Remember me
▼ Content

New Federal Report, Approved by White House, Predicts 5C Rise by 2100



Page 2 of 2<12
11-11-2017 21:23
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote: Nah, it's not a paradox, if you know that the story about the Garden of Eden is really prophecy, that covers a vast time period. The ejection from Eden is symbolic of what we are about to go through. Ok, here's how it goes. Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge. Everything was fine up to then. Why did God kick them out of Paradise just because they ate from the Tree of KNowledge? Easy to understand nowadays. It is our knowledge that allowed us to develope the lifestyles we currently enjoy, that are killing the planet. So really, we kicked our own asses out of Paradise. On on the Seventh Day, God Rested. That's about to happen.


Another attempted Jim Jones.


While Jim Jones did use this same reasoning, I don't think Greenman is going to commit mass suicide over it. Mass isolation, maybe.


The Parrot Killer
11-11-2017 21:49
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(621)
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Nah, it's not a paradox, if you know that the story about the Garden of Eden is really prophecy, that covers a vast time period. The ejection from Eden is symbolic of what we are about to go through.

The story says we already went through it.
GreenMan wrote:
Ok, here's how it goes. Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge. Everything was fine up to then. Why did God kick them out of Paradise just because they ate from the Tree of KNowledge? Easy to understand nowadays. It is our knowledge that allowed us to develope the lifestyles we currently enjoy, that are killing the planet. So really, we kicked our own asses out of Paradise. On on the Seventh Day, God Rested. That's about to happen.

So you think the Bible is wrong, then you claim the Bible is right. Okaay.....
GreenMan wrote:
Ok, so you think you are not trying to propheci by predicting that life goes on without all the doom and gloom?

Nope. I am not even saying it will. I am saying your prophecy is false.
GreenMan wrote:
That's exactly what you are doing though, and the leading minds in science are all saying you are false.

Science doesn't use consensus.
GreenMan wrote:
So, yes, you were predicted in many places in prophecy. Everyone was warned about you.

What...that science is evil? That I'm the devil himself? Are you sure you aren't quoting from the scripture of the Church of Global Warming?
GreenMan wrote:
And no, no one is using your reasons for Climate Change Denial.

Argument from randU. Argument of the Stone. List of scientists doing EXACTLY that have been presented.
GreenMan wrote:
I'm out talking about the Stefan-Boltzmann Law or the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. Yes, they are in use.

Then how do you reconcile 'greenhouse' gases against them?
GreenMan wrote:
What I am talking about is your spastic attempt to use those laws to deny Global Warming.

No, it is YOU making spastic attempts to support 'global warming'. I am only quoting the theories you can't seem to reconcile.
GreenMan wrote:
Looks like, since those laws are so well known, that if something was supposedly violating them, that someone else would have pointed that out by now.

They have, dope.
GreenMan wrote:
But no one has.

They have, dope. Argument from randU. Argument of ignorance.
GreenMan wrote:
So no one in the scientific community agrees with you that they are being violated.

Argument from randU. Argument of ignorance. Argument of the Stone.
GreenMan wrote:
And there are a lot of heavy hitters on the AGW Denial side that would use such violations, if they were indeed violations.

Implying that no one has. Argument of ignorance. Argument of the Stone.
GreenMan wrote:
So your 15 minutes of fame just expired.

See ya, wouldn't want to be ya.

Fame??? You think a forum is fame???

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!


You have apparently convinced yourself that you are so wonderful that you don't have to justify the stupid things you say. Just saying that real scientists use your same arguments doesn't really support your claim. It just sounds like more bull shit. Why don't you parrot a link that shows this? Can you come up with a link that supports your claim that someone out there with a real brain also thinks that greenhouse gases violate the laws of physics, for anything close to the reasons you say.

And no, I didn't say the Bible was wrong. The Bible is right, as far as I know. I'm sure that you think what I said about us still being in Eden seems totally bizarre to you. That's because you have never really dug into the Bible. And that you don't have a clue about what the Isaiah Code is, or how it reveals what the older parts of the Bible really is.

It turns out that in order to preserve the details of the prophecies, they were written down as historical events. The reason behind that is that when the original words are translated to other languages, the translators can see the meaning slightly, or put a religious slant on the words, to make it look like a prophecy was fulfilled that wasn't really. The early Jews and then the Christians did exactly that. First was the Jews, when they convinced themselves that Cyrus of Isaiah 44 & 45 had come and gone. They established themselves as the Chosen Ones then. A few hundred years later, Jesus came along and established the Christian religion. Again, we have a group of people who considered themselves the Chosen Ones. Each group offers proof of that to anyone, by showing them the prophecies, and the events that occurred. Of course, both groups were wrong, so both groups had to put certain skews on some things to make it look like they had.

