Who the f-ck elected the UN to set any regulations, taxes and impose fines and most of all geoengineer the planet?
Goal to end fossil fuels by 2050 surfaces in Lima UN climate documents
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
With electronic bank transfers. Transfers of bits and bytes are supposed to FINALLY and ONCE AND FOR ALL stop the earth's climate from changing.
Bank transfers through a Dictatorship cloaked in a guise of unity in saving ourselves from ourselves.
citation request
trumped up denier claim... you know it... you've been shown that's the case... you continue to purposely perpetuate this falsehood.
mice nuts! But let that distract you from the bigger picture!
:mrgreen: more big-picture distraction, hey?
you not "believing"? Easy... it fits the fake-skeptic narrative! You know, the one where all you blustering blowhard types can't discuss/argue a single actual point of related science, while at the same time pumping your own "skeptic cred". Whenever have you followed up on a single piece of misinformation to actually confirm its authenticity/validity? All that passes for "skeptics" on this board is a bunch of C&P wizards plying misinformation taken from denier blogs and/or twitter feeds! Heeelarious.
nation governments did... and, at the UN level, there's no formal geo-engineering being entertained as a part of preventive/adaptive/mitigation pursuits.
no - the requirement is to bring a degree of stability forward via emission reductions! The long-life of already accumulated atmospheric CO2 isn't something that can simply be turned off. Past CO2 impacts on climate change were not human induced... you do recognize the distinction, right?
citation request!
D.B. Eaver world renowned expert in the treatment of CO2 related delusions, specializing in drug therapy and drinking treatments, delusion substitutions and shock administrations. Very resonable rates
You wouldn't know a scientific fact if it bit you on the ***.
Here is some science for you: everything is to be questioned.
When the "scientists" want their detractors thrown in jail, it is not science they are doing.
When the "scientists" sue their detractors, it is not science they are doing.
When the "scientists" e-mail each other on how to fudge their research, it is not science they are doing.
When the "scientists" e-mail each other on how to suppress any opposition, it is not science they are doing.
When the promoters of this "science" habitually, consistently, and continually do everything they warn us not to do, then only an idiot believes their con.
Colpy this is not the right approach. If you yell at them they climb higher into the tree. Speak softly in a very controled manner and offer a banana or some other bright coloured fruit, and smile, they soon approach close enough for the tranquilizer gun. A recovery can only begin with trust.
says the doofus, you... who thundered forward with claims about surface temperature and you didn't even understand the basic distinction as to what ocean water depth is included within that measure/dataset! You haven't a clue about anything and your past posts are exhibit A in that regard.
of course; it's a fundamental tenet of science. It's unfortunate that fake-skeptics and deniers, like you, feel questioning doesn't apply to your astute understanding of denier blog science!
Colpy BS! I expect this is you once again drawing reference to your same mentioned 'out-of-context' comment on Suzuki! But hey, even if he said it the way you're fabricating it... does a one-instance circumstance give you the latitude to attach this to your "all encompassing scientists" designation?
a handful of court cases involving a small grouping of... what... a half-dozen or so scientists??? Is this you taking additional liberty in pumping up your BS? Here's the thing Colpy... apparently deniers are in such a huff that some scientists have decided to push back and sue for defamation - go figure!
if you're referring to 5 years ago Hackergate, this is more Colpy BS! For amusement sake, I challenge you to state just what incident you're referring to... and be prepared to support it. Again, even if your trumped up claim had legs, you're talking about, what... a couple of scientists? Yet another case of Colpy taking extreme liberty and doing a broad-brush wide sweeping attachment of that to "all scientists"! Of course... that's what Colpy and his ilk do!
now... this just has to be Hackergate! And I expect it follows on a reference you made just days back; one that reflected on presumed journal "gate keeping". As I did then, as I'll do again, I'll label that related comment one of frustration about the failings of a paper... and I'll again ask you what happened to the paper in question? You know, the paper that did appear... that wasn't suppressed! So, again... more Colpy BS! It's what you do... it's what you're all about! Yet another case of Colpy taking extreme liberty and doing a broad-brush wide sweeping attachment of that to "all scientists"! Of course... that's what Colpy and his ilk do!
jibberish! Oh wait... you said "promoters"!!! Here's the thing Colpy, as member 'mentalfloss' tried to impress upon you, none of that has anything to do with the science... no matter how hard you try to distract and deflect away from your failed denier science!
Anyone who thinks ending the use of fossil fuels by 2050 is either possible or reasonable has rocks in their f**king head! 
oh my! I provide you a reference that shows your claim is bullshyte... and surprise, surprise... you come back with a "go fetch". Of course you do! Another member 'taxi' claim busted! :mrgreen:
Anyone who thinks ending the use of fossil fuels by 2050 is either possible or reasonable has rocks in their f**king head!
of course! But don't you (or others) try to attach that to anyone other than the handful of country reps who wanted that to appear in the draft! Of course, it would never end up in a final document. At least a couple of times in recent past posts, as I recall, I've spoken of legitimate organizations that have put forward 40-50 year 'roadmap' pursuits that are intended to map out a strategy approach to achieve a lessening dependence on fossil-fuels... at the end of that period, there is no question that fossil-fuels are still a part of the mix, but a significantly lessened part. How could it be anything else?
beav, beav... I am imperious to your thunderdolt best! And I did get quite the chuckle out of your recent post referring to "Professor Plimer"!
Post #38.
Anything you post is BS. I live in the area so I know what is going on.
Does your mommy know you are playing in an adult forum?
The windmills were rejected by the faithful long before suzuki built is island mansion. But you were still in diapers then.
huh! "Post #38"??? Why... that's your original post where you make the unsupported claim. Your claim remains unsupported; meanwhile, I provided you a linked reference, directly written by Dr. Suzuki, that confirms you claim is BS!.
so... let's recap: you made an unsubstantiated claim, I called you on it by asking you to provide a supporting reference... I did so while at the same time providing you a link to an article written by Dr. Suzuki... an article that shows your unsubstantiated claim is BS. You came back only to insult and offer up a vague reference to "Campbell River newspapers"... you couldn't actually be bothered to provide a direct reference, you simply implied "go fetch". And now, why, you simply complete your jerking circle by referring back to your original post! Is that you being the implied "adult"?
as clearly laid out in the prior post recap... twas not I speaking da BS! That sir, that is you... you are one BS arteeest!
note: this is a graph-free zone! :mrgreen:
BE HAPPY you planet saviour you, god bless you, saving even the ignorant deniers like me and the other heritics here in this greenhouse. Your imperviousity is total and complete.
