More Climate BS...

#3,676
#3,676
OrangeTsar said:
Was listening to NPR last night (unpleasant; but keep an eye on what your enemy is up to).
They were still talking about global warming as if it were a confirmed fact. It was a „report“ on how increased CO2 was allegedly reducing the nutrient content of foods. They were seriously trying to claim that the gas that causes plants to grow is hurting plants. And they wonder why no thinking human takes them seriously anymore.
Click to expand...
They seriously were making the claim that one of required ingredients for photosynthesis is bad?
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider and rikberry31
#3,677
#3,677
swampfoxfan said:
NPR the "enemy " says a lot about you, fear the truth don't you.
Click to expand...
If they think carbon dioxide is bad for plants, while they may not be the type of enemies one needs to shoot, they are enemies like any other moran with some pittance of influence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, marcusluvsvols, StarRaider and 1 other person
#3,678
#3,678
LouderVol said:
I have seen one study on this that actually supports it. my understanding is that the increased CO2 allows the plant to grow/ripen faster, but CO2 doesn't likewise increase nutrient absorbtion/"development" speed in the fruit. and due to that the plant doesn't have as much time to get the fruit as nutrient rich as they otherwise would. kinda like the mega-farms who use chemicals to get fruit ripe at the same time aren't as nutrient rich as home grown less GMO produce.

but that report pointed towards over planting/no crop rotations as a contributor as well.
Click to expand...
Perhaps a case of correlation not causation? But I'd be still be surprised. Sounds like another desperate attempt to keep hope alive by the climate cult.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rikberry31, marcusluvsvols and hog88
#3,679
#3,679
rikberry31 said:
Nutrient content has nothing to do with CO2 levels, it depends on the weather and soil quality. CO2 is absorbed by plants during the day and they release oxygen at night. CO2 is essential for plants, the relationship between plants and animals is perfect and magical.
Anyone who says CO2 is a pollutant is a moron or a liar. We would actually benefit from higher levels of CO2. Facts.
Click to expand...
Wasn't there test some decades back where they actually pump high levels of CO2 into a patch of woods and the results were the plants were significantly better than the control group? Did not feel like looking it up.
 
#3,681
#3,681
GroverCleveland said:
Wasn't there test some decades back where they actually pump high levels of CO2 into a patch of woods and the results were the plants were significantly better than the control group? Did not feel like looking it up.
Click to expand...
Yes, there have been several FACE experiments and the all show the higher CO2 benefits plants. These climate change loonies are always wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#3,685
#3,685
Orangeburst said:
give us some context on the avi and sig..did you get a ride with Blue Angels?
Click to expand...
nope, tribute to the 40th anniversary

VFL Curt Watson and the Movie "Top Gun"

Found this jewel wandering around a rabbit hole on Youtube. Tom Cruise needed a "fam flight" before making the movie "Top Gun." Blue Angel Curt Watson took him up in Blue Angel #7. For whatever reason, this site won't let me do a link to Youtube. Hie thee over there and search: Top Gun: The...
www.volnation.com www.volnation.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland, UT_Dutchman and Orangeburst
#3,686
#3,686
StarRaider said:
nope, tribute to the 40th anniversary

VFL Curt Watson and the Movie "Top Gun"

Found this jewel wandering around a rabbit hole on Youtube. Tom Cruise needed a "fam flight" before making the movie "Top Gun." Blue Angel Curt Watson took him up in Blue Angel #7. For whatever reason, this site won't let me do a link to Youtube. Hie thee over there and search: Top Gun: The...
www.volnation.com www.volnation.com
Click to expand...
is that Tom Cruise? doesnt look anything like him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider
#3,689
#3,689
OHvol40 said:
The best thing is that all of you are waxing poetic about what one dude claims he heard on NPR. One big ole anecdotal circle jerk.
Click to expand...
I don't care what NPR says. Make you case that climate change is not a hoax without using sources that are profiting from the hoax, you can't. It is total 🐂 💩. It is all over, the average Joe is not even fooled by this scam anymore.
Move on to then next hoax like a good commie. Maybe y'all can make some hay with the hunta virus. Or maybe go back to the next ice age scare, most people have forgotten about that by now. Fire it up.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TAF
#3,690
#3,690
rikberry31 said:
I don't care what NPR says. Make you case that climate change is not a hoax without using sources that are profiting from the hoax, you can't. It is total 🐂 💩. It is all over, the average Joe is not even fooled by this scam anymore.
Move on to then next hoax like a good commie. Maybe y'all can make some hay with the hunta virus. Or maybe go back to the next ice age scare, most people have forgotten about that by now. Fire it up.
Click to expand...
I hope your tantrums are cathartic for you, sincerely… because they are outwardly embarrassing.
 
#3,692
#3,692
rikberry31 said:
Prove me wrong Sunshine.
Click to expand...
I’ll be honest. I just have no inclination to waste my time explaining to you the nuances of why increasing co2 and other greenhouse gasses at the rate we have inside the finite container that is our atmosphere will cause warming in conjunction with the sun’s rays just to hear some rebuttal about Al Gore, and “the grift”, and Obama, and more use of the 🐂💩icons, and, and, and. I have no interest in any of that hyperbole that I’ll inevitably get in return.

