Official Global Warming thread (merged)

#3,676
#3,676
BartW said:
Lol cry me a river! History does not have a liberal bias. What part of this entry do you disagree with?



Here is John Tyndall's note to the Royal Society in 1859 and subsequent paper On the Absorption and Radiation of Heat by Gases and Vapours, and on the Physical Connexion of Radiation, Absorption, and Conduction. The greenhouse effect is very established physics, I promise. Get a spectroscope and try it out yourself.
Click to expand...

Hey my name is Bart and every source I put up has to be credible because I say so. Any contradiction to what I think is conspiratorial and anecdotal because I say so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,677
#3,677
BartW said:
A friend of mine at UT wrote an article on this topic:

Unintended Anti-Nuclear Consequences Lurking in the EPA Clean Power Plan

It seems hydro gets shafted too. And gas is a winner! That crap better get straightened out. Luckily we have Vols on top of it representin at EPA hearings :loco:
Click to expand...

Saw that, think I posted it in this thread a while back. Neat on their part, but I'm guessing this wasn't an accident and it will push through. Look forward to carbon emissions going up, and prices going up, again like Germany.
 
#3,678
#3,678
BigOrangeTrain said:
You want to be taken seriously, yet you use wiki article? :eek:lol::eek:lol:
Click to expand...
Because you're such an expert on being taken seriously :eek:k:
BigOrangeTrain said:
Hey my name is Bart and every source I put up has to be credible because I say so. Any contradiction to what I think is conspiratorial and anecdotal because I say so.
Click to expand...

Do you not understand the difference between anecdotal and statistical evidence, or do you just not like it? Do you still not embrace your identity as a conspiracy theorist? When you're replying, consider that the senate's new republican environmental leader -- your side's political leader -- actually wrote this book:

2017020.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3,685
#3,685
BigOrangeTrain said:
This is almost as bad as your salon.com or wiki articles you like to claim as evidence
Click to expand...

Colbert is right to mock the GOP's dumb "I am not a scientist" question dodge. Specifically, what part of the segment did you find inaccurate?

I only have to link so many wiki articles because you're so clueless on subjects which you're debating. They have citations. Follow them and learn a thing or two on your own.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#3,686
#3,686
China and US strike deal on carbon cuts in push for global climate pact

The United States and China have unveiled a secretly negotiated deal to reduce their greenhouse gas output, with China agreeing to cap emissions for the first time and the US committing to deep reductions by 2025.

The pledges in an agreement struck between President Barack Obama and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jingping, provide an important boost to international efforts to reach a global deal on reducing emissions beyond 2020 at a United Nations meeting in Paris next year.

China, the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world, has agreed to cap its output by 2030 or earlier if possible. Previously China had only ever pledged to reduce the rapid rate of growth in its emissions. Now it has also promised to increase its use of energy from zero-emission sources to 20% by 2030.

The United States has pledged to cut its emissions to 26-28% below 2005 levels by 2025.

The European Union has already endorsed a binding 40% greenhouse gas emissions reduction target by 2030.

Speaking at a joint press conference at the Great Hall of the People, Obama said: “As the world’s largest economies and greatest emitters of greenhouse gases we have special responsibility to lead the global effort against climate change. I am proud we can announce a historic agreement. I commend President Xi, his team and the Chinese government for their making to slow, peak and then reverse China’s carbon emissions.”

He said the US emissions reductions goal was “ambitious but achievable” and would double the pace at which it is reducing carbon emissions.

“This is a major milestone in US-China relations and shows what is possible when we work together on an urgent global challenge.”
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3,694
#3,694
I am much more concerned about another cataclysmic event I've observed. Sometime in July, i thought i observed that there were fewer minutes of daylight with each passing day. Knowing anecdotal evidence is useless in the scientific community, i began to document the decrease in light. I asked a couple of friends who live in other parts of America to observe. We all observed the decrease. Furthermore, the data produced a model by which we have accurately predicted sunrise and sunset. The amount of daylight is decreasing by a little more than 90 seconds per 24 hour day. At this rate of decrease, there will cease to be sunshine around Feb 1st, 2016. The data is as scientific as you can get. Our hypothesis and prediction has been repeoduced independently by others. Obviously, without sunlight all life will expire. Make your plans accordingly. Best wishes to all as we steadily head toward our demise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#3,696
#3,696
My initial impression is that this agreement between China and the US has no basis in any real attempt to actually achieve those goals.
 
#3,698
#3,698
K-town Vol Fan said:
You do realize global warming doesnt mean we won't have winter or snow anymore, right?

You're really showing your ignorance.
Click to expand...

snow in South Carolina on Nov 1st - a freakin polar vortex before mid nov --- sure I expect snow and ice until the end of March but its the constant extreme crap weather, the past 2 years, thats making this GW garbage a joke.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top