What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

OT: Current Affairs and Politics

Messages
11,677
I never mentioned carbon dioxide. If I referred to anything it was pollution, specifically pollution of the air. I'm no scientist but I'm sure plants don't crave carbon MONoxide or methane.

Hahaha, squirm, squirm, squirm, PouPou.

You mentioned it directly in relation to "climate action". As much as you try, you can't squirm away from it, buddy.
 

Avenger

Immortal
Messages
34,613
That little lefty making that speech made me cringe. Next time she tries and deliver a speech I’d turn off everything that is powered by fossil fuels and see how far she goes.
 
Messages
11,677
She's a puppet, Avy. Sold by her mother in exchange for a nice book deal and some celebrity attention.

It's the new form of child prostitution.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Messages
11,677
I say this as someone who supports climate action. There's no conclusive proof of most of the claims bring made, but I believe the burden of proof should lie with those who support more pollution. I also don't think meaningful climate action is possible without hurting the economy. People need to be prepared for this. Unfortunately most would rather provide for their kids than worry about what will happen to their great grandchildren.

I've already quoted this, PouPou.

Same paragraph. One sentence directly following the other with no differentiation.

They are linked.
 

Bazal

Post Whore
Messages
103,830
That little lefty making that speech made me cringe. Next time she tries and deliver a speech I’d turn off everything that is powered by fossil fuels and see how far she goes.

Yeah, look, she's clearly intelligent and whatever, but she's far too young to realise she's being manipulated
 

Gary Gutful

Post Whore
Messages
53,254
It could very well be an increase in temperature, Gary.

The question is what caused this increase?

We did have one between 1970-2000, but that doesn't mean carbon dioxide did it.

Once again:
* Did carbon dioxide cause the increase in temperature between 1910-1940?
* If so, why did temperatures then decline between 1940-1970? After carbon kept rising?
* If not, then it was natural, so why is the 1970-2000 increase any different? They were about the same increase over about the same timeframe, so why are they different?
* Why has temperature flattened out since 2000, if carbon dioxide keeps rising?
* Did carbon dioxide cause the emergence from the Little Ice Age in the 18th Century? How?
* If not, then why is the recent, and finished, temperature increase any different (non-natural)?
* Why would we assume that a short term, 30-year temperature increase is a big deal when we have similar natural increases in recent history, as well as a longer term trend of increase that took us out of the Ice Age 13,000 years ago, that clearly cannot be linked to carbon dioxide?

It could very well be an increase in temperature that is causing some damage to the GBR, Gary. Doesn't mean carbon dioxide did it.

***

You see, you just all keep making the same mistake. You pick something, say "What about this?!?!" but do so under the assumption that carbon dioxide cause increased temperature.

We have historical records (both proxy and direct) that show that there has never been a link between the two. So, why do you all keep talking as if it is the case?

Because someone told you so? Because you have been told to think that? Can't you look at the data for yourselves? It's pretty straight forward once you spend a little bit of time on it, you know?
The answer was agricultural runoff you f**ken simpleton!
 
Messages
11,677
Gotta split (home time) but I do notice that everyone is loving their circular, emotion-driven arguments but...

...no one is referencing the data I posted...

...strange, considering all the legitimate scientists we have in here *cough*Bazal*cough*...
 

Bazal

Post Whore
Messages
103,830
The answer was agricultural runoff you f**ken simpleton!

But that contains carbon. Which plants eat, so it's GOOD for the oceans!

For f**ks sake Gary, you're supposed to the the second best Marine Biologist in Australia!
 
Top