Yellowtail Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 53 minutes ago, Danderman123 said: Regardless of the personal actions of scientists, the planet is warming, caused by human produced carbon dioxide. How is it that only human produced carbon dioxide causing it, and not all carbon dioxide? 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 12 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: How is it that only human produced carbon dioxide causing it, and not all carbon dioxide? All CO2 causes warming. The problem that the natural level of 280mm is now increased to 400+ ppm by human produced CO2. I 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 17 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: He's not claiming the topic is "about" alarmism, he is claiming the people like you that are posting are alarmists. Do you disagree? Yes. My point is that the first step in solving a problem to identify the problem. The Deniers don't believe there is a problem. They generally don't believe that human produced carbon dioxide is causing global warming. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: How is it that only human produced carbon dioxide causing it, and not all carbon dioxide? Because , there is an amount of CO2 that would be produced naturally from a variety of sources. That can't be helped . Then there is the CO2 produced by Human, not naturally but by bad choices that could be mitigated. Those are the ones that we can do something about, and should. I am sure you , like everyone else is complaining about the air Quality in Thailand and all the human causes for it. Ok , wouldn't you agree that steps should be taken to mitigate the situation? I am sure you would. Then why can't we apply such approach planet wide . Edited February 18 by sirineou 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 58 minutes ago, Danderman123 said: Yes. Wrong. He posted: "3 posts in a row - all adding to c02 levels. Comedy show watching you alarmists." His post clearly not referring to the topic, but to the posters. 58 minutes ago, Danderman123 said: My point is that the first step in solving a problem to identify the problem. The Deniers don't believe there is a problem. They generally don't believe that human produced carbon dioxide is causing global warming. What "deniers" are you talking about? You call everyone that disagrees with any of the idiocy you spew a denier. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 1 hour ago, sirineou said: Because , there is an amount of CO2 that would be produced naturally from a variety of sources. That can't be helped . Then there is the CO2 produced by Human, not naturally but by bad choices that could be mitigated. Those are the ones that we can do something about, and should. I am sure you , like everyone else is complaining about the air Quality in Thailand and all the human causes for it. Ok , wouldn't you agree that steps should be taken to mitigate the situation? I am sure you would. Then why can't we apply such approach planet wide . I am not complaining about the air quality in Thailand. I agree something needs to be done "planet wide", but it is my position that the things being pushed to "solve" the issue are largely ridiculous, are the people pushing them. Have you seen any cost benefit analysis done for any of this stuff? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 10 hours ago, Yellowtail said: I am not complaining about the air quality in Thailand. The answer of an oxygen deprived brain 10 hours ago, Yellowtail said: Have you seen any cost benefit analysis done for any of this stuff? Yes!! We don't do it many will die and most will suffer. We do it and maybe we will not. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KhunLA Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 (edited) https://aseannow.com/topic/1319843-greenland-has-lost-ice-36-times-the-size-of-new-york-that’s-a-huge-problem-for-the-planet/page/3/#comment-18704240 Edited February 19 by KhunLA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 4 hours ago, sirineou said: The answer of an oxygen deprived brain Oh, an insult, I'm shocked. 4 hours ago, sirineou said: Yes!! I bet you have not. 4 hours ago, sirineou said: We don't do it many will die and most will suffer. What is "it" that we need to do? 4 hours ago, sirineou said: We do it and maybe we will not. So, the plan is to end suffering and stop people from dying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 27 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: Oh, an insult, I'm shocked. I am making excuses for you and you don't even appreciate it. and i worked in the CI2 angle. 32 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: I bet you have not. Sure I have. the cost analysis is , we don't do something soon. it will cost a lot of death and suffering 34 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: What is "it" that we need to do? transition into a less polluting lifestyle. and make those who profit by polluting pay for it. every other Industry has to pay for the pollution they cause in their peruse of profit, but not the energy sector? 42 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: So, the plan is to end suffering and stop people from dying? Very cute and highly insincere. You are not a dummy . unless you want to argue otherwise. You know what we are talking about. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 3 minutes ago, sirineou said: I am making excuses for you and you don't even appreciate it. and i worked in the CI2 angle. Sure I have. the cost analysis is , we don't do something soon. it will cost a lot of death and suffering transition into a less polluting lifestyle. and make those who profit by polluting pay for it. every other Industry has to pay for the pollution they cause in their peruse of profit, but not the energy sector? Very cute and highly insincere. You are not a dummy . unless you want to argue otherwise. You know what we are talking about. Yet you pretend to not know what I am talking about. My post: I agree something needs to be done "planet wide", but it is my position that the things being pushed to "solve" the issue are largely ridiculous, are the people pushing them. Have you seen any cost benefit analysis done for any of this stuff? You claimed that you had seen a cost-benefit analysis, and then go on to (apparently) prove you have not. Typical leftist dodge and then a few silly emojis, for what? Is it a serious topic or is it not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 1 minute ago, Yellowtail said: Yet you pretend to not know what I am talking about. Now pretending not to know what my comment was about. In case you are sincere, It was about the death and suffering reply you made. 4 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: Have you seen any cost benefit analysis done for any of this stuff? Not sure what you are talking about there. I have seen the benefit. (preventing death , and suffering), as to the cost. How much does a life cost? