account for losses from sunlight just incidentally colliding with air molecules. The blue sky overhead is that. Blue light hitting oxygen, is kicked out in all directions, creating a thin haze outside the atmosphere and the blue sky we see overhead in daylight but don't see really, at night, so much.

Dropped Cat. This is not a trick, this is not a parlor joke, watch the birdie. Starting right
now:
The next thing to account for is the 17-20% SCATTERING LOSSES created by:___________ Created by what.
GREEN HOUSE GAS COOLANTS.
They COOL us by 17-20% scattering/absorption COOLING.

Let's say there were NO green house gases. Then the small amount of scattering by oxygen would be all of that scattering. And 17% MORE ENERGY would REACH the EARTH'S SURFACE.

Let's say we put in enough to block say - 1% sunlight in.

1% cooling. YES or NO?

Add more. Enough to block say - 10% energy to surface.

That's 10% what? diffraction/scattering/absorption COOLING.

Add more. Enough to block say - 20% energy to surface.
That's what the situation is NOW.
GREEN HOUSE GASES have blocked 20% energy to earth.

No? Yeah. That's the situation.
Now. What would HAPPEN if we suspended enough GREEN HOUSE GASES to CREATE 21% ENERGY R.E.D.U.C.T.I.O.N.?

Further AMPLIFICATION of the SCATTERING/ABSORPTION LOSSES that led to 20% energy REDUCTION - COOLING?

Or ''MAGICAL GREEN HOUSE GAS HEATING!''

How did the Green House Gases create 20% energy reduction COOLING?
By
Simply
Existing.

End of Story. When you put in enough to create 10%, then 15%, then 20% LOSSES you created 10%, then 15%, then 20%
COOLING.
COOLING is what you created and when you add enough to block 21% - what will you create more of? More COOLING?

Or magical green house gas heater-in-the-sky-isms, so you have to send the government money because you used fire and made the sky hot?

What did you just create when you added MORE of the
GREEN HOUSE GASES that created the FIRST 20% COOLING?

Now. The GREEN HOUSE GAS COOLING LOSSES are accounted for along with oxygen there's

CONDUCTION COOLING. All gases participate, Green House Gas water, leads in cooling per mole.

Then CONVECTION COOLING.
All gases participate, Green House Gas water ALONE
UNIQUELY CREATES the MODE of COOLING within the convection effect of PHASE CHANGE REFRIGERATION.

Green House Gas water COOLS by EVAPORATING.
It rises like other gases to emit energy, and CONDENSE:
CHANGING phase a SECOND TIME to return to the surface
FASTER
than if it remained gas.

So - without the government here to hold your hand, and tell you what to say - YOU say.

Explain how the gases creating 17% COOLING off the TOP
and CREATING a mode of REFRIGERATION
and LEADING in COOLING per MOLECULE in the OTHER mode

are a heater.

Climate scientists aren't claiming that humans are creating energy.

Humans are trapping more energy by increasing the concentration
of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

I didn't tell you, you're dumb. I told you, that all you have to do, is look at what you're saying and I'll tell you again.

If you believe in this all you have to do, is explain ANY PLACE at ANY TIME that ANY BODY
EVER
made the temperature of an object warmed with light
had it's temperature RISE by putting it in a COLD light blocking bath.

NAME it. I'll wait and YOU go FIND that.

If NOT then - what is that when someone says something about which they' HAVE to know if they're lying.

That's called FRAUD when people do that.

It's called FRAUD when they tell you of an effect and THEY CAN'T REPRODUCE it

and THEY CAN'T EVEN MAKE YOU BELIEVE somebody MIGHT have produced it anywhere, because IT'S so WACKO.

''So THEN we PUT the WARM ROCK in the COLD, REFRIGERATED, LIGHT BLOCKING BATH, and...boY, HoWDY YeW shoulda SEEN the TiMPaCHURe CLIMB, YaW! HoooWEEE THiM THAiR... wuz some POW'urFuL BackerDiSTiCaL Rays, YaW! PoWuR'FuL!"

