Off Topic Conspiracy Thread
- Thread starter Building 7
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
You know some climatologists have long, meaningful discussions with them?
So called experts are right on everything of course. Aren't they?
Spook I don't know if you did this on purpose but you seem to be mixing Ozone damage and the effect of greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels.
Ozone depletion is a phenomenon caused by a group of gases called clorofluorocarbons (CFCs). These were mainly used in aerosols and refrigerants from the 50s but have largely been phased out and replaced with HFCs. CFCs were/are a powerful greenhouse gas but do not come from fossil fuels. The Ozone layer is responsible for absorbing the majority of the UV radiation, particularly UVB, absorbed by the atmosphere. Therefore with less ozone in the upper atmosphere would mean higher levels of UV radiation reaching the biosphere. The relationship between the ozone hole and global warming is complex.
The burning of fossil fuels produced greenhouse gasses such as CO2 and as you say these are causing a warming of the planet overtime. As others have said there are dozens of factors influencing the temperature of the planet but we have now added human activity to these.
Seems the climatologists he has deep and meaningful discussions with aren't such experts.
Using that word just shows what a prat you are.
Do you mean you haven't had discussions with them on this subject? Another case of you believing everything you read and acting on it?
I would mention a book it is a good job you haven't read but our inconsistent moderator would have another fit.
I had a look at the twin tower conspiracy theories a few years back, but this thread prompted me to start looking again.
There's a lot of additional, and detailed information available now, which makes it pretty much certain that the official view is bollocks.
There's a lot of additional, and detailed information available now, which makes it pretty much certain that the official view is bollocks.
Man-made climate change is hardly any of your concern. You'll be rotting in the ground soon.
Yeah, all of the major climatology and environmental institutes, along with the overwhelming majority of individual scientists, are all pulling our leg when they say human-induced climate change is a major threat.
Not you though, Castro, the free-thinking Daily Mail-reading intellectual who is right on climate change but all the experts are wrong.
Been to a lot of funerals of people younger than me. Be careful when crossing the road on your own.
Yeah, all of the major climatology and environmental institutes, along with the overwhelming majority of individual scientists, are all pulling our leg when they say human-induced climate change is a major threat.
Not you though, Castro, the free-thinking Daily Mail-reading intellectual who is right on climate change but all the experts are wrong.
The Guardian reading intellectual who obviously doesn't wonder why "experts" have been so wrong so many times.
Though, as Stockholm Tiger pointed out, you don't seem able to differentiate between the ozone layer and other things.
I have been crossing the road on my own for decades whilst it will be a new experience for you.
And make sure you aren't abducted and experimented on by aliens. Though perhaps you have and they practised their lobotomy skills on you. Or maybe you are the world's only surviving brain transplant tdonor after one of their experiments.
I don't read the Guardian. Well, that's not true, I read the comments section for a laugh, same with the Daily Mail. I like to laugh at mongs on both ends of the spectrum. Who are these experts that have been wrong so many times? The 97% of scientists who believe climate change is a real threat to our environment, and have used empirical evidence to prove it?
It's ironic, you've mocked people on this thread for believing in conspiracy theories and you seem to get really sensitive when someone criticises the US government but apparently 97% of scientists are not to be trusted. Hilarious.
Irrespective of it being wholly man made, not at all man made ,or somewhere in between, do you think the climate is liable to change, as you seem to agree that it has done cyclically since the earth was formed?
If so, should man do something to prepare things for future, such as consider how and where we build, and how we use finite resources?
See, there you go, using that strawman argument again. I haven't said I believe in aliens, ghosts or UFOs on this thread at all. The only thing I suggested was that the Saudis were heavily involved in the September 11 attacks.
That's great, the people deserve the truth and if more people look into it, we'll get an answer much faster.