Thread: Top Judge Declares Global Warming a Myth (from CL)

[QUOTE="Robski"]in England if someone says they are a Daily Mail reader they've basically stopped thinking for themselves a long time ago and their opinions would be disregarded by most.

Spot on .I think the Mail has the same editorial staff as the Sun

Can somebody please tell me where the largest green house emission (CO2) actually goes?Does it hang around the local mum and pop shop,or does it go to Mars?

Well there happens to be 50% of scientists that don't buy global warming. So basically saying that everyone is on board with global warming would be a major untruth.

Now don't get me wrong if you want to be environmentally conscious fair enuf, but just say that and I have no problem.

^^

Can they balls. They can beat you over the head with figure that mean nothing & sling slogans around but their talent pool ends there. They don't care about facts, only about making themselves look important, or clever & they come accross as neither.

I suspect they are just trolling.

Originally Posted by britmaveric

Well there happens to be 50% of scientists that don't buy global warming. So basically saying that everyone is on board with global warming would be a major untruth.

Now don't get me wrong if you want to be environmentally conscious fair enuf, but just say that and I have no problem.

I think you may have found your target audience here RJ.
1 person, statistically that could still be construed as a majority.

Originally Posted by Little Chuchok

Can somebody please tell me where the largest green house emission (CO2) actually goes?Does it hang around the local mum and pop shop,or does it go to Mars?

Well there must be some expert here that knows the answer to this?

Most greenhouse gases are absorbed by the oceans, but, the warmer the oceans get, the less green house gases they are able to absorb.

Originally Posted by Little Chuchok

Well there must be some expert here that knows the answer to this?

They are all experts who know fuck-all

This is just a Class War.

In answer to your question I think plants & trees swallow most of it, but I'm no expert & might be wrong unlike everyone else.

Originally Posted by Sir Burr

Most greenhouse gases are absorbed by the oceans, but, the warmer the oceans get, the less green house gases they are able to absorb.

Then the ocean at the mo, must be getting saturated by CO2.

Now they'll start banging on about saving the fish.

Expect images of dying dolphins on the news any time now.

Originally Posted by Little Chuchok

Originally Posted by Sir Burr

Most greenhouse gases are absorbed by the oceans, but, the warmer the oceans get, the less green house gases they are able to absorb.

Then the ocean at the mo, must be getting saturated by CO2.

The CO2 is used by plant plankton for photosynthesis. The plants break it down, keep the carbon and release the oxygen as a by product. This also happens to a lesser extent with land-based plants.

Originally Posted by Richard Littlejohn

Now they'll start banging on about saving the fish.

Been "banging on" about this for some time. Inform yourself about the state of fish in the North-sea, for example. Or in the coastal waters of the Philippines.

Originally Posted by britmaveric

Well there happens to be 50% of scientists that don't buy global warming.

50% of all scientists, or of those working in relevant fields, or what?
Link?
-don't worry, I won't hold my breath...

Originally Posted by Little Chuchok

Originally Posted by Little Chuchok

Can somebody please tell me where the largest green house emission (CO2) actually goes?Does it hang around the local mum and pop shop,or does it go to Mars?

Well there must be some expert here that knows the answer to this?

Here's how it works;

Originally Posted by stroller

Originally Posted by Richard Littlejohn

Now they'll start banging on about saving the fish.

Been "banging on" about this for some time. Inform yourself about the state of fish in the North-sea, for example. Or in the coastal waters of the Philippines.

Overfished? There will be lots of plants for the fish to eat.Do fish fart?

Originally Posted by stroller

Originally Posted by britmaveric

Well there happens to be 50% of scientists that don't buy global warming.

50% of all scientists, or of those working in relevant fields, or what?
Link?
-don't worry, I won't hold my breath...

Boon Mee posted the link in a previous global warming hysteria thread.

I know we're in issues now & concentration camp rules apply but I'll find it later.

The figure was at least half of all scientists doubted the numbers.

^
Oh, a blog with someone venting their opinion and just stating so without evidence, most likely.

Originally Posted by Little Chuchok

So Plant life should be booming.Fish that eat plants will get really fat and therefore there will be a plentiful supply of fish for humans to eat.

Sorry, but nature don't follow your oversimplistic beer-imbibed logic.

That's the thing with these climate change loons - they think they have mother nature all figured out based on checking the weather twice a day for 100 years.

How can you argue with blind faith like that?

It might've been a blog, BTW. You know BM.

I meant strict rules. Sorry.

Originally Posted by Richard Littlejohn

That's the thing with these climate change loons - they think they have mother nature all figured out based on checking the weather twice a day for 100 years.

How can you argue with blind faith like that?

It might've been a blog, BTW. You know BM.

Blind faith? How can argue with evidence like this?

Any chance of a quick edit of that post, LC?

Make it readable.

Originally Posted by Richard Littlejohn

Boon Mee posted the link in a previous global warming hysteria thread.

I know we're in issues now & concentration camp rules apply but I'll find it later.

I asked Britmaveric (not you) for a link as part of an exchange during a discussion, not as a moderator - he hasn't quoted anything which would require a link.
Jeez...

I rarely venture into Issues, but I've heard rumours of a ruthless mod, who lurks around ruthlessly deleting posts that aren't backed up by links & I was just putting it in ink that this link exists, before the post was ruthlessly deleted.