Off Topic Dark Matter and other Astronomy information.

Man is contributing to the change in global temperature due to the increased CO2 production since industrialisation began.

The science, logic and stats back it up, and it's viewed as being a fact by the vast majority of scientists.

The only debate should be about the scale of that impact and the future possible ramifications, not the basic premise.

 

So Yet more paragraphs aimed solely at avoiding the simple question posed, what a shocker.

 

In all honesty I am unsure at this moment in time, we seem determined to feck up the planet in numerous ways so would it be a surprise if what we did affected the climate? not really. However, people in positions of power will often exploit their power by scaremongering to gain a financial advantage for themselves, so would it be a surprise if politicians and scientists did this? hell no!

So is it likely that one extreme of the spectrum is right and the other end wrong or is more likely that the truth is somewhere inbetween with some damage and some money making?

 

@Diego

You can actually read in the thread when they latched onto this denier thing. Given they only read links that agree with their uninformed conclusions, they were bound to come across the witch hunt style of the religious zealots. You can pin point when one of them picked up on it and they all followed suit like a pack of brainless clowns

Classic case of group think, the shared mentality unchecked is detrimental to rationale

 

Tobes take your non arguments delusion and fake life somewhere else mate. You wont even debate the topic, and yet you are still here for more gaping.

These sorts of posts you like, science ones, not so much

 

and False Narrative is (tm) loser

 

This ^ is a beauty. It confirms your fragile ego and the fact that something as inane as a meal out and a few drinks challenges your self image, and you you feel the need to call it a lie, as your ego is that fragile that in your dope addled head it somehow makes me superior to you in some way, so therefore you have to decry it as not being real.

Calling me jobless and deluding yourself that you'd somehow 'won' the previous discussion, is your pathetic self affirmation again.

Tragic lad.

 

OK if you say so

Say no more

 

I do say so.

And I'll say what I ****ing like and choose to finish when I'm done btw

Has she given you your bollocks back out of her ****ing handbag this weekend? You gibbering ****ing mess

 

I bet you could cycle a grifter through your gooch after that today.

Who knew asking you to state why you think the science is valid would make you run off looking for an ass suture kit.

please log in to view this image

 

Have you got a cock like a cocktail sausage?

 

Shout if you can, I cant really hear over the sound of the sides of your arsehole slapping together

 

Toby science

please log in to view this image

 

Like me you are not a young man Tobes, do you remember fog (not the mists we have today, the type when you couldn't see your neighbours front door on a terrace street). That was caused by particulates in the air brought about by burning fossil fuels (mainly coal and oil at that time) that also produced CO2 (London is known for its "pea soupers" back in the 18th centuary).
Times have changed, we now have "clean burn" fuels but the CO2 output is pretty much the same. Yes we now use more energy, but we also have more sources of this energy, Hydro, Nuclear etc (we couldn't survive/grow otherwise) but the CO2 production level has not gone up by a vast amount.

Do I believe the Earth is warming, probably (we are still coming out of an ice age)
Do I believe CO2 is responsible, no (too many other factors involved)
Do I believe man is responsible, no

 

This is the outcome of almost everything you post on here

please log in to view this image

 

I remember this one distinctly as you ran away very quickly and refused to go back when it became clear that you had done a quick google and got caught out big time,it was on the jeremy corbyn thread that I have bumped just in case you wanted to see it.

Post no 170 by sisu
The HIV-AIDS Virus was manufactured as a designer bi-product of the US Special Virus programme. The Special Virus programme was a federal virus development programme that persisted in the United States from 1962 until 1978. Dr. Robert Gallo's 1971 Special Virus paper reveals that the United States was seeking a "virus particle" that would negatively impact the defence mechanisms of the immune system

Article on rense.com http://www.rense.com/general38/made.htm
The HIV-AIDS Virus was manufactured as a designer bi-product of the US Special Virus programme. The Special Virus programme was a federal virus development programme that persisted in the United States from 1962 until 1978. Dr. Robert Gallo's 1971 Special Virus paper reveals that the United States was seeking a "virus particle" that would negatively impact the defence mechanisms of the immune system.

You then go on to talk about an up coming court case not realising that you had failed to notice that the rense article was from 2003!

So what did you say about lameness of the highest order?

 

Man is contributing to the change in global temperature due to the increased CO2 production since industrialisation began.
Bold statement backed by nothing, there is no scientific evidence that A CO2 causes A LOT of warming, and B no evidence whatsoever that the CO2 is ours. Temperature goes up so does CO2. The only concidence is from 1980 to 1998, they all matches. Even satellites matched, since then CO2 and temp nowhere near match and satellites and surface temp dont match any more, but only surface temp has been edited to ****.

The IPCC only deals with 1970 onwards, you are talking cack about "since industrialisation began, that was the 1700? Definitely reading utter rubbish on links WE HAVE NO DATA TO SUPPORT THAT OLD WIVES TALE

The science, logic and stats back it up, and it's viewed as being a fact by the vast majority of scientists.
You discussed no science, you posted loads of links from very biased sources many of which backfired, and refusal to discuss your own links. You applied no logic (ignoring inconvenient info and refusing to even discuss it is not logical, dont talk of logic mate)

The only debate should be about the scale of that impact and the future possible ramifications, not the basic premise.
Now you say because you "believe" that something is real there should be no debate, which is far leftist authoritarianism, and obviously wanting government to fix everything for you is pathetic.

in short this is a joke of an explanation, meaningless sloganism picked up from the utter **** you have been reading.

 

You are unwell mate.

You bile here, then bump that on the other thread and then repost it here in a climate change debate.

As much as I argue with Tobes and Astro, they are not weird freaks.

 

Yeah yeah,so what were you saying about "lameness of the highest order"?

 

I gave a theory on why this might have arisen a few pages back.
Peak oil has been reached in a very short period (considering todays use), we do not have anything to replace it yet and governments are panicking.
Climate change could be a good reason to reduce energy use (and tax it, always good for governments) and also stop panic buying and hoarding

Just one theory amongst many, but worth considering