I will share an interesting fact, though.
Did you know that fossil fuel companies started asking questions about the effects of the byproducts of burning their fuels in the mid 20th century? They found the answers to be disturbing, and hid the results from us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BernardKingGOAT
#3,693
#3,693
OHvol40 said:
I’ll be honest. I just have no inclination to waste my time explaining to you the nuances of why increasing co2 and other greenhouse gasses at the rate we have inside the finite container that is our atmosphere will cause warming in conjunction with the sun’s rays just to hear some rebuttal about Al Gore, and “the grift”, and Obama, and more use of the 🐂💩icons, and, and, and. I have no interest in any of that hyperbole that I’ll inevitably get in return.

I will share an interesting fact, though.
Did you know that fossil fuel companies started asking questions about the effects of the byproducts of burning their fuels in the mid 20th century? They found the answers to be disturbing, and hid the results from us.
Click to expand...
Yes, and we’ve literally spent trillions cleaning up emissions since then. CO2 is NOT a pollutant and not what they were talking about. We’ve literally decommissioned half our coal plants while China has built over 100 in the last two years. Take it up with them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland and UT_Dutchman
#3,694
#3,694
WaywardVol said:
Yes, and we’ve literally spent trillions cleaning up emissions since then. CO2 is NOT a pollutant and not what they were talking about. We’ve literally decommissioned half our coal plants while China has built over 100 in the last two years. Take it up with them.
Click to expand...
China has also diversified their power grid (likely motivated by not being held captive by ME oil, novel idea, I know 🙄). Looks like their grid is roughly 58% fossil fuels, while the rest is a combo of all the others. This is very similar to the US by comparison. They are also at the tail end of massive industrialization, while we’ve had a post-industrial service based economy for decades. Why would I point the finger at China when we could all improve?

Also, I don’t think I ever claimed CO2 to be a pollutant, but it certainly is a greenhouse gas.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: swampfoxfan
#3,695
#3,695
rikberry31 said:
I don't care what NPR says. Make you case that climate change is not a hoax without using sources that are profiting from the hoax, you can't. It is total 🐂 💩. It is all over, the average Joe is not even fooled by this scam anymore.
Move on to then next hoax like a good commie. Maybe y'all can make some hay with the hunta virus. Or maybe go back to the next ice age scare, most people have forgotten about that by now. Fire it up.
Click to expand...
Make your claim that climate change is a hoax without using sources that profit from it. Or just listen to what ExxonMobil has to say.
 
#3,696
#3,696
OHvol40 said:
I’ll be honest. I just have no inclination to waste my time explaining to you the nuances of why increasing co2 and other greenhouse gasses at the rate we have inside the finite container that is our atmosphere will cause warming in conjunction with the sun’s rays just to hear some rebuttal about Al Gore, and “the grift”, and Obama, and more use of the 🐂💩icons, and, and, and. I have no interest in any of that hyperbole that I’ll inevitably get in return.

I will share an interesting fact, though.
Did you know that fossil fuel companies started asking questions about the effects of the byproducts of burning their fuels in the mid 20th century? They found the answers to be disturbing, and hid the results from us.
Click to expand...
You are totally ignorant on this. Nuances my azz. CO2 is a small fraction of our atmosphere and there is not enough of it, we could use more and not a significantly heat trapping gas like H2O. You don't have time to "explain" because you can't on any factual grounds. Climate change is 🐂 💩. It's called weather, which is in constant change, NATURALLY.
The Sun warms the Earth, plain and simple. Predictable and factual. Prove me wrong.
 
#3,697
#3,697
swampfoxfan said:
Make your claim that climate change is a hoax without using sources that profit from it. Or just listen to what ExxonMobil has to say.
Click to expand...
you realize the exact same argument plays back against you?

"Make your claim that climate change isn't a hoax without using sources that profit from it"
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland, rikberry31 and marcusluvsvols
#3,698
#3,698
swampfoxfan said:
Make your claim that climate change is a hoax without using sources that profit from it. Or just listen to what ExxonMobil has to say.
Click to expand...
There is insufficient CO2 in the atmosphere to be of any significant effect to the temperature. CO2 is not a significant heat trapping gas like H2O is which causes the real greenhouse effect. There is absolutely no correlation between increased CO2 levels and rising temperature of the earth. CO2 is essential to life and beneficial. Earth temperature can be accurately predicted by sunspot activity. The sun warms the earth, that is all.
 
#3,700
#3,700
swampfoxfan said:
Is this a loop? It was my answer to rberry.
Click to expand...
I quoted you, but changed "is a hoax" to "isn't a hoax".

the people claiming man made climate change is real to the point of being a disaster waiting to happen are making money from those claims. so if one were consistent with your previous argument you would need to throw out all those studies as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rikberry31
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top