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 7 minutes ago, sirineou said: Now pretending not to know what my comment was about. In case you are sincere, It was about the death and suffering reply you made. Still pretending then. 7 minutes ago, sirineou said: Not sure what you are talking about there. I don't doubt that. 7 minutes ago, sirineou said: I have seen the benefit. (preventing death , and suffering), as to the cost. Yet you seemed to have claimed you have seen a cost benefit analysis when you have not. What is the benefit you have seen and from what? 7 minutes ago, sirineou said: How much does a life cost? To the current administration? If you're a hostage being held by Iran, over a billion dollars, if you're one of the working poor in East Palestine, nothing. Do you have an what a cost benefit analysis is or no? My position is that the feel-good nonsense being pushed as solutions are largely ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 4 hours ago, Yellowtail said: Still pretending then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 22 hours ago, Yellowtail said: What "deniers" are you talking about? You call everyone that disagrees with any of the idiocy you spew a denier. Deniers come in all flavors, including those who simply attempt to sow doubts about the Global Warming hypothesis. Sowing doubt was first used by the tobacco industry, but the oil companies picked up the technique: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doubt_Is_Their_Product Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 (edited) 7 hours ago, Yellowtail said: Oh, an insult, I'm shocked. I bet you have not. What is "it" that we need to do? So, the plan is to end suffering and stop people from dying? One very old trolling technique is to deflect from describing the problem of Global Warming and instead argue about solutions. After enough time has been wasted on solutions, then claim that the Global Warming problem doesn't exist. I suggest that discussion of solutions be moved to another topic. Edited February 19 by Danderman123 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 1 hour ago, Danderman123 said: Deniers come in all flavors, including those who simply attempt to sow doubts about the Global Warming hypothesis. Sowing doubt was first used by the tobacco industry, but the oil companies picked up the technique: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doubt_Is_Their_Product So, you don't know, you were just making it up, and now you're changing the subject, that's what I thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 1 hour ago, Danderman123 said: One very old trolling technique is to deflect from describing the problem of Global Warming and instead argue about solutions. After enough time has been wasted on solutions, then claim that the Global Warming problem doesn't exist. I suggest that discussion of solutions be moved to another topic. Aside from it being easy it is for you to continue regurgitating the same silly talking points over and over, what is the point of discussing climate change if there are no solutions? I think we most all agree that the Earth warming, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 42 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: So, you don't know, you were just making it up, and now you're changing the subject, that's what I thought. The atmosphere is being warmed by human produced Carbon Dioxide. Your job is to raise doubts about the reality of Global Warming. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 41 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: Aside from it being easy it is for you to continue regurgitating the same silly talking points over and over, what is the point of discussing climate change if there are no solutions? I think we most all agree that the Earth warming, no? The first step in solving a problem is to recognize that there is a problem. In this case, the problem is that human produced carbon dioxide is warming the atmosphere. Although you admit that the atmosphere is warming, you disagree that human produced Carbon Dioxide is the primary cause. So, it's impossible to discuss solutions with you, if you don't recognize the cause of the problem. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 It would be easy for a Denier to prove that human produced Carbon Dioxide isn't the cause of the current warming: Show another source of increased carbon dioxide. Show increased solar output. Show changes to the Earth's orbital parameters that are currently causing warm. Show a wizard who is casting warming spells. To the extent that the Deniers can't do this, they are wrong. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 10 hours ago, Danderman123 said: The first step in solving a problem is to recognize that there is a problem. In this case, the problem is that human produced carbon dioxide is warming the atmosphere. The problem is that the atmosphere is warming, regardless of why. 10 hours ago, Danderman123 said: Although you admit that the atmosphere is warming, you disagree that human produced Carbon Dioxide is the primary cause. You are lying again. Where did I say that? 10 hours ago, Danderman123 said: So, it's impossible to discuss solutions with you, if you don't recognize the cause of the problem. Or if you're not bright enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rimmer Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 Bickering flame and reply has been removed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 https://www.co2.earth/ The Deniers cannot dispute that this increase in atmospheric CO2 comes from human activity. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottiejohn Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 21 minutes ago, Danderman123 said: The Deniers cannot dispute that this increase in atmospheric CO2 comes from human activity. It is only a graph produced by someone/thing you support! It is NOT proof, it is only the opinion of the originator who may claim it is proof! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 4 minutes ago, scottiejohn said: It is only a graph produced by someone/thing you support! It is NOT proof, it is only the opinion of the originator who may claim it is proof! You don't believe that carbon dioxide levels have increased over the last 100 years? @Yellowtail Here is your chance to educate a Denier! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now