Israel has found a way do do both in the desert. Why can't the rest of the world.
Climate Change
- Thread starter Addict2sex
- Start date
desalination is not theft. other countries have their own water and land to so so.
But Israel is clearly stealing Palestinian water as their solution do water issues.
If you were just talking desalination there are other, better examples.
So.
in a world that no-one can envision. Even the experts admit this. How do we know climate change is a “bad” thing. We do know precipitation patterns will change, and we do know nature has a magical way of balancing carrying capacity.
Speaking of water.
We have over 20% of the worlds fresh water….. just…. in the Great Lakes. Never mind what’s a little north, a lot north, or right in and under your yards.
For a bunch of environment champions. Odd that we are shitting in it, like there’s no tomorrow nor lifting a hand.
CO2 is plant food and the increase in CO2 have help drive continuous crop yield improvements
in addition more CO2 in the atmosphere reduces the plants water usage.
finally more CO2 is making the planet greener.
The only danger is the loonie lefts attempts to reverse these wonderful trends via their ideological driven fools agenda
Netherlands is the largest food importer in the world. How does Israel steal water when they get it from the sea.
Correlation is not causation.
Trying to claim that crop yields are rising from CO2 when you also keep claiming that CO2 is too small a part of the atmosphere to cause climate change is idiotically hypocritical. Only a true moron would think both claims are true.
Which is it, can CO2 increases raise crop yields or are they too small to change the climate?
your ignorance of science is on full display.... once again
those are two completely different processes
photosynthesis is a chemical process - small changes can have a significant effect
it is also a non -reversable reaction so increases in the input drive the reaction
A separate process (decomposition or cellular respiration ) is required to release CO2 previously bound by plants
absorption of infrared radiation is a physical process - small changes do not cause a significant effect.
chemical processes determines chemical structure
chemical structure determines physical properties
physical properties determines physical effects/ processes
so do not try to compare chemical effects/ processes to physical effects/ processes (grade 10 science class)
which is exactly what you have ignorantly done
what is idiotic is you pretending you have any scientific understanding
it is idiotic and comical
that is the fundamental issue with the anthropogenic climate change narrative
a 0.01% change in atmospheric composition can not possibly heat up the atmosphere, oceans and surface land mass by any measurable amount
absorption of infrared radiation is a physical process - small changes do not cause a significant effect.
there is also a logarithmic relationship between concentration and absorption , therefore diminishing returns with each incremental addition
absorption by co2 is saturated and has been for millions of years
climate systems are non linear, dynamic, chaotic systems with many many inputs & interdependences
you incorrectly view climate as driven solely by an inert trace gas measure in parts per million
co2 is not the control knob for climate
when is your next clown show ?
Last edited:
actually the Netherlands is the second largest food
While I’d dearly love to focus on and change the channel just wee bit and what the GTA is shitting in, plus how vital cold water streams are. Never mind warm water streams and lakes the Kawarthas, Muskokas and many more kettle lakes. Or why people that champion the environment can’t be bothered to lift and hand. Or the fact shit runs downhill to 20% of the world’s surface fresh water, known precipitation changes ( how do we know….nature has a funny way of balancing things)
Or even simply snowpacks and aquafers the champions are pissing and shitting in
Snowmelt Runoff and the Water Cycle | U.S. Geological Survey
Perhaps you've never seen snow. Or, perhaps you built a snowman this very afternoon and perhaps you saw your snowman begin to melt. Regardless of your experience with snow and associated snowmelt, runoff from snowmelt is an important component of the global movement of water, possibly even if...
Regarding crop yields since the 60s
Jamie Sarkonak: The Liberals' unserious, unfeasible fertilizer emissions plan
The federal plan to cut total fertilizer emissions to 30 per cent below 2020 levels by the end of the decade is really just a funding package for research and techn…
nationalpost.com
Last edited:
Larure, you are amazing.
You post two idiotic and contrary claims and of course you refuse to back down.
