IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

Greenpeace Co-founder No-scientific Proof Humans Are Dominant Cause Warming, Patrick Moore sells soul, joins the MIC

JimMac
post Feb 26 2014, 10:52 PM
Post #1





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 600
Joined: 13-May 09
From: West coaster now in Ontario
Member No.: 4,315



Greenpeace co-founder no-scientific proof humans are dominant cause warming

Right, the poles are melting, and the planet's in the 6th great extinction event but that's just natural. Check those temp records Patrick for the day after 9/11

What an idiot.. sold out to big oil.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
EJT
post Feb 26 2014, 11:38 PM
Post #2





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 14
Joined: 6-August 07
Member No.: 1,622



So, let's see here.

As stated priorly, back before the beginning of the 'Industrial Age,' there was far more CO2 being emitted into the atmosphere than even now, what with all the automobiles, coal-fired power generation plants, what have you.

You may enquire 'How so?' to which I shall reply: Because all day, every day of the year, there were people all over the Earth burning coal, wood, and dung for cooking, and heating, whereas these days, almost all cooking, and heating is either by electrical (includes microwave), or natural gas means. So, there is far, far less CO2 being emitted by humans, even with all those dread 'automobiles, etc.,' inasmuch as those dread automobiles, etc., aren't being driven/flown/propelled 24/7/365.

Yet, with all that CO2 being generated back then, the Little Ice Age happened which severely limited the crop growing seasons, and large swaths of the Earth's populations died from starvation as a result.

"Western Europe experienced a general cooling of the climate between the years 1150 and 1460 and a very cold climate between 1560 and 1850 ..."
http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/lia/little_ice_age.html

And, as an adjunct to that, consider too, that before, during, and after the Medieval Warming period (800-1400 AD), that same situation of burning wood, coal, and dung existed; so if CO2 causes warming, then the Little Ice Age should never happened. And, if the people living back then used ~even more~ fuel during the Little Ice Age in order to keep warm, then the Little Ice Age should have been stifled altogether.

See also: http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/lia/vi...during_mwp.html

Finally, if CO2 is supposed to be linked to cooling, then how was it that there occurred the Medieval Warm Period with all that wood, coal, and dung burning going on just ~PRIOR~ to that epoch? One simply can't have it both ways, i.e., the same agent of cause simply CANNOT produce diametrically opposite effects.

The obvious answer is just this: CO2 has ZERO deleterious effect on climate temperatures, and certainly ~no~ aspect of <ahem> 'Climate Change.' And as the Brits are wont to declare: The proof is in the pudding!

The Vostok, Antartica ice core samples don't lie. The levels of CO2 in them are gas trapped in the ice when that ice formed, way back then. Those levels have been ascertained repeatedly, without fail. In fact. they were far, far higher than now, and there were BOTH glaciers, AND later, NO polar ice sheets with the very same level of CO2, then your hypothesis doesn't hold up. As before: The same agent of cause simply CANNOT produce diametrically opposite effects.

Of course, if you're going to ignore the obvious, then you'll be guilty of cutting off your nose to spite your face! Your choice. cleanup.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
N2264J
post Feb 27 2014, 10:10 AM
Post #3





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 13
Joined: 5-July 13
Member No.: 7,439



QUOTE (EJT @ Feb 26 2014, 10:38 PM) *
The obvious answer is just this: CO2 has ZERO deleterious effect on climate temperatures, and certainly ~no~ aspect of <ahem> 'Climate Change.'


I'm not a climate scientist so you'll excuse me if I throw down with 98% of them who say (some details may vary):

- it's happening
- we're doing it
- it's going to be bad

By the way, do you fly for a fossil fuel corporation?

This post has been edited by N2264J: Feb 27 2014, 10:14 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Feb 27 2014, 09:40 PM
Post #4





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 951
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (N2264J @ Feb 25 2014, 01:10 PM) *
I'm not a climate scientist so you'll excuse me if I throw down with 98% of them who say (some details may vary):

- it's happening
- we're doing it
- it's going to be bad

By the way, do you fly for a fossil fuel corporation?


Actually EJT is in fact correct.

The questions everybody should ask themselves is this:

What happens to molecules when they become depolarized
and hence loose their vitality?

What happens to the particles that form the molecules that
form the matter or the gasses that becomes depolarized?

Hope you all will find the answers through your own effort!

Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
N2264J
post Feb 28 2014, 11:50 AM
Post #5





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 13
Joined: 5-July 13
Member No.: 7,439



QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Feb 27 2014, 08:40 PM) *
Actually EJT is in fact correct.


Do you fly for a fossil fuel corporation? Are you a lawyer for the tobacco industry?

Look, the jig is up. We're the last country in the world who thinks there is still a "debate" about it.

Pick nits about the details of global warming with someone who still believes there is no link between cigarette smoking and lung cancer and you'll marginalize yourselves right out of the conversation.

Meanwhile, I'll defer to the science.

This post has been edited by N2264J: Feb 28 2014, 11:52 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Feb 28 2014, 02:45 PM
Post #6





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 951
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (N2264J @ Feb 26 2014, 02:50 PM) *
Do you fly for a fossil fuel corporation? Are you a lawyer for the tobacco industry?

Look, the jig is up. We're the last country in the world who thinks there is still a "debate" about it.

Pick nits about the details of global warming with someone who still believes there is no link between cigarette smoking and lung cancer and you'll marginalize yourselves right out of the conversation.

Meanwhile, I'll defer to the science.


Actually there's no link between tobacco and cancer.

Go to post #923 here:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...0&start=920

You have been duped!

Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic


Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st November 2019 - 08:49 PM