A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Others » Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Explain this, then, you Global Warming Freaks



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old June 2nd 19, 05:35 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Sylvain[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 159
Default Explain this, then, you Global Warming Freaks

Le 02/06/2019 Ã* 05:33, Hägar a écritÂ*:


*** Sylvain, you are almost as smart as that moron Herbert Glazier ...
are you praying to Mecca yet ???



Hagär, you are a simplistic illiterate unalphabetic moron. It's not
because it's most rain at the area where the sun radiance is the most
intense, that the global warming will make more rain

We are going to make you a car with simplistic reasoning and you will
see if it will work well

  #12  
Old June 2nd 19, 07:22 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Hägar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 595
Default Explain this, then, you Global Warming Freaks

"Sylvain" wrote in message ...

Le 02/06/2019 Ã* 05:33, Hägar a écrit :


*** Sylvain, you are almost as smart as that moron Herbert Glazier ... are
you praying to Mecca yet ???



Hagär, you are a simplistic illiterate unalphabetic moron. It's not
because it's most rain at the area where the sun radiance is the most
intense, that the global warming will make more rain

*** you idiot!! It is called the "Rain Forest" and by sheer coincidence,
they seem to flourish wherever the Earth's temperature is the hottest,
namely at the Equator, between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of
Capricorn.
My simplistic, illiterate and unalphabetic (you must have invented that one)
mind had nothing to do with it, you pathetic doofus.

We are going to make you a car with simplistic reasoning and you will
see if it will work well

*** We've been reading about that car for half a century, be it the "Water
fuelled car", the "Compressed Air Car", an unsuccessful French invention, by
the way, and just like the "Flying Car", which still is and will remain a
pipe dream of the demented Lefty lunatics, who also think the human race
will meet its maker in 12 years if we don't stop cows from farting.
Personally, I think the atmospheric pollution comes from the French never
taking a shower and stinking up the heavens.


  #13  
Old June 2nd 19, 07:52 PM posted to alt.astronomy
palsing[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,068
Default Explain this, then, you Global Warming Freaks

On Sunday, June 2, 2019 at 8:51:12 AM UTC-7, Hägar wrote:

### In conclusion to this ridiculous tit-for-tat I can only say this:
today, here where I live, the daily temperature is not any hotter than it
was 50 years ago. We have out 6 years of drought and then one year of
overabundance of rain, just like clockwork, since time immemorial.


This only proves that you don't know the difference between weather and climate, a common mistake among climate deniers.


Regarding the comment that you are a registered Republican .... well Special
Investigator Mueller makes the same claim and if you believe him, then you
truly are dumber than a rock.


Do you have evidence that Special Investigator Mueller is lying? Let's see it. But then, you have provided virtually zero evidence to support your claims in the past...

This discussion is over.


Yeah, you've made this claim before, too, and yet, here we are!

Not because I can't find the evidence you so
desperately crave, but because the entire argument is moot in face of what I
see with my own eyes every day and certain non-issues, such as Global
Warming, aren't worth the effort. Case closed. Send me a post card in 12
years if we are still around. Be sure to vote for that wizard AOC !!!


Actually, it is over exactly *because* you cannot find the evidence that you desperately seek because it does not exist! If it did, you would certainly provide it. Obviously, the case is not closed at all, except in your small mind.

I surprised that you haven't given up a long time ago. you must have finally seen the futility in making arguments that you cannot support.

  #14  
Old June 2nd 19, 08:16 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Sylvain[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 159
Default Explain this, then, you Global Warming Freaks

Le 02/06/2019 Ã* 20:22, Hägar a écritÂ*:


*** you idiot!!Â* It is called the "Rain Forest" and by sheer
coincidence, they seem to flourish wherever the Earth's temperature is
the hottest, namely at the Equator, between the Tropic of Cancer and the
Tropic of Capricorn.
My simplistic, illiterate and unalphabetic (you must have invented that
one) mind had nothing to do with it, you pathetic doofus.


Wherever the Earth's temperature is the hottest isn't where there are
rainforests

But is where there is in the hot deserts about 30° 35° latitude,
called too the "horse latitudes"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse_latitudes
  #15  
Old June 2nd 19, 09:38 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Notroll2016
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 742
Default Explain this, then, you Global Warming Freaks



"Hägar" wrote in message
...

