GOP, businesses torched AOC for doubting existence of smash-and-grab robberies
- Thread starter AndrewX
- Start date
John…. You’re moving the goal posts. You just got debunked.
The Oil companies caved and admitted it.
The science you are using is apparently easily debunked. Give it up. Global warming is real. AOC has former Oil industry scientists under oath in Congress sharing their work, and their predictions of carbon levels in the atmosphere and global temperature rise of 1 degree to date were bang on.
Hey, I have an idea…. Why don’t you throw out some technical jargon that you believe people won’t understand…. Words that are big, but prove nothing. You’re like the financial advisor who confuses people with industry language about the markets, and equity funds, and the ability to stay liquid, all while diversifying…. Big can’t pick a stock to save his life.
At this point I am going walk away. We shall agree to disagree.
Last edited:
The dark secrets behind big oil’s climate pledges
Oil companies and the banks that finance them are making empty promises – and getting credit for them too
www.theguardian.com
Oil Industry ‘Net-Zero’ Pledges are an Attempt to Delay Climate Action, New Paper Warns
Fossil fuel companies “cannot be relied upon to decarbonize at the speed and scale needed” to tackle rising global emissions.
www.desmog.com
Which wasn't what he was arrested for.
The observations were also consistent (arguably more consistent) with Tycho's model.
His problem was insisting his model was right.
You have to remember that Johnny argues like a Bible Thumper from the Southern Baptist (or really any White Evangelical) tradition.
It's all clobber texts.
Take a single statement or fact and insist it says what you say it does.
Context and meaning are not relevant. (In fact, they are evil traps that must be avoided.)
Repeat it endlessly and keep pointing to it.
The heathen will be forced to admit that Johnny is right and come to Jesus.
Much like when a clobber text hermeneutic tries this approach with people outside their circle of faith, it doesn't work well.
There isn't much point in bothering really. It's such an aggressively anti-scientific approach that it can't really be broken into.
Additional facts and context don't matter. He has his holy memes and verses and will chant his mantra assuming it will ward off the evil doers.
Don't go searching for Ångström in previous LaRue posts. Mind you, don't go searching for his hilarious bit about electromagnetism not being a real thing, either.
in your dreams
two separate reports showing increased ice mass
your hanging your hat on the "might" speculation of one of the authors 20 to 30 years oy
Antarctica ice mass is growing despite the increases in atmospheric Co2 .
That is the relevant conclusion from experimental observations.
That conclusion does not support the AGW hypothesis.
That is not scientific evidence
So far you are swing and missing
Odd how the Boltzmann equation has been kicking around for over a hundred years , yet you ( a non-scientist) claim it is easily debunked
The next step you will take is to link some bullshit misinformation from Skeptical Science
We have been there and done that
How many times do you have to be told a science is not determined in a court
The satellite data show next to no warming, all well with any expected natural variation
Hey I have an even better idea, why don't you learn the technical information and understand the science before forming an uncompromising opinion about it
Stop and think about what you are saying..... You are objecting to the use of scientific terminology in a scientific discussion ??
It is not my fault "you are not a scientist"
It is easy to see when the left loses an argument as they always revert to personal insults when the subject matter gets too difficult for them
Run away if you want
Probably best before you embarrass yourself further
Hey, why don’t you stop misrepresenting the 15 Micron wavelength absorption theory… you applied it erroneously. I just demonstrated that last night. From 2010 too. Wow… that’s a long time to peddle bad information.you bring nothing to the table but insults
you bring nothing to the table but insults
you bring nothing to the table but insults
Do not mis-represent me
That is an absurd lie
Prove that or say nothing
I never said "electromagnetism is not a real thing"
There is a reason it is called electromagnetic radiation
You do not like me and I detest you
But I will not sink so low as to mis-represent you like that
Grow up
You did nothing of the sort
You are self admitted scientific know nothing
As I recall you were quite clear stating "I am not a scientist"
Yet you think a quote from a blog nullifies the Beer-Lambert Law ???
Where did you want you Noble Prize sent?
Too funny (yes I am laughing at you)
You were given multiple refences supporting saturation of the 15 Micron wavelength
Last edited:
Odd how his experimental observations and theory were correct - the earth does revolve around the sun.
His problem was an incorrect politically driven consensus view and uncompromising zealots
Personal attacks. The last resort when they can’t argue logically. Sad.
Here’s MIT’s explanation using the 15 micron’s…
And you said all their models didn’t factor in Beers Law…. You were wrong about that too. (I’m glad I took your advice to research this myself, as I am learning tons! And if I relied I you, I would have remained “misinformed”)
How do greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere?
Greenhouse gas molecules in the atmosphere absorb light, preventing some of it from escaping the Earth. This heats up the atmosphere and raises the planet’s average temperature.
Last edited:
I though you were running away?
Back for more humiliation?
Do not misquote me
I said the models treat water vapor as a secondary feedback only, which is why they are consistently wrong
At no point did I say all their models didn’t factor in the Beer-Lambert Law
If you ignore saturation then you need to revisit the Beer-Lambert Law
Last edited:
??
How is a personal attack when I just repeated what you said ??
You are self admitted scientific know nothing
As I recall you were quite clear stating "I am not a scientist"
where as this is a direct personal attack
Omitting “I’m laughing at you” (Personal attack)
Vs
A comparison of your argument styling.
2 different worlds.
Odd how MITs Richard S. Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences, MITHere’s MIT’s explanation using the 15 micron’s…
How do greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere?
Greenhouse gas molecules in the atmosphere absorb light, preventing some of it from escaping the Earth. This heats up the atmosphere and raises the planet’s average temperature.climate.mit.edu
characterizes ‘the imaginary climate crisis’ – ‘The whole narrative is pretty absurd’
anyways your little article avoided the saturation issue- conveniently
Between water vapor and COs they gobble up all most all of the outbound radiation at that wavelength
The issue would be if they closed off the blue shaded "escape window" radiation wavelengths which escape directly to space
adding more Co2 will not close this window off
again refer to the numerous papers provided which support saturation
You are comically entertaining
Think of it as a compliment as you try to fake your way through a scientific argument while being a self admitted scientific know nothing
what is next on your agenda-?
Are you going to try and fake your way through a technical discussion on viruses to align with your ideological goals on behavioral control?
I never said Know Nothing…. I said I am not a scientist. 2 different things. And if this so called Know Nothing is debunking your junk science, then wow…. You should not be laughing.
And by all that you mean…
CO2’s long lifespan is the key reason that human activities are leading to climate change. As we keep taking carbon-based compounds like coal and oil out of the ground, and put that carbon in the atmosphere in the form of CO2, the added CO2 piles up much faster than it can be naturally removed.
again with the mis-representation
No I do not mean that at all
Climate is far to complex to be controlled by a trace gas measure in parts per million
so why do you hate mankind?
You have debunked nothing
It is simply astounding how any grown adult can possibly think they have debunked physical laws of nature by reading a blog and spending a couple of hours on an internet search.
what part of the atmospheric window did you not understand ?
so why do you hate mankind?
I thought you were running away?
Why the about face?