Your claim about CO2 and crop yields is really stupid, there is zero evidence that the two are related. CO2 use in greenhouses shows limited increases but nowhere near the chart you posted from some oil lobbyist. Your ignorance about greenhouse gases and the greenhouse effect are also just as idiotic. There is no legit scientist anywhere in the world that disputes the existence and reality of the greenhouse effect yet you keep holding on to this kooky theory about IR absorption as if its some alchemy type scientific discovery that you alone have made and that every scientist in the world is ignoring.
You're a bit like the anti vaxxers who find new and crazier theories as their old ones are systematically debunked. You're now at the point of the silver drinking wackos whose kids are all suffering from measles as they try to give them enemas to cure them.
There is no legit source you can post that backs up your theories.
None.
No real scientist believes the crap you believe.
None.
people with integrity should never back down from the truth
1. greenhouse operators purposely spend big $ money to add co2 to the greenhouse to increase their yield
2. Our World in data and www.nature.org are not oil lobbyist- you are such a despicable person
3 https://www.nature.com/scitable/kno...tmospheric-concentrations-of-carbon-13254108/
rising CO2 concentrations are also likely to have profound direct effects on the growth, physiology, and chemistry of plants, independent of any effects on climate (Ziska 2008). These effects result from the central importance of CO2 to plant metabolism. As photosynthetic organisms, plants take up atmospheric CO2, chemically reducing the carbon.
4 https://www.edrosenthal.com/the-guru-of-ganja-blog/why-co2-is-critical-for-cannabis
4.
At no point have i denied absorption of infrared radiation by organic molecules
what you are incapable of understanding is PARTS PER MILLION & saturation
you are also incapable of understanding our climate system is non-linear, dynamic and chaotic
a whole lot more complicated than Co2 as the control knob
please glue your self to the freeway in order to stop your outrage over these un-necessary enemas
wrong please see above.
CO2 is plant food
just the 2022 physics noble prize winner for staters
JOHN CLAUSER, 2022 PHYSICS NOBEL PRIZE WINNER:
polar bear extinction
ocean acidification
coral bleaching
droughts / floods
wild fires
more / less snow
extreme weather events
global boiling
crop failure
catastrophic sea level rise
all broken hockey sticks and evil propaganda lies
the con has not worked
your perverted evil dream of a socialism / communism world order is not going to be achieved via climate change propaganda.
it was mildly entertaining watching you pretend you have any scientific understanding
sort of like watching a turtle who has been flipped on its back
funny for a short period but it becomes cruel after a while
Attachments
Last edited:
You would think a gif is scientific evidence.
I asked to you to provide scientists and their papers that back your two central claims.
1) That CO2 is responsible for the growth in crop yields as your post claimed earlier in this thread.
2) That IR absorption/saturation claims disprove anthropomorphic climate change.
Clauser has posted nothing about your two central thesis.
Try again.
You could start your IR debate with a sourced rebuttal to this thread.
I think we need to build a wall to protect us from the US. Anywhere south of us is gonna bake this year and before know it the 'mericans will be showing up at the border saying its too hot to live in the US.
Mark my words, mark my words....
PS - This would be a good end of the world disaster movie - where we build a wall and keep the US out. Next we fire some scientists from our pathogen lab in Winnipeg - they escape and hightail it to the US where they find an open air food market and unleash it. None of em will believe its real, and they wont wear masks and da daah! Just make sure Will Smith doesnt create an antidote in some bunker somewhere...
Mark my words, mark my words....
PS - This would be a good end of the world disaster movie - where we build a wall and keep the US out. Next we fire some scientists from our pathogen lab in Winnipeg - they escape and hightail it to the US where they find an open air food market and unleash it. None of em will believe its real, and they wont wear masks and da daah! Just make sure Will Smith doesnt create an antidote in some bunker somewhere...
I saw Will Happer's name on the page.
That's enough to know its bullshit.
We hit 1.5ºC last year.
