Latest ice out ever.

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
But the capitalist got rich $$ off of the global warming nonsense while he jet-setted globally on his appointed Boeing 757 to scare people or tweeted about it from one of his lavish massive mansions with the thermostat stuck on 75*.
You're saying the Koch smokers are better?! Or major shareholders of ExxonMobile?!

Your arguments are weak.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
"Climate Scientists" are paid to have an agenda, I will take independent research any day.

The entire US Government and all of it's coherts are lying terrorists, regarding every subject of discussion.
The one percent of climate scientists defending the fossil fuels industries are the ones paid to have an agenda. The other 99% are all about what the science says.

Do try to keep that straight.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
I am confused how that would explain the massive leaps in temperature and co2 in the previous eras, when Human co2 activity was at zero.

It makes much more sense to me that the Sun cycles, and natural activity ( like Volcanic Eruptions) play a bigger role than what Humans have achieved.
The connection is the CO2; you just admitted the science says that temperature rises with CO2.

Instead of volcanoes spewing all those greenhouse gases, this time humans are doing it. It's coming from every tailpipe, smokestack and plowshare.

Cause and effect.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
you support censoring black people from stores
That's a misleading generalization.

I support the owner of a property determining the use of it. I support the owner of a persons body, "that person", determining the use of it. Otherwise, if somebody else forcibly determines the use of your body, you might be their slave, slave.

If I had a store, a potential customers race wouldn't be a concern to me. If a black person owned a store, I wouldn't try to force him to serve me, if he was inclined not to. You would though...racist!
 

Justin-case

Well-Known Member
That's a misleading generalization.

I support the owner of a property determining the use of it. I support the owner of a persons body, "that person", determining the use of it. Otherwise, if somebody else forcibly determines the use of your body, you might be their slave, slave.

If I had a store, a potential customers race wouldn't be a concern to me. If a black person owned a store, I wouldn't try to force him to serve me, if he was inclined not to. You would though...racist!
Rob, we all know that you don't support civil rights, most racists dont. Please stop spamming the forum with white nationalist talking points.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
That's a misleading generalization.

I support the owner of a property determining the use of it. I support the owner of a persons body, "that person", determining the use of it. Otherwise, if somebody else forcibly determines the use of your body, you might be their slave, slave.

If I had a store, a potential customers race wouldn't be a concern to me. If a black person owned a store, I wouldn't try to force him to serve me, if he was inclined not to. You would though...racist!
you support kicking black people out of stores based solely on their skin color and nothing else. you are racist
 

trippnface

Well-Known Member
The one percent of climate scientists defending the fossil fuels industries are the ones paid to have an agenda. The other 99% are all about what the science says.

Do try to keep that straight.
The Scientists bringing to light the Solar Cycle issues are not the shills advocating for the oil industry, please do not make that mistake.

This is about Population control. The next Grand Solar Minimum is going to destroy Global crop production and cause mass starvation & death. It is in their interests to keep us ignorant about the reality of our Enviornment. I really urge you to investigate this farther. Humans at large, and especially the mass Enviorment abusers, 100% are adding to co2 levels shifts in Earth.

That still does not change the fact that nothing we do even comes slightly close to the effects of the Sun on Global Climate.


 

londonfog

Well-Known Member
That's a misleading generalization.

I support the owner of a property determining the use of it. I support the owner of a persons body, "that person", determining the use of it. Otherwise, if somebody else forcibly determines the use of your body, you might be their slave, slave.

If I had a store, a potential customers race wouldn't be a concern to me. If a black person owned a store, I wouldn't try to force him to serve me, if he was inclined not to. You would though...racist!
Would you approve of a store owner not serving your mother ? Calling her a bitch and forcing her out his store for men ?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
The Scientists bringing to light the Solar Cycle issues are not the shills advocating for the oil industry, please do not make that mistake.

This is about Population control. The next Grand Solar Minimum is going to destroy Global crop production and cause mass starvation & death. It is in their interests to keep us ignorant about the reality of our Enviornment. I really urge you to investigate this farther. Humans at large, and especially the mass Enviorment abusers, 100% are adding to co2 levels shifts in Earth.

That still does not change the fact that nothing we do even comes slightly close to the effects of the Sun on Global Climate.


you are a far right wing conspiracy nut, not one single national academy of science shares your idiotic views, jew hater
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
i'm not really worried about us, most adults will be dead before things start to get really bad, but we're fucking our kids, and really fucking their kids. wonder how they will remember us? or if they'll even have time to remember us, as they struggle through their whole lives to survive the shitstorm we left them
 

trippnface

Well-Known Member
Top quality information meticulously sourced. Ask David any question you have, he will answer in an extremely knowledgeable fashion.

 
Top