"palsing" wrote in message
...

On Saturday, June 1, 2019 at 12:43:39 PM UTC-7, Hägar wrote:

If you follow the Equator around the Earth, you'll find more Rain Forests
than anything else. There are areas very densely populated by an
abundance
of vegetation, matched nowhere else on Earth and the majority of the
Global
animal species have taken up residence there. The heat hovers above 100F
and the humidity will make it difficult to breathe for native residents
from
above or below the Tropics of Cancer or Capricorn. These Rain Forests
flourish in Equador, Southern Columbia Northern Peru and in most of
Brazil,
despite man's concerted effort to clearcut all the trees. In Africa they
can be found in Gabon, the Congo and Uganda and Kenya. Also the islands of
Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei et al are covered in Rain Forests.

So, how again is a computer modeled rise in World temperature by say, 5
degrees, detrimental to us ?? the Rain forests would spread North and
South,
the wild life numbers would increase and people would sweat more ... your
turn, Palsing ... shovel some more of your usual bull****.


What you say, on the surface, seems perfectly logical, and there was a time
when I was right there with you. I'm no climate scientist and I personally
have no answer for you from personal experience, but that doesn't mean that
your scenario can't be addressed by others who are more knowledgable than
either of us.
Read these, for example...

https://skepticalscience.com/few-deg...al-warming.htm

https://www.climaterealityproject.or...degrees-warmer

Here are a whole lot of responses...

https://tinyurl.com/y5d25t8b

So for me, the question becomes "how do we know who to believe about all of
this?" I can only speak for myself, and I simply do not think that the
world's population is being bamboozled and lied to by a few well-placed
people

*** Like the Democrats and CNN and MSNBC who to this day swear that Trump is
a Russian agent and that the Russkies helped to elect him to POTUS ... like
that, Palsing ???

who will be getting rich because of this. I think that the scientific
community as a whole is honest and that the way the Scientific Method works
keeps them honest. That does not mean that they are always correct but it
does mean that they are *probably* mostly correct, even if their timing
might be suspect. Plus, the vast majority of climate scientists mostly agree
that climate change is real and has negative long-term effects for most of
the world's populations.

*** The World's population lives in climate of above 110F and extremely high
humidity to Point Barrow, where there is total darkness for 5 months and the
temperatures are in the below (-) 40F range .. like that, Palsing ???

As always, it is all about the data and the evidence, and I see a whole lot
from the one side and very little from the other side that can't be refuted.
Whether you believe me or not, I'm a really big skeptic about most claims
and always do a lot of due diligence before making any statements of my own.
That is why I'm always asking for evidence and why I always provide evidence
to support my own position. It is always evidence that changes my mind (and
I've changed my mind often over the years) and I'm convinced that this whole
climate change issue is real and mostly accurate. I would agree that the
early climate change models left a lot to be desired, but the newer models
are getting better and better with the passage of time, but no, they are
nowhere near perfect right now...

*** Gee, you mean like the "hockey stick" ... when the earliest version of
the climate morons was still called Climate Change, they needed something
with more impact to jog the World population into their alley of bull****,
the IPCC directed computer modeling until ... you guessed it, the infamous
Hockey Stick appeared. Unfortunately, the computer manipulating culprits
long ago abandoned the IPCC ship for fear of being held responsible for this
hoax ... even Pachauri, the head cheese and sexual molester quit while the
getting out was good ... like that, Palsing ???

The bottom line, in my view, is that there are just too many people on this
Earth, and the population is increasing at an alarming rate, mostly by
people who can least afford a big family to begin with... but I have no
answer to this perceived problem and I see no answer proposed by anyone that
I would trust...

*** You finally hit the nail on the head !!! Way too many people. Und it is
unfortunate that those who can afford it least are multiplying the most, all
wanting their share of the consumer goods, throw away products made by those
who are taxed to the extent that they can't afford more than one, perhaps
two kids, since both parents have to be working to pay the Federal and State
and City Extortion rates called taxes, to pay for those who are too busy
multiplying like rabbits ... you finally got it right, Palsing ... Bravo !!!

