Agnostic.com

10 0

New Evidence That Man-Made Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
Does Not Cause Global Warming

[americantraditions.org]

dc65 7 Jan 16

Post a comment Reply Add Photo

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

10 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

First, this is not 'new' evidence. It is six years old and was literally crushed within three weeks of its release.

Now, if you want to be throwing around information the first thing you must do so as not to appear a bit off in the brain locker is to check the source, date, corroborating material, contradictory material, and by all means know something about the subject to be able to make a discerning judgment about whether it should be posted or not. It also pays to know a little about the subject and associated disciplines.

[climate.nasa.gov]

First of all I don't like being called names. Just because I don't agree with you. Based on my knowledge of chemistry, physics and thermodynamics I do not believe CO2 is causing global warming I have done a lot of research on this subject and there are many other people that believe the same thing. What I'm saying is we have some global warming and the subject needs more research we don't do science by consensus science is done by collecting data analyzing applying to the scientific method. I tried to find the newest information or information that was suppressed. I consider all information 5 to 10 years old worth reviewing but you have no right to tell me how to think. Now there are many people out there doing research and believe as I do research the information for yourself and come back to me with some reliable information about CO2 only. Yes I believe some of the human activities are changing the landscape of this earth. But nobody is going to stop their way of life everybody wants their air conditioning automobile RVs boats nice homes and everything energy brings us nobody's going to stop using fossil fuels until there is a better source for reliable energy that is cheaper. In my opinion fossil fuels are too valuable to be burning them for energy. We should be using fossil fuels for manufacturing products but we don't have anything else yet in place that can meet the energy demands of the world. Also do some research on plants and the benefits CO2 brings we have a growing population to feed we have people starving in the world already. There is research going on about the benefits CO2 for plants also do some research on that. Judith Curry can explain to you what the problem is with this research that's going on in the past there's no point in me going over it all. Do a Google search she has written many articles.

@dc65 -- Cite the place in my comment where I called you names. When you get done with that, cite where I told you how to think. As for the rest of what you had to say, no one in the scientific community is blaming all global warming on CO2, nor is anyone claiming that man is 100% at fault. I am not a climatologist, but I do know how to read the data and evaluate it. Regarding the many other people who say the same thing, that's fine. I have no problem with that, but I can assure you that if you want to argue from consensus, I win with a consensus of 97+% of the scientific community that refutes what you have to say.

@evidentialist we don't do science by consensus science is done by collecting data analyzing applying to the scientific method. This is where you can start doing your research about people that have another opinion I'm not interested in changing your mind you will believe what you want that is your right.
Judith Curry can explain to you what the problem is with this research that's going on in the past there's no point in me going over it all. Do a Google search she has written many articles. If you don't do the research don't bother to discuss it with me anymore you have your opinion thank you.
Judith Curry can explain to you what the problem is with the research that's going on in the past there's no point in me going over it all. Do a Google search she has written many articles.
After you've researched the opinions of people like Judith Curry, John Coleman and many others ,,maybe we can discuss sensibly but if you're not interested in that it's OK to. You write a lot of words that come from somebody else,, what the majority of people are saying. I don't believe what they say is correct. If you plot CO2 as a percent of the atmosphere on linear graph it will not even show up as an increase. ( In 1800 approximately .03% of the atmosphere today .041% of the atmosphere approximately )Too much of the information out there is just repeating other people's writings 97% comes from that. well I am in the 3% that is left. So please do your research on that 3% that is left. One of us will be proven wrong someday and the correct information will be out there someday in the future. Much more research is needed and that will happen.

0

So? what's your point? mine is that even if humanity "only" contributes to (& if, then increasingly), not "causes" climate change, we still have a moral duty to do our damnedest & respond in a way that is beneficial to all life forms on earth.

1

Go ahead idle your car all day . I live in canada. we can do with all the help we can get !

0

You just got to look around you now and 30 years ago. there's a hell of a difference

2

What... The... Fuck...
This stands out to me because the point they want to make is that man didn't cause these levels so man must not be doing it now;
"It is quite obvious that any greenhouse gas effect back at that time, or on Venus and Mars today, could not be driven by our industry, cars, and airplanes. It is contradictory to the idea of man-made global warming."

Do they think that because Mario is a plumber that he's the only one that can fix pipes?(Hopefully that analogy works because my brain is too fried from trying to comprehend the stupidity in that 'article'.)

0

How the physics can be nationalists, traditionalist, or patriotic? I am a coal miner. Do you feel that the dust, obstructing my breathing, is patriotic? I wish you had it.

4

Convenient how this one article refutes 150 years of global scientific findings...I didn't realize the Koch Brothers were interested in this kind of thing. Funny how deniers call scientific research "fake" until they think they can introduce 'data' based on shoddy research, and then try to spin it to their advantage. Of course, real science is based on reproducible findings. I'll wait until some similar testing is done by someone NOT sponsored by Big Energy...

1

The sitd listed does not exist. Could be just another misinformation attempts.

8

Hmmmm... American Traditions Magazine - A free online magazine devoted to Christian values, traditional American values, and upholding the United States Constitution.
dc65, are you trolling?

It's not the first time he's posted this. You should see the other posts by the author of the article. Alex Jones comes to mind.

5

This is on the "about" page of the website you cited: The purposes of the magazine, as stated on the Home Page, are to promote Christian values, traditional American values, and the upholding and protecting of our United States Constitution.

In other-words, I would need to see peer reviewed correlation from a reputable source before I believe anything that is posted on this site.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:15713
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.