No? That sounds REAL to you?

 

[Ununionized]

So like I told the guy above there - if YOU think you can get past SENTENCE ONE
then YOU do that:

(1) Explain how YOU think a FREEZING COLD BATH blocking 20% of SUN
to a SUN WARMED ROCK
made that ROCK HOTTER
when it was IN that FRIGID refrigerated light blocking BATH,
than when it was being WARMED by 20% more SUN LIGHT, and was NOT in the REFRIGERATED BATH.

That's your ONE sentence ''END of the BULLSHOOT'' on that.

This isn't negotiable. You either have to explain that or that movement's a fraud.

This is about a FRIGID BATH blocking LIGHT to a LIGHT WARMED ROCK.

YOU tell us how blocking MORE light
and scrubbing with a FRIGID refrigerated bath, makes the temperature WARMER,
THAN WHEN THERE WAS NO BATH, and FULL SUN to WARM the ROCK.

Seriously: this isn't complicated, or difficult, or anything. It's a matter of some men being uncovered committing temperature adjustment fraud and when they were made famous in a movie they started explaining themselves.

What you see above is what they say makes them among the SMARTEST men on the PLANET. The men who can't tell you what the weather will do for TWELVE YEARS in a ROW and had to LIE to the entire WORLD.

''The ''SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY would COME DOWN ON ME IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS if I SAiD the WORLD COOLED since 1 9 9 8. OK it HAS but it's only 7 years' data, etc etc.

In 2010 he confessed AGAIN under pain of JAIL.

It's scientific fraud is what it is or - hey - SHOW US some place in the history of mankind where the ABOVE is practiced by ANY body ANY where.

 

[Baked Alaskan]

Yes 1998 was a very hot year. So misleading in the media by conservatives, especially Cruz.

There are tens of thousands of peer reviewed scientific papers proving humans have a detrimental effect on the climate through pollution. I think there is only one peer reviewed scientific paper disproving the human effect on climate.

There are lots of Koch brother reviewed papers though. All bs.

I know I shouldn't post on this bs, but the science is sooo one sided I don't understand the opposition.

 

[DuskrayTroubador]

Yes 1998 was a very hot year. So misleading in the media by conservatives, especially Cruz.

There are tens of thousands of peer reviewed scientific papers proving humans have a detrimental effect on the climate through pollution. I think there is only one peer reviewed scientific paper disproving the human effect on climate.

There are lots of Koch brother reviewed papers though. All bs.

I know I shouldn't post on this bs, but the science is sooo one sided I don't understand the opposition.

The aliens will be impressed by our ability to play devil's advocate.

 

[Ununionized]

Alaskan 98 is the year GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES started LYING committing institutional scientific fraud at PRODIGIOUS levels.

That's where the 1 9 9 8 comes in. It stopped warming then.

People that want you to believe in that sh** want you to ''just IGNORE the fact THOSE PEOPLE STARTED COMMITTING FRAUD AT THAT POINT!! They HATE COOL SCIENCIE PEEPUL !!


Government employees were telling people - Oh - it's gonna be the END if we don't DO something these TEMPS keep going UP and UP and UP.

They got CAUGHT: they were LYING for 7, THEN 12, then 15 YEARS.
LYING.
EVERY single DAY about it getting WARMER when it simply WASN'T.

Phil Jones gave his excuse - ''The SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY WOULD COME DOWN on ME in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS if I said the world COOLED since 1998.
OK IT HAS but it's just ... about seven years of data, not statistically significant.

Then 2009 - Heads of FOUR meteorological groups seen LYIN: issuing FALSE PRESS RELEASES.

Yes 1998 was a very hot year. So misleading in the media by conservatives, especially Cruz.

There are tens of thousands of peer reviewed scientific papers proving humans have a detrimental effect on the climate through pollution. I think there is only one peer reviewed scientific paper disproving the human effect on climate.

