19 Jan 2020, 3:41 am
20 Jan 2020, 1:09 am
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
IPCC Expert’s 8 Discredited Papers
Philip Munday’s work falls to pieces whenever someone tries to verify it.
Last week, Nature published a damning refutation of a significant body of climate change research. The title of that article is self-explanatory: Ocean acidification does not impair the behaviour of coral reef fishes.
The authors studied more than 900 fish from six different species over a period of three years, attempting to verify earlier findings by a team of researchers at Australia’s James Cook University. Their attempts failed.
Philip Munday’s work falls to pieces whenever someone tries to verify it.
Last week, Nature published a damning refutation of a significant body of climate change research. The title of that article is self-explanatory: Ocean acidification does not impair the behaviour of coral reef fishes.
The authors studied more than 900 fish from six different species over a period of three years, attempting to verify earlier findings by a team of researchers at Australia’s James Cook University. Their attempts failed.
These guys don't like cow farts:
Quote:
20 Jan 2020, 2:12 am
SoloSailor wrote:
These guys don't like cow farts:
Quote:
You do?
20 Jan 2020, 2:22 am
Pepe wrote:
SoloSailor wrote:
These guys don't like cow farts:
Quote:
You do?
Every time a cow farts a buffalo gets its wings.
20 Jan 2020, 2:35 am
EzraS wrote:
Pepe wrote:
SoloSailor wrote:
These guys don't like cow farts:
Quote:
You do?
Every time a cow farts a buffalo gets its wings.
You do realise that "Buffalo Wings" are really chicken wings, right?
So you are really saying:
Every time a cow farts, a chicken gets its wings pulled off.
20 Jan 2020, 3:10 am
20 Jan 2020, 8:18 am
Pepe wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Pepe wrote:
SoloSailor wrote:
These guys don't like cow farts:
Quote:
You do?
Every time a cow farts a buffalo gets its wings.
You do realise that "Buffalo Wings" are really chicken wings, right?
So you are really saying:
Every time a cow farts, a chicken gets its wings pulled off.
Ha. This logo for a resturant chain that features buffalo wings says you are wrong. Otherwise they would get in trouble for false advertising:
20 Jan 2020, 7:25 pm
20 Jan 2020, 11:15 pm
21 Jan 2020, 1:10 am
21 Jan 2020, 1:27 am
Kiprobalhato wrote:
SoloSailor wrote:
Why must humanity cut emissions in half by 2030?
regardless of whether you believe all the doom and gloom predictions or not, reducing the amount of toxic s**t we pump into the air seems like a pretty obvious choice if you ask me. again i'm not getting why "less garbage" is so controversial
unless you like smelling exhaust all the time?
I believe the "emission reduction" is referring to CO2.
CO2 is odourless,
Non-carcinogenic,
Non-toxic, period.
And is vital in the photosynthesis process, producing oxygen via plants,
I.E. It is plant food.
Quote:
Photosynthesis is the process by which plants, some bacteria and some protistans use the energy from sunlight to produce glucose from carbon dioxide and water. This glucose can be converted into pyruvate which releases adenosine triphosphate (ATP) by cellular respiration. Oxygen is also formed. https://www.rsc.org/Education/Teachers/ ... thesis.htm
Also,
CO2 is invisible.
The pollution you *see* is pollution, not CO2.
21 Jan 2020, 3:03 am
21 Jan 2020, 3:11 am
21 Jan 2020, 3:52 am
EzraS wrote:
Kiprobalhato wrote:
SoloSailor wrote:
Why must humanity cut emissions in half by 2030?
regardless of whether you believe all the doom and gloom predictions or not, reducing the amount of toxic s**t we pump into the air seems like a pretty obvious choice if you ask me. again i'm not getting why "less garbage" is so controversial
unless you like smelling exhaust all the time?
I believe it is the percieved chicken little 'the sky is falling' the world coming to an end is around the corner drastic measures need to be taken hypehype and hysteria that people are arguing against.
That and also that it seems to them that a lot of climate activism mainly has a political motivation.
Extinction Rebellion is doing so much damage to more rational man-made climate change proponents.
Their emotionalism is pushing me towards becoming more verbally militant,
Which is out of my comfort zone.
I detest sanctimony, self-righteousness, virtue-signalling and emotional blackmail.
Evolution,
What have you created?
And more importantly,
Why?
21 Jan 2020, 3:55 am
cyberdad wrote:
Kiprobalhato wrote:
[seems like a pretty obvious choice if you ask me. again i'm not getting why "less garbage" is so controversial
This might go some way to answer your question
https://theconversation.com/climate-exp ... ves-123549
Quote:
cyberdad wrote:
I'm out! you guys have the floor
21 Jan 2020, 4:12 am
Pepe wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Kiprobalhato wrote:
[seems like a pretty obvious choice if you ask me. again i'm not getting why "less garbage" is so controversial
This might go some way to answer your question
https://theconversation.com/climate-exp ... ves-123549
Quote:
cyberdad wrote:
I'm out! you guys have the floor
Did I forget to mention I'll be back
Only kidding...floors yours (for now
)
