Off Topic Climate Change

You are ignorant and stupid though those are two of your more likeable traits.

 

So they are just doing it for the money

 

yes, you claimed that big oil is conspiring against climate for money.
Now you are saying they are not getting into far more profitable renewable.. for money

So in a matter of 4 posts you claim that big oil is denying climate for money AND supporting climate but not for money.

Did you bang your head or are you drinking?

 

@PISKIE You're on a fishing expedition you ****

I do not believe for one second you are that stupid! Not when there has never been evidence as far as I am aware, that you are that stupid.

 

I think Disney test some of their new creations on here.

 

@PISKIE is def on the wum here imo

 

I haven't been following this thread, I'll have to have a proper read and see how much of a mad **** you actually are first.

 

I knew it you bastard !

 

****ing hell, you're showing a lot of limitations in your research there.

 

Citation?

me n the Pisk goes way back to my BBF days, the pisk is alwight

 

Careful, once pulled in, it's hard to get out of the ****e

 

Yeah I'm never sure whether to give these threads the time they need. If you're dealing with somebody who's open to listening to a view that doesn't support their own, it's sometimes worth it. But if you're dealing with a subscriber to shape shifting interdimensional lizards who have infiltrated the Royal Family, then it's probably best to just go and do the washing up instead.

 

CO2 is only a cold gas if it has been pressurised and cooled.

But you make an excellent point that CO2 absorbs energy in the infra red.

 

I'm afraid phddee has thrown everything from tampered reports, fake news articles and unreachable web pages at me in his pursuit of 'the truth'. You'll also notice how every post has to end with an insult to boost his ego.

It's why there is so little point in genuine engagement

 

Quick question, if CO2 is so important why can unused carbon credits be sold?

Surely every credit not used should be a bonus to the climate.

 

that's because the carbon credit scam is obviously a scam.

It's a system of wealth redistribution.

Rich nations buy up credit from poor nations, and rich nations keep producing and the corrupt govs of banana republics just pocket the credit cash.

It has nothing to do with environment or climate Diego, it never had.

please log in to view this image

please log in to view this image

Neither of the two above images are dishonest or untrue, they both have said these things, Figueres constantly blabbed about destroying capitalism


History,, Lysenkoism was communist science that demanded nature conform to the proletariat. Millions died.

Now we have communists again, going after the best economic system the planet has ever had, that has lifted more out of poverty than any other system ever by a MASSIVE Margin

There are far worse environmental threats than CO2, or AGW, and they get almost no attention.

Every year most of the CO2 is consumed/aborbed and only 3% to 5% of that yearly cycle is our emissions.

please log in to view this image

****ing junk science.

In 10 years not one person has ever been able to give me any evidence, none, including Loony lefty there as well.

They cant even tell you how much is human caused change and how much is natural.

Land changes have infinitely more impact than CO2 ever will. Fact
In fact China's land changes have caused warming that would overwhelm any possible Co2 signal for example.

All US warming is in minimum temps, as in the coldest weather is getting not as cold, slowly.
IF AGW was valid both MIN and MAX temps would be increasing but they arent
US max temps have declined since the 1930s and the UK.. lol its hottest century is still the 1700s

These liars will leave out these things, because it doesn't compute
"Climate change" is bollocks, climate will always change no matter what, AGW is a theory without evidence

 

Why is it that reverse image searches on these sorts of discussions always end up on some really weird sites?

 

Why is it that you are talking about images instead of salient points.

but to smash your conspiracy theory, here is a scr shot


I copy paste what image I am looking for from here.

I dont visit the sites

I see you never came back, re New York Times fake temperature data because I was correct. They only use data back to 1960 to hide the fact that the US was warmer before the 60s

even the new Climate report from the WH confirms this to be true, NYT climate news is fake news

 

Image searching for something to back up your view is also pretty ****ty research.