There are lots of Koch brother reviewed papers though. All bs.

I know I shouldn't post on this bs, but the science is sooo one sided I don't understand the opposition.

Your all or nothing belief is kinda funny, but - here's the deal -

first off - nobody who believes in a GHGE can predict what will happen with a thermometer. This is always a sign when the 'sciences' ''experts'' can't predict what happens to a THERMOMETER with more and less light put on it.

So the first thing to do is check and see if they're telling the truth Well obviously they're not.

Second thing is, - is there ANY INDICATION ANYWHERE in HISTORY that CO2 CREATED poor LIVING conditions, for - ANYTHING?

Third thing is - is there ANY INDICATION ANYWHERE in HISTORY that a WARM, GREEN EARTH is BAD for biodiversity.

YOU may not realize what ENERGY MARKETS scamming looks like but HERE is what it looks like:

GEORGE SOROS started a religion. a religion of LOVING Gaia or earth and NOT polluting.
He told his followers that coal is the devil and that NOBODY who had any DIGNITY or LOVE for GAIA would have that shit in their portfolio.

Remember 'OCCUPY' movement? That was George.

So GEORGE had THOUSANDS of various people out throwing rocks at their OWN investment guy. ''Divest my portfolio of the DEVIL FIRE! (coal)
MONTHS this goes on. ''DIVEST of the DEVIL FIRE it's DESPICABLE.!
sO EVENTUALLY the price goes down, THESE PEOPLES' INVESTMENT GUYS DO WHAT THEY SAY: PUT the stuff out for sale a DIME on the DOLLAR.

Who comes along and buys up a million and a half shares of DEVIL FIRE?

LoL George Soros, the man who had them out there in the freezing cold, throwing rocks at their and their own MOMS' investment guy, ''get rid of the devil coal''

their ANTI COAL RELIGION FOUNDER came along and BOUGHT it all.

It's a SCAM to bilk these public school educated people out of everything they have left, basically.

Their medical care belongs to the TAX COLLECTOR

Their POT medicine is ruled by that SAME MEDICAL GROUP AS

''LIKE HEROIN.'' The PEOPLE who now RUN your medicine.

DOMA was the law of the land till just a COUPLE years ago.

When GOVERNMENT starts screaming about the DEVIL they're lying basically and they're lying about this. There's gonna be no POLLUTION clean up, there's gonna be BILLIONS spent so YOU
can have somebody tell you that since you make fire the sky gets hot so you owe them money.

But the sky DOESN'T get hot. ONE LOOK at WORLD TEMPS right after WWII shows you that.

You can't ''HEAT a sun warmed rock through placing it in a sun blocking bath of cold refrigerant.'' It's a scam. Pure and simple.

And a lot of people worry, it'll turn out like pot law did. Started out as a SCAM to CHANGE markets: Democrats wanted NEW energy technologies so they DESTROYED the NATIONAL HEMP commodities industry to install NYLON and POLYPROPYLENE because america's farmers were too backward for FDR.

So now many years later people are shot in the head over pot. MILLIONS upon MILLIONS CRIMINALIZED. Did it START like this?

Of course not. But it winds up with YOU and ME logging in ANONYMOUSLY world wide, out of FEAR of the GOVERNMENT

and their SCIENCE SCAM. That pot is like heroin. What does the DEA guy say about you? And me? ''MEDICAL MARIJUANA IS A JOKE.''

Not SHOOTING CHILDREN in the HEAD is a JOKE.
The IDEA POT is a MEDICINE is ''a Joke.''

THIS GUY
and the GUY in CHARGE of YOUR MEDICINE
both believe that POT is like HEROIN and that the MANY CRITICAL PEER REVIEW PAPERS, from The World's TOP research institutions, SAY so.

And that leaves YOU with : now what?

Now, scurry around the planet hiding because you know pot isn't like heroin.

Well you're generation's about to get a big version of ''pot is like heroin '' V 2 if the Federal Government gets it's way.

