60 Minutes

[Anonymous]

you know about coal, oil, and gas?
we burned too much too fast.

So, we humans, we're doing this activity 800,000 years ago?

 

[Anonymous]

It's not.
And you don't care what I think, so read what others more qualified than me have to say about it:

China: Yes, It's Capitalism
https://fee.org/freeman/detail/china-yes-its-capitalism

How China Became Capitalist
http://www.cato.org/policy-report/januaryfebruary-2013/how-china-became-capitalist

China’s government may be communist, but its people embrace capitalism
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...-communist-but-its-people-embrace-capitalism/

The Chinese like capitalism more than Americans
http://money.cnn.com/2014/10/13/news/economy/capitalism-china-likes-more-than-us/

By what measure is Socialist China better than The U.S. in terms of saving the world from ecological calamity?

 

[Anonymous]

So, we humans, we're doing this activity 800,000 years ago?

This question perfectly illustrates why people think (correctly) that right wingers are dumbshits. Do you not think that all of the scientists who study this issue have not thought of this? Do you not think that there could be multiple mechanisms that raise C02 levels?

Right wingers so often have the reasoning capability of first graders, yet they think they are brilliant. This is why we are in so many of the messes we are in.

 

[Anonymous]

This question perfectly illustrates why people think (correctly) that right wingers are dumbshits. Do you not think that all of the scientists who study this issue have not thought of this? Do you not think that there could be multiple mechanisms that raise C02 levels?

Right wingers so often have the reasoning capability of first graders, yet they think they are brilliant. This is why we are in so many of the messes we are in.

So what is the answer, oh wise one? Share your brilliance with us. Or just follow the "experts". LOL!

 

[Anonymous]

And which humans exactly caused a runaway greenhouse effect on Venus?

Oh my Moonbat, the science is greenhouse gases, not humans. Humans generate a vast amount of greenhouse gases. Ipso facto.

And since you want to discuss Greenhouse effects, Water vapor is the most potent greenhouse gas (NOT CO2), owing to the presence of the hydroxyl bond which strongly absorbs in the infra-red region of the light spectrum.

Yes, that is part of the climate modelling. The higher the temperatures, the higher the concentration of water vapor. Good that you realize this for a change.

Studies from other planets have nothing to do with greenhouse gas effects. They have to do with global warming with the absence of humans..... MORON!!!

Goodness me. Let me parse that. You say studies of other planets with greenhouse gases have nothing to do with greenhouse gas effects. Do you understand you contradicted yourself? Then you say they have to do with global warming? And then you bring up the absence of humans again? Are you a bit drunk again?

Mars has demonstrated global warming, independent from the presence of humans.... Got it, moron?

Um, see above. Venus, Mars, global warming. You said it.

The recent data has clearly shown that humans have ACCELERATED the rate of climate change by accounting for the burning of fossil fuels and other carbon positive activities. If you thing that is a good thing then so be it. Just don't deny it with confused arguments.

 

[Anonymous]

Oh, what would we do if some mindless liberal wasn't making a completly irrelevant reference to FoxNews?

Well, I guess it seems I'm right again that you favor Fox news for your disinformation.

I'm sorry for you to hear this, but regardless of what your American Hating scientist has said publicly, this is what his hacked emails said... “Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest. Phil, hopefully we can find time to discuss these further if necessary,” writes Peter Thorne of the UK Met Office.

“I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run,” Thorne adds.

Nice try again Moonbat. As you obviously don't know, the tropical troposphere is a small part of the modelling for the entire atmosphere. And as I explained before, that was from 2005 in emails when the FIRST IPCC assesment was being drafted, and underscoring the need for confidence intervals, which at that time were much more difficult to calculate. This is how science is done.

Then about ten years later in 2014 Thorne was a Lead Author of the FIFTH IPCC Assessment:
http://www.climatechange2013.org/ima...hure_FINAL.pdf

Read it Moonbat. Take a break from Fox news once in a while.

 

[Anonymous]

"Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide have increased to levels unprecedented in at least the last 800,000 years".

So which human activity caused such high levels of CO2?
Are you one of these religious morons who thinks man walked with dinosaurs?

Um, it is because we have reasonably good data of greenhouse gasses and temperature out to about 800k years ago. Why do you have a problem with data? What thought processes lead you to conflate that with dinosaurs and religious idiots?

