Not really Adept, like Dome say, i am just trolling
.Climate Scientists Laugh at Global Warming Hysteria.
-
Globemaster_III
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 8:00 am
- Location: little whore house in texas
Well what is the $#@!ing point then? You think it's a joke? I guess that's why you're a Trump fan.Globemaster_III wrote:QUOTE (Globemaster_III @ Jan 27 2017, 04:56 AM) Adept: This guy has his head firmly stuck in the sand. I guess reality looks too scary.
Not really Adept, like Dome say, i am just trolling
<bp|> Maybe when I grow up I can be a troll like PsycH
<bp|> or an obsessive compulsive paladin of law like Adept
-
Globemaster_III
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 8:00 am
- Location: little whore house in texas
Adept quote: Well what is the $#@!ing point then? You think it's a joke? I guess that's why you're a Trump fan.
The Only Reason Why You Are So Angry BeCause You Don't Know How To Control YourSelf
One Person Can Not Tell Million Of People To Stop Working, Stop Eating, Stop Having Sex, So We Can't Have Any More Baby In Hoping We Can Stopping Carbon FootPrints
So One Days We Can Stop Climate Change.
To Be The President Of United Stated Of America Is To Serve To The People, I Am His Biggest Fan And I Think You Got It Backwards.
The Only Reason Why You Are So Angry BeCause You Don't Know How To Control YourSelf
One Person Can Not Tell Million Of People To Stop Working, Stop Eating, Stop Having Sex, So We Can't Have Any More Baby In Hoping We Can Stopping Carbon FootPrints
So One Days We Can Stop Climate Change.
To Be The President Of United Stated Of America Is To Serve To The People, I Am His Biggest Fan And I Think You Got It Backwards.
-
MagisterXF94
- Posts: 1935
- Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 9:46 am
- Location: Trieste, Italy
Trumps only mandate is to serve himself and that mass of cronies.Globemaster_III wrote:QUOTE (Globemaster_III @ Jan 27 2017, 08:43 PM) Adept quote: Well what is the $#@!ing point then? You think it's a joke? I guess that's why you're a Trump fan.
The Only Reason Why You Are So Angry BeCause You Don't Know How To Control YourSelf
One Person Can Not Tell Million Of People To Stop Working, Stop Eating, Stop Having Sex, So We Can't Have Any More Baby In Hoping We Can Stopping Carbon FootPrints
So One Days We Can Stop Climate Change.
To Be The President Of United Stated Of America Is To Serve To The People, I Am His Biggest Fan And I Think You Got It Backwards.
A presidency built on fear, lies and hatred is Nothing to be respected, and should be fought in any legal non violent way possible
QUOTE ^cashto@Elem (all): yeah, i imagine if you're rusty, you could build op short for no reason, build a naked ref, then go two techpaths even though your mining is by all objective standards $#@!ed[/quote]
-
Globemaster_III
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 8:00 am
- Location: little whore house in texas
noirsol quote : Trumps only mandate is to serve himself and that mass of cronies.
A presidency built on fear, lies and hatred is Nothing to be respected, and should be fought in any legal non violent way possible.
My guessing is that your last president have imprints fears, lies and hatred into you that you letting him controlling your life
you should fear no one and don't lets any person control you, not even the president.
Rau::: I know how to settle this!
Saturday night fight!
Globey comms Trump team.
Adept comms The Hillaries
Attack!!
I like that
A presidency built on fear, lies and hatred is Nothing to be respected, and should be fought in any legal non violent way possible.
My guessing is that your last president have imprints fears, lies and hatred into you that you letting him controlling your life
you should fear no one and don't lets any person control you, not even the president.
Rau::: I know how to settle this!
Saturday night fight!
Globey comms Trump team.
Adept comms The Hillaries
Attack!!
I like that
Last edited by Globemaster_III on Sun Jan 29, 2017 3:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Globemaster_III wrote:QUOTE (Globemaster_III @ Jan 29 2017, 11:14 AM) noirsol quote : Trumps only mandate is to serve himself and that mass of cronies.
A presidency built on fear, lies and hatred is Nothing to be respected, and should be fought in any legal non violent way possible.
My guessing is that your last president have imprints fears, lies and hatred into you that you letting him controlling your life
you should fear no one and don't lets any person control you, not even the president.
Rau::: I know how to settle this!
Saturday night fight!
Globey comms Trump team.
Adept comms The Hillaries
Attack!!
I like that
So we can count on this next Saturday night?
*#$@faced $#@!tard Troll
The problem with the argument of global warming is that the alarmist are blaming an occurrence that has been happening long before humans existed, on humans.
It is undeniable that the climate is changing. It is also undeniable that the climate has always been changing. There is no doubt that the earth is getting warmer however, it was getting warmer long before we came along.
The real question is; is mankind responsible and if so, by how much are they responsible for the change in climate?
