Maybe he just bought it as a short term investment, knowing full well that climate change ocean level rises don't happen that fast.
(though I admit I know nothing about this claim, including whether it is crap or not)
Climate Change Kills the Mood: Economists Warn of Less Sex on a Warmer Planet
- Thread starter eznutz
- Start date
(though I admit I know nothing about this claim, including whether it is crap or not)
1ST,...I have NEVER said IPCC was not as bright as me,...this has NOTHING to do with who is "bright", but who has ulterior motives,...!!!
You still have NOT shown were IPCC stated that,... methane has 20 times the warming effect of carbon dioxide.
And the effects of deforestation, for that matter
And IF I am wrong,...I will admit it,...but 1st show us all were you have EVER admitted you are wrong.
FAST
So now you are claiming that the whole of the IPCC is trying to commit fraud on the human race for the big bucks of green energy?
That's what you mean by 'ulterior motives', correct?
You still have not answered posts #18 and #22.
And in actual fact you lied,...I stated that IPCC have not confirmed that "methane has 20 times the warming effect of carbon dioxide",...you said they did,...!!!
By simply ignoring them,...you confirm what I have stated,...!!!
And another lie,...I have NEVER stated the UNEMPLOYABLEs motive was,..." the big bucks of green energy".
By simply ignoring posts #18 and #22,...you confirm their motive,...!!!
FAST
Sure I did.
I gave you links to the IPCC pages on methane.
Did you read them?
Ok, just because you apparently don't have the attention span or knowledge to read the papers that give you your answers, and because I know that you will apologize fully and honestly when you understand that you are wrong, decent person that you are, I'll give you this:
(oh, and note that the IPCC says methane is 34 times worse then CO2 over a 100 year time period)
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/10/02/2708911/fracking-ipcc-methane/
And for the record, a page that you won't be able to understand on the issue from the IPCC.
https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch2s2-10-2.html
(though from AR4, if you like you can check to see if there is better info in AR5, but this is as much of your homework as I'll do for you).
Now you should apologize for accusing me and the IPCC of lying.
Ok, so you don't think that all the world's climatologists are defrauding the human race for the big profits of green energy.
Why do you think they are doing it?
What is their motive?
I'm really looking forward to more details about your conspiracy theory.
1st lie,...this is the link you posted,...https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch2s2-3-2.html
Which says NONE of the following,...!!!
And when does your groups of UNEMPLOYABLEs make ANY statements of those effects of methane gas, and deforestation, in their scare mongering press released,...???
I think you have found your calling,...just don't forget to stand up,...
Actually,...its NOT all the world's climatologists,...granted there are quite a few that belong to certain clubs like, IPCC, NOAA and NASA.
There is no conspiracy,...just the simple fact,...they are the UNEMPLOYABLE,...do you need another motive,...???
FAST
Last edited:
My mistake, grabbed the wrong page.
Its here.
Go read it, it answers your questions.
http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/uploads/WGIAR5_WGI-12Doc2b_FinalDraft_All.pdf
You keep shouting about this but its all there in the report.
Just read the report.
You claimed they were committing fraud on the world for 'ulterior motives'.
Now you are backing away from this claim, its time that you admit you are full of shit and apologize.
Lie #1
Why would I waste my time reading another of your links,...you read them,...would be the 1st time you did.
The next time your UNEMPLOYABLEs make a press release stating that methane gas and deforestation far out weigh mans contribution of CO2 to the so called "global warming" scam.
Post a link,...but I'm not going to hold my breath.
Lie #2,...I never made that claim,...always stated they are UNEMPLOYABLE,...and that's their motive.
Is it ever possible for you to post without having to lie in it,...???
FAST
The information you want is here:
http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/uploads/WGIAR5_WGI-12Doc2b_FinalDraft_All.pdf
I don't care if you can't read it or won't, you've been offered the report and information.
Any claims you make from this time forward that they didn't talk about methane are considered out and out lies, since you've been shown the summary and given a link to the report.
You really are quite slimy, aren't you?
You accuse all climatologists of 'ulterior motives' and when challenged try to weasel out of it.
Now instead of accusing them of fraud for profit you are down to accusing all climatologists of fraud in order to keep their jobs.