Now we have good data and science to understand greenhouse gas concentrations and atmospheric temperatures and resultant climate changes.

The simple math to quantify the human contribution from fossil fuel emissions, deforestation, etc. makes it plain to see the incredibly rapid upsurge in greenhouse gases and temperature are from human activity.

What high school did you drop out from?

 

[Anonymous]

The Data are contentious at best. But, even if we accept the data, it is MINIMAL warming at best. And, even if you disagree with all of the aforementioned, NOBODY is sure what is causing "Global Warming". It is convenient to point to increases in CO2, but their is NO established, causal relationship between increases in CO2 and increases in temperature. And there is DEFINITELY no guarantee that by reducing CO2 that it will cause Global cooling. This is ALL HIGHLY speculative and theoretical AT BEST.

I COULD walk out of my house today and I COULD get hit by an Asteroid and I COULD get killed by it. As a result, I COULD decide to never go outside again. This is the same argument you Global Warming Alarmists want us all to accept. We are NOT going to fundamentally destroy our way of life because something COULD happen.

USING ALL CAPS TO MAKE YOUR POINT IS THE BEST WAY TO WIN AN ARGUMENT. YOU ARE VERY PERSUASIVE AND OBVIOUSLY THOROUGH AND SMART. THANK YOU FOR YOUR IN DEPTH RESEARCH EFFORT AND PRESENTING IT HERE SO WELL. GOD BLESS AND HUGS!

 

[Anonymous]

Um, it is because we have reasonably good data of greenhouse gasses and temperature out to about 800k years ago. Why do you have a problem with data? What thought processes lead you to conflate that with dinosaurs and religious idiots?

Now we have good data and science to understand greenhouse gas concentrations and atmospheric temperatures and resultant climate changes.

The simple math to quantify the human contribution from fossil fuel emissions, deforestation, etc. makes it plain to see the incredibly rapid upsurge in greenhouse gases and temperature are from human activity.

What high school did you drop out from?

Here we go again... 800,000 years ago is when CO2 levels were supposedly as high as they are now, right?
You argue that CO2 levels are so high now because of human activity, right!
What human activity caused high CO2 levels 800,000 years ago? Or... are increases in temperature and CO2 part of a natural process that we can't control?

In your answer, stay very focused. Don't mention FoxNews and answer the questions... genius!

 

[Anonymous]

Well, I guess it seems I'm right again that you favor Fox news for your disinformation.



Nice try again Moonbat. As you obviously don't know, the tropical troposphere is a small part of the modelling for the entire atmosphere. And as I explained before, that was from 2005 in emails when the FIRST IPCC assesment was being drafted, and underscoring the need for confidence intervals, which at that time were much more difficult to calculate. This is how science is done.

Then about ten years later in 2014 Thorne was a Lead Author of the FIFTH IPCC Assessment:
http://www.climatechange2013.org/ima...hure_FINAL.pdf

Read it Moonbat. Take a break from Fox news once in a while.

The emails have nothing to do with what was known 10 years ago and what is known now. The emails reveal deception and the willingness to manipulate data and science for political purposes. MORON ALL CAPS CONVINCING!

 

[Anonymous]

Here we go again... 800,000 years ago is when CO2 levels were supposedly as high as they are now, right?
You argue that CO2 levels are so high now because of human activity, right!
What human activity caused high CO2 levels 800,000 years ago? Or... are increases in temperature and CO2 part of a natural process that we can't control?

In your answer, stay very focused. Don't mention FoxNews and answer the questions... genius!

Just because humans weren't cause behind high CO2 levels back then, doesn't negate the fact that they are the primary driver behind high CO2 levels today.

You cannot think beyond linearly can you?

 

[Anonymous]

Just because humans weren't cause behind high CO2 levels back then, doesn't negate the fact that they are the primary driver behind high CO2 levels today.

You cannot think beyond linearly can you?

See, here is the problem. There is NO direct causal relationship between temperature and CO2 levels. However, we do know that The Earth NATURALLY has fluctuations in temperature.
Just like when the thermometers rise when it gets hot, we can't make it cold by artificially lowering the Mercury within the thermometer. CO2 levels have proven no more responsible for warming trends than mercury levels in a thermometer. There appears to be a correlation, but no definitive proof that one causes the other.