But there was no reason for either of the two groups to alter or skew anything they considered to be just a historical document. So the books they considered as history were painstakingly preserved without alteration.

And that is why a person can now still get the details that were intended to go along with the prophecy of Isaiah. I can go into the specifics of the Isiah Code if anyone is interested. But for now I will just say that the stories such as Adam and Eve, Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt, and the conquests of the Jews after they cross the Jordon are long drawn out prophecy, that explain what would happen over a long period of time.

Adam and Eve describes out early development as a society. Everything is fine until we get too smart, and get kicked out of Paradise. That is the top down view of what the rest of the Bible is about. Getting Kicked out of Paradise.

Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt. That is the struggle of humanity as it developes the social order that we now have. The birth of Christianity is even included in that story. Moses takes people from a period of time when everyone is enslaved by the monarchs of the land, to the self governing world that we currently enjoy. Crossing the Jordon turns out to be symbolic of people leaving Paradise. It's the Gateway, so to speak, and is what we are beginning to go through now.

That's from many years of research on my part into the words of the Bible. I doubt anyone on the planet knows more about what it really says than me. But feel free to challenge anything I said here. I will be glad to explain where it all comes from. It just takes quite a while.

But anyway, the Golden Calf that the Israelites made, while Moses was on the Mountain. They did that because they got tired of waiting. That's why people accepted Jesus as Messiah, thus creating the Christian religion. They did that, because they were tired of waiting for the real Messiah to show up.

You are taking the place of a prophet, when you predict nothing will happen, whether you agree or not. You are telling people to not concern themselves about Global Warming, because it isn't real. That's prophecy, ****. And that is based on your emotional reaction to the news that humanity is in trouble. "No it's not." Yes, it is. And it doesn't matter if science doesn't work off of consensus. Common Sense does work off of consensus. Common Sense is on my side, not yours. Your side is simply Stupidity, supporting Stupidity.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~
11-11-2017 22:27
Wake
★★★★★
(2586)
GreenMan wrote: Ok, here's how it goes. Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge. Everything was fine up to then. Why did God kick them out of Paradise just because they ate from the Tree of KNowledge? Easy to understand nowadays. It is our knowledge that allowed us to develope the lifestyles we currently enjoy, that are killing the planet. So really, we kicked our own asses out of Paradise. On on the Seventh Day, God Rested. That's about to happen.


I suggest you stop when you're only five miles behind.
12-11-2017 07:09
litesong
★★★★☆
(1861)
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up" yipped: I suggest you stop when you're only five miles behind....
.... says "racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up".... alias "wrong-way Corigan".
12-11-2017 16:42
Wake
★★★★★
(2586)
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up" yipped: I suggest you stop when you're only five miles behind....
.... says "racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up".... alias "wrong-way Corigan".


"MOMMY, CHANGE MY DIAPER!!!!"
12-11-2017 17:11
litesong
★★★★☆
(1861)
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up" yipped:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up" yipped: I suggest you stop when you're only five miles behind....
.... says "racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up".... alias "wrong-way Corigan".
"MOMMY, CHANGE....."
"many time threatener wake-me-up" does NOT change its fixation with Joan Crawford & continues its "wrong way Corrigan" mental navigation.
Edited on 12-11-2017 17:12
12-11-2017 17:35
Wake
★★★★★
(2586)
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up" yipped:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up" yipped: I suggest you stop when you're only five miles behind....
.... says "racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up".... alias "wrong-way Corigan".
"MOMMY, CHANGE....."
"many time threatener wake-me-up" does NOT change its fixation with Joan Crawford & continues its "wrong way Corrigan" mental navigation.