So now that you've confirmed that you don't think any climatologist is lying for money, you now claim they all lie to keep their jobs.
If that's the case, since most of this research is government financed, are you claiming that there is pressure from governments to produce fraudulent climate change work?
What exactly are you claiming this 'ulterior motive' is that virtually every climatologist is motivated by?
Again with yet another link you have not read.
AND,... "talk about methane",...is useless bull shit.
If you have in fact read any of the numerous links you posted,...cut and paste were any one of you UNEMPLOYABLE CLUBS state that methane out weights man made CO2 by 20 to 37 TIMES as a green house gas,...plus the major effect of DEFORESTATION.
Until you do that,...you haven't provided shit.
And of coarse the enevitable lies,...
I have never said all climatologists
I have never,... accused them of fraud for profit
I have never stated that,... "there is pressure from governments to produce fraudulent climate change work",....in fact I stated that your heros infamous HOCKEY STICK GRAPH,...was denounced by the US government as bull shit.
,..."What exactly are you claiming this 'ulterior motive' is that virtually every climatologist is motivated by?",...no just the ones who are UNEMPLOYABLE.
FAST
Last edited:
I'm all for the warmer climate. Had sex out on the balcony the other night it was so warm.
Its right here:
http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/uploads/WGIAR5_WGI-12Doc2b_FinalDraft_All.pdf
You should stop making claims when I've given you links to the sources that show you are wrong.
Its sad.
Still being slimy, eh?
Why won't you tell us what you think this 'ulterior motive' you talked about is?
Or are you just weaseling around and trying to backpedal now?
C'mon, out with it.
What is this 'ulterior motive' that you think motivates climatologists.
What do you think the 'ulterior motive' of the World Bank is on this issue?
They think climate change will push 100 million into poverty in 15 years.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/cli...people-into-extreme-poverty-by-2030-1.3310459
Last edited:
You have provided shit all,...as usual.
I'll give credit for one thing,...you are consistent,...lie in every post.
I have given you the the UNEMPLOYABLE CLUBS "motive" over and over again,...which does NOT include free thinking climatologists,...but like a child,...you just cover your eyes,...and stamp your feet.
I am NOT going to repeat it again,...just so you can lie again.
You are really a loser.
When you want to post something of value,...you MIGHT get a response,...otherwise,...don't bother.
FAST
Last edited:
Its there.
Read it.
http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/uploads/WGIAR5_WGI-12Doc2b_FinalDraft_All.pdf
You weasel around a lot, inferring this and inferring that, but when cornered you just mumble and hope it all goes away.
Saying that climatologists release the work they've done for the last 20 or so years based on 'ulterior motives' is accusing them of fraud.
Man up and make the accusation clearly, or just admit you don't have anything on them at all, its all just your own bullshit.
Meanwhile, no 'ulterior motive' could make the world 1ºC hotter then pre-industrial times, nor could any 'ulterior motive' increase CO2 levels globally to give us our new 400ppm CO2 levels.
Those are measured facts, unless you are now accusing climatologists of faking measurements.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/temperatures-one-degree-celsius-1.3310733
To put this in context:
When the IPCC released its third assessment report in 2001, it said the Earth's temperature could increase by nearly 6 degrees C in the next 100 years (specifically, the IPCC warned the increase may be as much as 5.8 degrees C from 1990 to 2100).
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2001/jan/23/globalwarming.climatechange2
Now, we're being told we should be worried about a possible increase of 1 degree C.
But, please, let's not have anyone suggest the IPCC's predictions have been spectacularly wrong. :biggrin1:
And with this being about 25 years from this prediction, 5.8ºC being the upper range of the IPCC projections (with 4ºC being the median of the worst case projection), and the temperature having gone up 1ºC, this makes the predictions once again look accurate and possibly accurate for their worst case scenario.
1ºC = 1/4 of 4ºC (median worst case scenario).
25 years (1990-2015) = 1/4 of the 100 year projection timeline.
And for fun.
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...odels-are-even-more-accurate-than-you-thought
Last edited:
OMG!!!
You honestly believe that the "pre-industrial age" refers to 1990?? :Eek:
You might want to take another look at your CBC story (http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/temperatures-one-degree-celsius-1.3310733). I would say you've just broken your own record for the stupidest thing ever posted on TERB.