I consider this video to be one of the best arguments on the subject.
A youtube quote:
"Using the IPCC's own calculations, I will show that the policy recommendations to "stop" climate change are insane.
- The IPCC figured a 5% cut in emissions when Australia implemented it's carbon tax by 2020. (the largest and most ambitious plan implemented to date)
- 100% of Australia's emissions are 1.2% of global emissions.
- The 5% cut of Australia's global amount of 1.2% is 0.07% of total global emissions.
- IPCC figures Co2 will be 410ppm by 2020
- 0.07% of 410 is 409.988 ppm
- IPCC equation for Co2 forcing is (5.35 * ln(current Co2 / revised Co2 )) or (5.35 * ln(410/409.988)) [source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiative ... pheric_gas)
- (5.35 * ln(410/409.988)) = 0.00016 w/m2 of reduced forcing
- Climate sensitivity parameter is simple the change in temperature per w/m2 increase. In other words, the actual change in temp divided by the change in energy 'imbalance' since the start of the industrial revolution(150 years). Accounting for El Nino it's risen ~ 0.7-0.8 K over the last 150 years, but lets just say 1 C.
- (5.35 * ln(400 / 280)) = 1.90821095007 w/m2
- 1 C / 1.90821095007 = 0.52 K per w/m2 (PS, This number is unlikely to rise because it's derived from a natural logarithm, thus will asymptotically approach zero as Co2 concentrations rise)
- Then figure the climate sensitivity parameter of 0.52(0.00016) and you get 0.0000832 C reduction in global temperatures.
Read that again... it's 1:12,000th of a single degree Celsius.
Now... for the kicker... The IPCC estimated it would cost Australia 160 billion dollars over the 10 year carbon tax plan to get 0.00016 w/m2 of reduced forcing..
To save a full degree Celsius of warming, based on the IPCC's own math on the Australian carbon tax plan, would cost 3.2 quadrillion dollars.... or 43 times total global GDP.
Does climate change really matter if the only realistic solution is an economic apocalypse?
According the the stern report(the biggest economic study ever done on climate economics, by the Royal Society of the UK), global costs, under a worst case(nothing done) scenario are expected to be ~ 5% of GDP per year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stern_Review
That means that if the costs of a carbon tax costs the average person more then 5% per year, then it is not worth it. Given that emissions are basically synonymous with GDP, a 5% cut in emissions would have an impact on temperatures literally too small to measure, but huge economic ramifications.
To use the above math on how long it would take to achieve a single C drop in temps spending 5% of global GDP on it.
- (5.35 * ln(400 / (400+ (20 * 0.05)))) = -0.01335830906 w/m2
- (0.52) * -0.01335830906 = -0.00694632071 K
- 1/0.00694632071 = 143.96 * 10 = 1440 YEARS
Well $#@!. 1440 years to break even on the 5% GDP cost. How many star systems can we colonize before then?
So you are stuck in a paradox. Either you drastically lower the average living standard, or cut emissions to a level that would have no discernible impact on global temperatures. In either case, it makes no sense.
You can argue about the plants and animals... But I can guarantee that any cut that is forced on people strong enough to have a measurable impact... would cause an economic apocalypse large enough to cause widespread environmental destruction. Starving people will burn the forests for energy and hunt everything to extinction, in order to survive.
To end this... Nuclear power is the only realistically viable path to disconnecting the carbon emission = GDP connection, But It's not "deniers" stopping the nuclear revolution... it's environmentalists."
It is undeniable that the climate is changing. It is also undeniable that the climate has always been changing. There is no doubt that the earth is getting warmer however, it was getting warmer long before we came along.
The real question is; is mankind responsible and if so, by how much are they responsible for the change in climate?
I consider this video to be one of the best arguments on the subject.
A youtube quote:
"Using the IPCC's own calculations, I will show that the policy recommendations to "stop" climate change are insane.
- The IPCC figured a 5% cut in emissions when Australia implemented it's carbon tax by 2020. (the largest and most ambitious plan implemented to date)
- 100% of Australia's emissions are 1.2% of global emissions.
- The 5% cut of Australia's global amount of 1.2% is 0.07% of total global emissions.
- IPCC figures Co2 will be 410ppm by 2020
- 0.07% of 410 is 409.988 ppm
- IPCC equation for Co2 forcing is (5.35 * ln(current Co2 / revised Co2 )) or (5.35 * ln(410/409.988)) [source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiative ... pheric_gas)
- (5.35 * ln(410/409.988)) = 0.00016 w/m2 of reduced forcing
- Climate sensitivity parameter is simple the change in temperature per w/m2 increase. In other words, the actual change in temp divided by the change in energy 'imbalance' since the start of the industrial revolution(150 years). Accounting for El Nino it's risen ~ 0.7-0.8 K over the last 150 years, but lets just say 1 C.