 

[igrowone]

And as far as us all being stoners... I've got some pretty decent sat/hybrid smoke, I take a few puffs and I'm on. That's all I can say about it LoL

i never thought i would say this
but some people really should not smoke cannabis
not after reading through the 100(or so) deranged posts on this thread

 

[Meraxes]

Do you realize we are a bunch of stoners with short attention spans...

........what?

 

[Ununionized]

You never thought you'd see Phil Jones admit three times the world stopped cooling in 1 9 9 8, one of those times, under threat of going to jail.

i never thought i would say this
but some people really should not smoke cannabis
not after reading through the 100(or so) deranged posts on this thread

And the world's #1 climatology office admit it's true through issuing a press release: with THREE PAPERS, analyzing how well
THEY know
YOU know
THEY know
it's true.

Giving you, the zombie-like, authority charmling
a long list of things that they noted alarming
not wanting to underestimate any harming
press release updates were hurried and swarming
They:
THOUGHT it was warming
SCREAMED it was warming
THREATENED it was warming
but - it wasn't really, warming
it just seemed like the warming
was still gonna keep on warming
'til there was such major warming
it was kinda like there was warming
so they just kept on declaring warming
figuring, - it was sure to resume warming
they erased peoples' careers over warming
that could not have ever even been warming
because "Green House Gases" created warming
always was thermodynamic law violating warming
which explains then why there has been no warming.
So it's really okay they fraudulently had faked warming.
Because if you were too dumb to know it wasn't warming,
Then really, it was just exactly like it really had been warming,
So it's exactly like, your using fire actually has the sky warming
So SEND them YOUR MONEY unless you want more fake warming.

Yeah that makes PERFECT sense, and ALSO, notice EVERY line ends, in 'warming.'

That's how you know: it's critical peer reviewed, SIGHNTS.

LoL !

 

[Dropped Cat]

Sunlight heats a material such as water or a brick primarily because
the long wavelength, or infrared, portion of the sun's radiation.

The warm ground radiates infrared photons (Wein's Law).

Most of the infrared photons emitted by the warm ground get absorbed
by the atmosphere on their way out, heating the atmosphere.

Molecules of CO2 absorb energy from infrared (IR) radiation. The energy
from the photon causes the CO2 molecule to vibrate. the molecule gives
up this extra energy by emitting another infrared photon.

The more CO2 in the atmosphere, the warmer it gets.

Good stuff, keep it coming.

 

[Ununionized]

when you finish up CONVINCINGLY with ''And that's how the much colder light blocking refrigerated bath,

made the light warmed rock, EVEN HOTTER,

than when it WASN'T in the FREEZING BATH,

and was warmed, with more sunlight!''

Your rambling walk around the Magic Gas Rosie won't violate thermodynamics.

Sunlight heats a material such as water or a brick primarily because
the long wavelength, or infrared, portion of the sun's radiation.

The warm ground radiates infrared photons (Wein's Law).

Most of the infrared photons emitted by the warm ground get absorbed
by the atmosphere on their way out, heating the atmosphere.

Molecules of CO2 absorb energy from infrared (IR) radiation. The energy
from the photon causes the CO2 molecule to vibrate. the molecule gives
up this extra energy by emitting another infrared photon.

The more CO2 in the atmosphere, the warmer it gets.

Good stuff, keep it coming.

When you show us all ONE other time in the history of all things,

someone heated a light-warmed rock hotter PUTTING it in a light blocking bath of frigid refrigerants,
than BEFORE it was put in it,

you'll have shown it happened. Once we all verify it being done.

 

[Finepointcanon]

LOUD NOISES!!!

 

[Betterhaff]

Edit

 

[Finepointcanon]

I can't be bothered to read all those posts with weird-ass formatting and CAPS EVERYWHERE but is that dude saying it's good to have ever increasing levels of co2 in the atmosphere? Maybe I misread...

 

[Skinny Leaf]

I would suggest consulting with an expert on the matter.