***No one in North America is multiplying like rabbits. Indeed, the US
birthrate has dropped below the replacement rate. (Due somewhat to the fact
that no one will **** the likes of you and yours). Do you understand what
no growth means for our economy? (No, of course you don't because it isn't
covered on Fox News). Yes, tax rates are still too high because Trump gave
all the tax cuts to the upper 5%. Trumpers - never have so many been so
stupid.



  #16  
Old June 3rd 19, 12:21 AM posted to alt.astronomy
Hägar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 595
Default Explain this, then, you Global Warming Freaks

"Sylvain" wrote in message ...

Le 02/06/2019 Ã* 20:22, Hägar a écrit :


*** you idiot!! It is called the "Rain Forest" and by sheer coincidence,
they seem to flourish wherever the Earth's temperature is the hottest,
namely at the Equator, between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of
Capricorn.
My simplistic, illiterate and unalphabetic (you must have invented that
one) mind had nothing to do with it, you pathetic doofus.


Wherever the Earth's temperature is the hottest isn't where there are
rainforests

But is where there is in the hot deserts about 30° 35° latitude,
called too the "horse latitudes"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse_latitudes


*** you pathetic moron, I don't know how many times I also mentioned the
word "humidity", when referencing rain forests. Deserts are mostly hot and
"arid", which is the opposite of humid, you retarded Frenchy ...


  #17  
Old June 3rd 19, 06:52 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Bast[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,917
Default Explain this, then, you Global Warming Freaks



Hägar wrote:
If you follow the Equator around the Earth, you'll find more Rain
Forests than anything else. There are areas very densely populated by
an abundance of vegetation, matched nowhere else on Earth and the
majority of the Global animal species have taken up residence there. The
heat hovers above 100F and the humidity will make it difficult to
breathe for native residents from above or below the Tropics of Cancer
or Capricorn. These Rain Forests flourish in Equador, Southern
Columbia Northern Peru and in most of Brazil, despite man's concerted
effort to clearcut all the trees. In Africa they can be found in
Gabon, the Congo and Uganda and Kenya. Also the islands of Indonesia,
Malaysia, Brunei et al are covered in Rain Forests.
So, how again is a computer modeled rise in World temperature by say, 5
degrees, detrimental to us ?? the Rain forests would spread North and
South, the wild life numbers would increase and people would sweat more
... your turn, Palsing ... shovel some more of your usual bull****.






Globalist warming nutcases NEVER take into account plate tectonics, and
continental drift.
E.G. that North America actually once was in the southern hemisphere, and
then slowly crossed the equator, so was lush with Rainforests.
That left behind coal and oil/gas deposits.
They also do not like to talk about ice ages.
All of which happened naturally before the first HAGAR started walking
upright.







  #18  
Old June 3rd 19, 09:24 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Hägar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,511
Default Explain this, then, you Global Warming Freaks

"Bast" wrote in message ...



Hägar wrote:
If you follow the Equator around the Earth, you'll find more Rain
Forests than anything else. There are areas very densely populated by
an abundance of vegetation, matched nowhere else on Earth and the
majority of the Global animal species have taken up residence there. The
heat hovers above 100F and the humidity will make it difficult to
breathe for native residents from above or below the Tropics of Cancer
or Capricorn. These Rain Forests flourish in Equador, Southern
Columbia Northern Peru and in most of Brazil, despite man's concerted
effort to clearcut all the trees. In Africa they can be found in
Gabon, the Congo and Uganda and Kenya. Also the islands of Indonesia,
Malaysia, Brunei et al are covered in Rain Forests.
So, how again is a computer modeled rise in World temperature by say, 5
degrees, detrimental to us ?? the Rain forests would spread North and
South, the wild life numbers would increase and people would sweat more
... your turn, Palsing ... shovel some more of your usual bull****.






Globalist warming nutcases NEVER take into account plate tectonics, and
continental drift.
E.G. that North America actually once was in the southern hemisphere, and
then slowly crossed the equator, so was lush with Rainforests.
That left behind coal and oil/gas deposits.
They also do not like to talk about ice ages.
All of which happened naturally before the first HAGAR started walking
upright.