- (5.35 * ln(400 / 280)) = 1.90821095007 w/m2
- 1 C / 1.90821095007 = 0.52 K per w/m2 (PS, This number is unlikely to rise because it's derived from a natural logarithm, thus will asymptotically approach zero as Co2 concentrations rise)
- Then figure the climate sensitivity parameter of 0.52(0.00016) and you get 0.0000832 C reduction in global temperatures.
Read that again... it's 1:12,000th of a single degree Celsius.
Now... for the kicker... The IPCC estimated it would cost Australia 160 billion dollars over the 10 year carbon tax plan to get 0.00016 w/m2 of reduced forcing..
To save a full degree Celsius of warming, based on the IPCC's own math on the Australian carbon tax plan, would cost 3.2 quadrillion dollars.... or 43 times total global GDP.
Does climate change really matter if the only realistic solution is an economic apocalypse?
According the the stern report(the biggest economic study ever done on climate economics, by the Royal Society of the UK), global costs, under a worst case(nothing done) scenario are expected to be ~ 5% of GDP per year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stern_Review
That means that if the costs of a carbon tax costs the average person more then 5% per year, then it is not worth it. Given that emissions are basically synonymous with GDP, a 5% cut in emissions would have an impact on temperatures literally too small to measure, but huge economic ramifications.
To use the above math on how long it would take to achieve a single C drop in temps spending 5% of global GDP on it.
- (5.35 * ln(400 / (400+ (20 * 0.05)))) = -0.01335830906 w/m2
- (0.52) * -0.01335830906 = -0.00694632071 K
- 1/0.00694632071 = 143.96 * 10 = 1440 YEARS
Well $#@!. 1440 years to break even on the 5% GDP cost. How many star systems can we colonize before then?
So you are stuck in a paradox. Either you drastically lower the average living standard, or cut emissions to a level that would have no discernible impact on global temperatures. In either case, it makes no sense.
You can argue about the plants and animals... But I can guarantee that any cut that is forced on people strong enough to have a measurable impact... would cause an economic apocalypse large enough to cause widespread environmental destruction. Starving people will burn the forests for energy and hunt everything to extinction, in order to survive.
To end this... Nuclear power is the only realistically viable path to disconnecting the carbon emission = GDP connection, But It's not "deniers" stopping the nuclear revolution... it's environmentalists."
Last edited by Wasp on Mon Jan 30, 2017 5:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Globemaster_III
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 8:00 am
- Location: little whore house in texas
wasp, thank you for all the details but i still think nix1 and ryujin would not understand
the only reason why people and most scientist want to bring up climate change so gov would fund their food stamps program
Democrat been telling telling people that NASA is nothing more than a food stamp program for engineer
that is the reason why democrat president Obama cut the fund and scrap the program
formal democrat president Obama want to fund climate change program but president Trump just cut the fund
like the way Obama does with NASA program.
Ryujin quote : So we can count on this next Saturday night?
Ryujin goto DCS.com, F15 VS F15 on World 2.0 Nevada RED FLAGS next Saturday night at anytime
If you run out of money for the game, i will open account just for you, email me.
Nix1, you also welcome too, 2 F15 vs F15 just to be fair.
the only reason why people and most scientist want to bring up climate change so gov would fund their food stamps program
Democrat been telling telling people that NASA is nothing more than a food stamp program for engineer
that is the reason why democrat president Obama cut the fund and scrap the program
formal democrat president Obama want to fund climate change program but president Trump just cut the fund
like the way Obama does with NASA program.
Ryujin quote : So we can count on this next Saturday night?
Ryujin goto DCS.com, F15 VS F15 on World 2.0 Nevada RED FLAGS next Saturday night at anytime
If you run out of money for the game, i will open account just for you, email me.
Nix1, you also welcome too, 2 F15 vs F15 just to be fair.
-
SumVeritas
- Posts: 1334
- Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 9:21 pm
- Location: Blakus wet dreams
you mean, like the ice age right¿?Wasp wrote:QUOTE (Wasp @ Jan 30 2017, 10:55 AM) getting warmer long before we came along.
if i understand correctly, this isn't a question anymore, not for actual scientists anyway.Wasp wrote:QUOTE (Wasp @ Jan 30 2017, 10:55 AM) The real question is; is mankind responsible and if so, by how much are they responsible for the change in climate?
Wasp wrote:QUOTE (Wasp @ Jan 30 2017, 10:55 AM) I consider this video to be one of the best arguments on the subject.
A youtube quote:
, lets just 
Duckwarrior wrote:QUOTE (Duckwarrior @ Mar 8 2017, 09:38 PM) Desert eagle .50 cal from beechcraft bonanza as fly poor people over doctor son beechcraft bonanza trump beef texas ping pong boat 400k doctor son beefsteak good texas cali donald trump hilary dumocrats