It's not an accurate description. It's a false assumption inspired by your mental illness.
Get help.
Should I be terrified of climate change?
- Thread starter oil&gas
- Start date
Get help.
That's already on your shelf next to the Economics for Dummies book. You subscribed to the entire series and received the bonus book "How To Convince Everyone You're Not A Communist But Really Are - for Dummies"
Wow, that's a sad attempt at a burn.
Meanwhile, since you're not even capable of reading a book for dummies, the world moves on.
More discussion about one of the biggest of the tipping points, which we could hit at any time now.
ROTFLMAO!! I can point out gazillions of your posts like this one:
Trump is definitely a Climate Change Denier!! He stupidly stated that there should be "Better Forest Management" to prevent the wildfires, when blaming the California Government for it!!
Every American knows that those forests are Federal Lands:
We know that a lot of the reductions in actual Carbon Emissions during Harper's years were not because of anything that he did. The provinces including even Alberta under Rachel Notely shut down several coal plants. Also, during 2008 - 2009 during the height of the recession, countries like The USA and Canada had a drop in the Carbon Emissions. Similarly in 2020, they dropped to the lowest levels since 1996. Of course since the economy reopening they have marginally risen since then but is still below the 2015 level. Poilievre only knows how to moan and groan. He does not have a plan at all. No doubt he will be a stab in the back for Canada when it comes to Climate Change as all he will do is "Axe the Tax" through the hearts and souls of Canadians!!
he calls others ''a science denier'', meanwhile he denied himself access to the wonderful world of ''scientific understanding and discovery'' when he dropped out of high school
comical
Likely I have a higher education than you, larue.
Cuz nobody who makes such basic mistakes about the science of climate change could have a degree in anything scientific.
He could have a Phd in Music, Classics o English, that would likely make him more educated than you or I and can as well as being scientifically illiterate.
I guess your training isn't in logic.
Myself I stopped taking science after second year university but I still know why if a woman weighs as much as a duck, she must be a witch, but I am wise in the ways of science like that.
nope
all one needs to do is read your posts to know you did not finish high school
it is painfully obvious you have no formal education in any scientific discipline
your half assed attempts at pretending you have have any understanding about scientific fundamentals would be comical to observe if it were not also painfully obvious that your intent is to deliberately mislead others.
Last edited:
What makes it a right post? So lefty aren't allowed to critique Joe Biden? GtfoROTFLMAO!! I can point out gazillions of your posts like this one:
you're a joke.You know what I find totally hilarious, other than the fact that you think you smart and well informed, is that your basic argument fails the kids page at NASA on the greenhouse effect.
What Is the Greenhouse Effect?
Learn more about this process that occurs when gases in Earth's atmosphere trap the Sun's heat.
Clearly he's never studied anything in the arts and his scientific 'expertise' reads like a guy who's repaired fridges for his life but thinks that makes him an expert in all gases and energy sources. His posts would be lessons in poor communication, bad formatting, repetitive slander, no structuring, no citations and never a conclusion backed up evidence.
He posts 20-30 year old charts about IR absorption from ancient climate change denial sites as if they were some modern discovery that only he and some retired geologist understand. His claims about understanding the climate change would make him fail high school science, let along an undergrad course. His errors would be posted by a prof or TA and dissected in front of a class on how not to make an argument, faulty logic and poor communication.
"Any time now"? Like noon today? Next year? 3024?
The only "tipping point" here is the point between your sanity and willful paranoia.
You think that forest fires are contained to federal lands only?
That's like thinking CO2 hovers only over each respective country that creates it.
btw Do you know what causes forest fires?
How many fires are started deliberately?
Dr Paul Read, co-director of Australia's National Centre for Research in Bushfire and Arson, puts the figure higher, at "62,000 and increasing".
Of those, 13% are started deliberately, and 37% are suspicious. That means 31,000 Australian bushfires are either arson, or suspected arson, every year.
That figure does not include recklessness or accidents. So a bushfire caused by a barbecue, or a spark from a chainsaw, would be classed as "accidental".
In short, up to 85 bushfires begin every day because someone leaves their house and decides to start one.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-50400851
That's just Australia.
How's your carbon tax scheme working?
The description is wrong...should read:
"It will be an overview talk, easy to follow for non-specialists...who can be easily indoctrinated into our campaign of fear."
"Last time we invited specialists it didn't go well. How dare they ask questions we can't answer!"
Its not about who starts them or how they start, its about forests being dry and damaged by insects due to climate change and burning faster and longer.
Ignorance is no excuse, skoob.
You aren't qualified to talk on this subject if you won't do the basic research.
Yeah sure...and they would just spontaneously combust without any intervention like matches.
You're being played.
ps deserts are dry. Oceans are wet. Just wanted to clarify that for you.
