You might want to look up the differences between organic and inorganic.
Greatest SCAM in History....
Warming Alarmists Redefine What A Hurricane Is So We'll Have More Of Them | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD
Global Warming: still the ‘Greatest Scam in History’
- Thread starter Walter
- Start date
You might want to look up the differences between organic and inorganic.
Greatest SCAM in History....
Warming Alarmists Redefine What A Hurricane Is So We'll Have More Of Them | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD
Is Earth a Living Organism? - Astrobiology Magazine
For those who will answer without even opening the link:-
Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-11 (GEOS-11) image acquired on June 14, 2000. Credit: NOAA
Is Earth really a sort of giant living organism as the Gaia hypothesis predicts? A new discovery made at the University of Maryland may provide a key to answering this question. This key of sulfur could allow scientists to unlock heretofore hidden interactions between ocean organisms, atmosphere, and land — interactions that might provide evidence supporting this famous theory.
The Gaia hypothesis — first articulated by James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis in the 1970s — holds that Earth’s physical and biological processes are inextricably connected to form a self-regulating, essentially sentient, system.
For those who will answer without even opening the link:-
Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-11 (GEOS-11) image acquired on June 14, 2000. Credit: NOAA
Is Earth really a sort of giant living organism as the Gaia hypothesis predicts? A new discovery made at the University of Maryland may provide a key to answering this question. This key of sulfur could allow scientists to unlock heretofore hidden interactions between ocean organisms, atmosphere, and land — interactions that might provide evidence supporting this famous theory.
The Gaia hypothesis — first articulated by James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis in the 1970s — holds that Earth’s physical and biological processes are inextricably connected to form a self-regulating, essentially sentient, system.
Wow! What a credible source?
Happy not worrying what happens to your grand kids. lol.
http://climate.nasa.gov
Interesting how some accept only those sources that agree with how they feel things should be, not how they actually are, ,
I've thought about it a lot. And took a good look at how things were and the way things are now, and I don't think it's a scam. I believe it's very real. Don't want to debate. It just my belief. So Eaglecrack, take your snide comments and ram them up the ole wazoo. 
.
.
I've thought about it a lot. And took a good look at how things were and the way things are now, and I don't think it's a scam. I believe it's very real. Don't want to debate. It just my belief. So Eaglecrack, take your snide comments and ram them up the ole wazoo.
Your insecurity issue must be acting up LittleHo.
Yes selfsame... it is in the interest of the US to have it's coffers raided by the UN and alt-left special interests.
Don't you think that if you're going to talk about science you should know something about it other than "somebody whose word I respect said,"?
We all now know that NOAA fudged the climate change data by not making sufficient corrections for the majority of their data coming from areas of very high and rapid urban growth. The data from satellites since 1979 show no such temperature growth.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2015/images/no slow down in global warming.jpg vs http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_March_2017_v6.jpg
If you are lied to and you do not have sufficient training to be skeptical you simply believe it.
The 97% Consensus is a good example:
From NOAA: "Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources."
Imagine what strength is given to the hypothesis of global warming to have the approval of the AMA?
https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech...sus-data-97-of-scientists-affirm-agw-debunked
https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech...57-global-warming-consensus-cooking-the-books
https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech...-desperate-effort-before-release-of-un-report
The actual science behind CO2 is so rediculous that no real scientist could ever come to the conclusion that one molecule out of every 2500 would change the heat transfer in the open atmosphere. 2/3rds of the heat transfer in the Troposphere is due to conduction/convection which means that CO2 does the same thing as every other type of gas in the atmosphere. And the percentage of CO2 compared to H2O in the atmosphere is 1,000 times less and the heat capacity of water is something on the order of a 1,000 times higher. Furthermore CO2 has extremely narrow and limited bands of energy in which it can absorb energy. And these bands are in the area of emission from both the Sun and the Earth that contain very little energy.
The very idea that CO2 has any effects is laughable on the surface and even more comic upon closer inspection.
Better to just forget about because you ossified fukks and your glorious leader Mr Dumpster Fire will all be dead by the time the real expensive consequences are felt anyway. Happy Birthday to your kids and grand kids though.