Thread: Global Warming
View Single Post
Colonel Flagg Colonel Flagg is offline
after enough bourbon ...
Colonel Flagg's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Philadelphia
Old Mar 15th, 2010, 11:20 PM       
Originally Posted by TheCoolinator View Post

Originally Posted by Colonel Flagg View Post
arguing based largely on climate change is documented and real.
Oh come on......

I at least gave more examples then that to support my argument. Real examples from real sources from all over the world. Publicly documented confessions of climate scientists changing numbers to create the appearance of a changing climate because of CO2 emissions. Top scientists that have stopped believing in the myth because of lack of accurate data.
You need to go back and read my previous post for comprehension. You obviously failed Geology or Natural Science somewhere down the line, because you completely missed the Ice Age reference. What you've been pontificating about is the AGW hypothesis, and this is something completely different.

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator View Post

Originally Posted by Colonel Flagg View Post
incidentally generating tons and tons more CO2 than all other pollutants combined
CO2 is not a pollutant.

Pollutant (n.) - any substance, as certain chemicals or waste products, that renders the air, soil, water, or other natural resource harmful or unsuitable for a specific purpose.

You can try living in an enclosed room with only CO2 to breathe, and see how long it takes before you asphyxiate. Pollutants come in many forms, and too much of of anything can be bad for the environment.

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator View Post
CO2 has no affect on the climate. There is no evidence that links CO2 to rising temperatures. The sun controls the heat of the globe as it controls the temperature of every single other celestial body in the solar system.
CO2 is a strong IR absorber, and as the concentration of CO2 goes up, so does its ability in the air to absorb and store heat (for lack of a better term). If global atmospheric CO2 levels reached a sufficiently high level, then yes, they would significantly contribute to the warming of the planet. The key word here, however, is "if". As for the sun controlling the heat of the globe ... well mere words cannot describe the incredible intuitive grasp you have of the obvious.

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator View Post
Global Warming proponents don't care about chemicals, wastes, and spend nuclear fuel rods. They only care about Carbon and they center everything on CO2. I've been saying this from the beginning.
Bullshit. I brought these points up because (drumroll) I agree with this part of your mostly inept argument. We need to look at mankind's impact on the environment from all sources, and CO2 is only one source.

In closing, please take my advice, and reread my previous post for comprehension, scanning all areas for the word "warming". You'll find it does not occur (with one exception - and it's minor). This is intentional.
The future is fun,
The future is fair.
You may already have won!
You may already be there.
Reply With Quote