*** they want to hear even less about the "Snowball Earth", in which the
Earth was covered entirely by ice. This happened at least three times, as
evidenced by "drop stones" which are huge rounded rocks, smoothed by moving
glaciers and ice sheets and then unceremoniously dropped when the ice
finally melted, due to volcanic activity, which spewed ashes through the
ice mantle into the atmosphere, creating "Global Warming" which then melted
the icy cover. I am sure if they play with their computer modeling long
enough, they could actually posthumously predict these Snowball Earth
scenarios. And yes, Bast, I was walking upright when you were still on your
hands and knees sniffing other Lezzes' crotches.








  #19  
Old June 4th 19, 12:27 AM posted to alt.astronomy
palsing[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,068
Default Explain this, then, you Global Warming Freaks

On Monday, June 3, 2019 at 3:42:00 PM UTC-7, Hägar wrote:

#### This is really rich, Palsing ... Google no less ... when I posted
liinks from Google early on in our pleasant discourse, you derided them and
me as, and I can't remember the exact words you used, but you implied that
Google was the moron's last resort at trying to be smart. Really glad to
see you are in the same boat.


Hagar, your memory is as bad as your evidence.

I never disparaged using Google as a research tool, I disparaged you using a reference from Google Docs as proof that there were only 15 coal-fired plants in the USA, remember this...

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...g6eeHoyRI/edit

This was, of course, a very embarrassing moment for you and I don't blame you for forgetting the exact words I used, but I did indeed imply that Google Docs was not a particularly good place to find actual evidence...

  #20  
Old June 4th 19, 02:22 AM posted to alt.astronomy
Bast[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,917
Default Explain this, then, you Global Warming Freaks



Hägar wrote:
"Bast" wrote in message ...



Hägar wrote:
If you follow the Equator around the Earth, you'll find more Rain
Forests than anything else. There are areas very densely populated by
an abundance of vegetation, matched nowhere else on Earth and the
majority of the Global animal species have taken up residence there.
The heat hovers above 100F and the humidity will make it difficult to
breathe for native residents from above or below the Tropics of Cancer
or Capricorn. These Rain Forests flourish in Equador, Southern
Columbia Northern Peru and in most of Brazil, despite man's concerted
effort to clearcut all the trees. In Africa they can be found in
Gabon, the Congo and Uganda and Kenya. Also the islands of Indonesia,
Malaysia, Brunei et al are covered in Rain Forests.
So, how again is a computer modeled rise in World temperature by say, 5
degrees, detrimental to us ?? the Rain forests would spread North and
South, the wild life numbers would increase and people would sweat more
... your turn, Palsing ... shovel some more of your usual bull****.






Globalist warming nutcases NEVER take into account plate tectonics, and
continental drift.
E.G. that North America actually once was in the southern hemisphere,
and then slowly crossed the equator, so was lush with Rainforests.
That left behind coal and oil/gas deposits.
They also do not like to talk about ice ages.
All of which happened naturally before the first HAGAR started walking
upright.


*** they want to hear even less about the "Snowball Earth", in which the
Earth was covered entirely by ice. This happened at least three times,
as evidenced by "drop stones" which are huge rounded rocks, smoothed by
moving glaciers and ice sheets and then unceremoniously dropped when
the ice finally melted, due to volcanic activity, which spewed ashes
through the ice mantle into the atmosphere, creating "Global Warming"
which then melted the icy cover. I am sure if they play with their
computer modeling long enough, they could actually posthumously predict
these Snowball Earth scenarios. And yes, Bast, I was walking upright
when you were still on your hands and knees sniffing other Lezzes'
crotches.





Silly Hagar,......you still think if women do not suck a dick, they have to
suck on something else ?
But I am amused that you can't stop thinking about me, and what I do when
the lights go out.




 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"New" CO2 molecule on Venus may explain Global warming! bjacoby Amateur Astronomy 22 July 22nd 12 10:55 PM
Changes In Solar Brightness Too Weak To Explain Global Warming Double-A Misc 2 September 21st 06 08:35 PM
Changes in Solar Brightness Too Weak to Explain Global Warming(Forwarded) Andrew Yee Astronomy Misc 0 September 14th 06 01:29 AM
Solar warming v. Global warming Roger Steer Amateur Astronomy 11 October 20th 05 01:23 AM
Attn: Global warming freaks Rich Amateur Astronomy 28 October 5th 05 11:37 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.