Is that too linear for you?

 

[Anonymous]

See, here is the problem. There is NO direct causal relationship between temperature and CO2 levels. However, we do know that The Earth NATURALLY has fluctuations in temperature.
Just like when the thermometers rise when it gets hot, we can't make it cold by artificially lowering the Mercury within the thermometer. CO2 levels have proven no more responsible for warming trends than mercury levels in a thermometer. There appears to be a correlation, but no definitive proof that one causes the other.

Is that too linear for you?

Simple straight line..from idiot denier to you.

 

[Anonymous]

Here we go again... 800,000 years ago is when CO2 levels were supposedly as high as they are now, right?
You argue that CO2 levels are so high now because of human activity, right!
What human activity caused high CO2 levels 800,000 years ago? Or... are increases in temperature and CO2 part of a natural process that we can't control?

In your answer, stay very focused. Don't mention FoxNews and answer the questions... genius!

Here we go again. It appears you still have not read the recent IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5):
http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_ALL_FINAL.pdf

The answers to your specific questions are in there.

Lets make this a fun game so we can get you out of your rut of willfull ignorance. You find the relevant page that shows the data you are interested in discussing and tell me and you will win a prize! Then we can help you work through the big words and the math.

In your research stay very focused. When your lips get tired don’t go back to watching Fox News. Remember: no all-caps responses, and source your work. Good luck!

 

[Anonymous]

Simple straight line..from idiot denier to you.

Whatever you say Mr. Groupthink Lemming. Just keep following society's Pied Pipers. Why even bother to ask the difficult questions and think at all for yourself? The Svengalis have done all your thinking for you.

You can align yourself with all the so-called "experts" and by association, you are now also an expert. Congrats... You have officially achieved DRONE STATUS.

 

[Anonymous]

The emails have nothing to do with what was known 10 years ago and what is known now. The emails reveal deception and the willingness to manipulate data and science for political purposes. MORON ALL CAPS CONVINCING!

Again, you do realize the emails you cherry pick out of context were exchanged before the first report ever came out, during the drafting? And that ten years of peer reviewed research has transpired since then, and five IPCC reports?

Do you understand the concept of peer review? Or are 259 scientist authors engaged in a vast ten year conspiracy to feed your wingnut fantasies?

 

[Anonymous]

Collective human actions are transforming, even ravaging, the biosphere - perhaps irreversibly - through global warming and loss of biodiversity.

 

[Anonymous]

Collective human actions are transforming, even ravaging, the biosphere - perhaps irreversibly - through global warming and loss of biodiversity.

Collective groupthink is transforming, even ravaging the average human's ability to think - perhaps irreversibly - through drone-type mentality that will result in the loss of human progress and individual freedom.

 

[Anonymous]

Simple straight line..from idiot denier to you.

I understand.... Neither you nor anyone promoting this man-made global warming scam, can overcome this inconvenient truth.

What you morons apparently don't understand or don't care about is this: you can't "control" weather (if you believe in that type of nonsense), without first controlling individuals. This is about CONTROLLING INDIVIDUALS. It's about totalitarian control.

 

[Anonymous]

This is about CONTROLLING INDIVIDUALS. It's about totalitarian control.

Oh dear…

I imagine our very special friend here hunched in front of his i286 Windows 95 machine in a stained wifebeater and backward Confederate flag baseball cap. Spittles of dried tobacco juice cover the screen and keyboard. In the background, his parents old B&W TV blaring Fox News. On the wall are stained and tattered posters of his favorite Fox news babes. He gets up and retrieves another beer from the fridge situated next to a sink piled high with dirty dishes smeared with frozen dinners and a little bit of vomit.

When he returns, he sits down at the keyboard and begins typing. His spell checker is barely even able to keep up even at his slow hunt-and-peck pace. His Caps Lock key is cracked. Breathing through his mouth, and smoking self-rolled cigarettes, he silently lip reads the words before him and before long he stops with a puzzled look on his face.

He calls down to his 14-year old half-naked sister passed out from a meth binge on his stained mattress in the basement.

“Hey baby doll, what does ‘Anthropogenic Component’ mean”?