03 May 18
Originally posted by @sonhouseNow you are resorting to unusually stupid arguments. Did cars exist 300 years ago? Are you going to argue man caused it because his horses farted too much?
Warming started 300 years ago. My goodness, could it be that humans are involved since the industrial revolution started on that timeframe? Of course you would deny that one.
That is a given.
The real changes have happened in the last 50 years not 300. Do you deny that ramp up in the loss of glaciers? Also a new report is showing the worlds lakes (fre ...[text shortened]... -climate-boost-global-lake-evaporationwith.html
*oh Jesus, he used the word 'alarming' again*
I remember when the great lakes had lower water levels than average and you argued it was the result of global warming. The water levels returned to normal as they always do. You have egg on your face.
03 May 18
Originally posted by @metal-brainYou have the egg of misunderstanding on your own face and there was significant industrial activity 300 years ago, all based on fires, lots of fires burning up entire forests of wood.
Now you are resorting to unusually stupid arguments. Did cars exist 300 years ago? Are you going to argue man caused it because his horses farted too much?
I remember when the great lakes had lower water levels than average and you argued it was the result of global warming. The water levels returned to normal as they always do. You have egg on your face.
https://www.nps.gov/cato/learn/historyculture/charcoal.htm
That example is only one of thousands of such efforts around the world required for the production of iron on an industrial scale.
Are you now denying such industries existed 300 years ago? In the US, whole mountains were denuded over a large stretch of the entire US and now most forest is second growth, the original wood long gone, chopped out by thousands of loggers and that happens anywhere on Earth there was such production of iron. It was in the 20th century when electricity was produced that stopped such denuding of forests strictly for the production of iron and steel. Now such forests are going away because we have way too many humans on the planet, ten times too many in fact so we are paving over 5000 square miles of land a year just for towns and roads.
Is your head in the sand over that one too?
04 May 18
Originally posted by @sonhouseYou forgot horse farts. Your argument is ridiculous!
You have the egg of misunderstanding on your own face and there was significant industrial activity 300 years ago, all based on fires, lots of fires burning up entire forests of wood.
https://www.nps.gov/cato/learn/historyculture/charcoal.htm
That example is only one of thousands of such efforts around the world required for the production of iron on ...[text shortened]... re miles of land a year just for towns and roads.
Is your head in the sand over that one too?
05 May 18
Originally posted by @metal-brainIn other words we are back to your baseless assumption Earth is SO huge mankind could not possibly have an effect on the weather.
You forgot horse farts. Your argument is ridiculous!
05 May 18
Originally posted by @sonhouseNot when the transportation back then was horses and ships powered by the wind. I can't believe you are foolish enough to defend such a losing argument. Give it up.
In other words we are back to your baseless assumption Earth is SO huge mankind could not possibly have an effect on the weather.
05 May 18
Originally posted by @metal-brainDid you not remember the part about completely denuded forests a couple hundred or more years ago just for charcoal used to make Iron? Did you not see the photo's of decimated forests? You think somehow that has zero effect on climate or ecology? A bad era for animals and climate too back then. BTW, the CO2 levels have passed 0.4 parts per thousand in the atmosphere as we speak. No big deal for you since you think temp rises before CO2 but you are totally wrong about that.
Not when the transportation back then was horses and ships powered by the wind. I can't believe you are foolish enough to defend such a losing argument. Give it up.
06 May 18
Originally posted by @sonhouseIf you insist on beating this dead horse give me your source of information. This is not going to end well for you.
Did you not remember the part about completely denuded forests a couple hundred or more years ago just for charcoal used to make Iron? Did you not see the photo's of decimated forests? You think somehow that has zero effect on climate or ecology? A bad era for animals and climate too back then. BTW, the CO2 levels have passed 0.4 parts per thousand in the ...[text shortened]... No big deal for you since you think temp rises before CO2 but you are totally wrong about that.
07 May 18
Originally posted by @metal-brainWhy? We've been down that road over and over. Regardless of the content or merit of the study, every scientific source of information either supports your pre-existing beliefs or it's wrong.
If you insist on beating this dead horse give me your source of information. This is not going to end well for you.
07 May 18
Originally posted by @wildgrassNews at 11.....
Why? We've been down that road over and over. Regardless of the content or merit of the study, every scientific source of information either supports your pre-existing beliefs or it's wrong.
08 May 18
Originally posted by @metal-brainFox news of course, since they NEVER lie.....
What is your source of information?
09 May 18
Originally posted by @sonhouseFox news promotes war and killing just like the other corporate owned tools of propaganda. I have never liked them.
So you admit Faux news lies?
I was saying you lie.
09 May 18
Originally posted by @metal-brainhttps://www.sciencealert.com/american-cities-losing-30-million-trees-every-single-year-in-stunning-decimation-tree-cover
Fox news promotes war and killing just like the other corporate owned tools of propaganda. I have never liked them.
I was saying you lie.
I guess losing 30 million trees a year is no big deal either.