Search results

So what percentage of Europe's money went to under-developed nations? He is going to put a price on carbon... So which is it? Is climate change just a tool to move wealth? Or are you perhaps mistaken, and policies and science are not the same thing? :roll:

"Plasma arrives to this planet on a daily basis via birkland currents entering at both poles, plasma you will recall, is ionized matter. You have no problem allowing the admissions of radiant heat (WATTS) so why balk at neutrons, and negative and positive ions, for christ sake you can see...

This, is geologic time: We live within geologic time, but things do not happen around us in geologic time. You can't even see the difference between bronze age and industrial age on a geologic timescale, unless the graph is long enough to go across Canada. So talking about climate shifts in...

Show me how. I want to see calculations for this. Grab a tube of toothpaste and squeeze. Heat and pressure... Watts are derived from the heat. You have it backwards. Constant growth of GDP depends on a limitless supply of inputs. It's as untenable as your idea of boundless earth systems.

Duh. :roll: Show me how geologic time scales dictate decadal or even century scale processes.

LOL, so environmentalists aren't the monolithic group you stated they were earlier... Goal posts are that way smack --------------> :lol:

That's stupid. Of course the planet has fixed capacities. How much land can be farmed? The bath tub is in a room. A room in a house. A house on land. Land on a planet. The planet has support systems with finite horizons. Don't talk so foolishly. How does a volcano produce more mass? The mass...

And what? You're talking about the kinds of changes found in geologic time. Compared to that, our climate over a one hundred year period is very stable. Of course it changes. If it didn't then we wouldn't be interested in studying climate change at all now would we? :idea: Global warming...

:roll: Some people don't even want us to debate this. They prefer to obfuscate enough that the policies aren't debated at all.

This doesn't prove that climate change is natural. First, geologic budgets of carbon don't apply to our timescale. Second, this analogy: A tub is filled three quarters full, and the flow adjusted so that the water exiting the overflow is balanced by the water coming through the faucet. Adding...

That is tough. The marketing board should have some kind of mechanism for that. The farmer could have the same herd size and get more production through genetic gains but then the farm has to pay I assume to get rid of it. That's where the interaction between people and environment gets cloudy...

Catching bull frogs... :D

It can kill the fish.

Pollutant. The EPA called it a pollutant.

Who declared CO2 a toxin?

Well you folks can try to fight volcanoes. Best of luck. Though, it's a fine cause to make those cookies. Half-baked ideas deserve at least half-baked cookies, if not seven twelfths or better baked.

Ball squirms with the best of them.

Are you two planning this con in a treehouse? Who's mom is bringing the cookies?

Another great video from Peter Sinclair: Debunking Lord Monckton Pt. 2 YouTube - Debunking Lord Monckton Part 2

"tons of water held aloft by hot air, you seem to have accepted that without a whimper" Here's an experiment for you. Place a volume of water in a pot. Place it on your stove. Turn element on. Observe.