"PLEASE STOP THAT BECAUSE I NEED MY MOMMY TO CHANGE MY DIAPER!"
12-11-2017 17:45
litesong
★★★★☆
(1861)
Wake wrote:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up" yipped:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up" yipped: I suggest you stop when you're only five miles behind....
.... says "racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up".... alias "wrong-way Corigan".
"MOMMY, CHANGE....."
"many time threatener wake-me-up" does NOT change its fixation with Joan Crawford & continues its "wrong way Corrigan" mental navigation.
"PLEASE STOP"
"many time threatener wake-me-up" Joan Crawford dreams spiral it into oblivion.
12-11-2017 18:05
Wake
★★★★★
(2586)
litesong wrote:
Wake wrote:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up" yipped:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up" yipped: I suggest you stop when you're only five miles behind....
.... says "racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up".... alias "wrong-way Corigan".
"MOMMY, CHANGE....."
"many time threatener wake-me-up" does NOT change its fixation with Joan Crawford & continues its "wrong way Corrigan" mental navigation.
"PLEASE STOP"
"many time threatener wake-me-up" Joan Crawford dreams spiral it into oblivion.


What is really interesting about this is that there was a Program on TV about this being the 75th anniversary of Casablanca. litebrain in his psychosis glombed upon this to attempt still more attention.

Again this underscores the mental illness of a person that cannot have any discussion that isn't about himself. litebrain - we did not sell illegal drugs to your mother. We did not hold the needle and inject them into her arm or leg or stomach as each vein became clogs from scar tissue. Most of us knew our fathers because our mothers were not so needy that they would take anything that came along.
12-11-2017 18:21
litesong
★★★★☆
(1861)
"many time threatener wake-me-up" wiffs:
litesong wrote:
"many time threatener wake-me-up" wiffs:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up" yipped:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up" yipped: I suggest you stop when you're only five miles behind....
.... says "racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener wake-me-up".... alias "wrong-way Corigan".
"MOMMY, CHANGE....."
"many time threatener wake-me-up" does NOT change its fixation with Joan Crawford & continues its "wrong way Corrigan" mental navigation.
"PLEASE STOP"
"many time threatener wake-me-up" Joan Crawford dreams spiral it into oblivion.
What is really...
"many time threatener wake-me-up" didn't dream about Joan Crawford within the last hour, so tries a new tacking maneuver.
13-11-2017 07:48
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(621)
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote: Ok, here's how it goes. Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge. Everything was fine up to then. Why did God kick them out of Paradise just because they ate from the Tree of KNowledge? Easy to understand nowadays. It is our knowledge that allowed us to develope the lifestyles we currently enjoy, that are killing the planet. So really, we kicked our own asses out of Paradise. On on the Seventh Day, God Rested. That's about to happen.


I suggest you stop when you're only five miles behind.


Oh, I see we have someone who thinks they know something about the Bible, lol. Too bad you never bothered to read it. But feel free to try and argue something that you think everyone agrees on, just because everyone agrees on it. How could everyone be wrong?

The answer to that is easy. Until the modern age, it was impossible to use the Isaiah Code, just because of the way it works. The book of Isaiah uses words as pointers to stories that are details in prophecy that was being given. For example, Isaiah might have said something about some battle that would be waged like the one in Dijon back during the days of old King Muckimuck, before some other major event was to take place. You can do a search on Dijon and read the stories in the earlier parts of the Bible and see what happened in Dijon. Isaiah is saying that whatever happened then in Dijon was going to happen again, somewhere else. Isaiah did that throughout his book, and used the names of places and people this way. So you can use those names to extract more details about the prophecy than were directly included in the prophecy. Basically, it gives you a storehouse of unmolested details, if you ever want to totally understand the prophecy.

But the problem is. Try doing a cross reference on the Bible using a name. That's easy to do now, with an online search engine, like at BibleGateway. But imagine trying to do it 20 years ago. It would have been almost impossible, unless you had a team of helpers, who could go through and find where a name was used, so you could just read about that particular event.

So, until recently, the Isaiah Code remained hidden in plain sight. And until you have used it, you have no reason to consider the older books of the Bible as anything as they were intentionally presented. I see that as a very clever time lock on the prophecy, and the Bible, put there by God, so that we could unlock it when we needed to.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~
13-11-2017 08:34
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
GreenMan wrote:
You have apparently convinced yourself that you are so wonderful that you don't have to justify the stupid things you say.

I have justified the things I say. I have pointed to the theories that you keep violating. I've shown you what they are. You continue to fail to reconcile your argument to them. You just deny them.

I have shown you the circular definition problem which you still haven't solved for the phrase 'global warming' or 'climate change'. No theory, not even a non-scientific one, can exist based on a void argument. Circular definitions are void arguments. They are just buzzwords.

I have pointed out your numerous paradoxes. You have not resolved ANY of them. You continue to make irrational arguments by continuing to use them.

GreenMan wrote:
Just saying that real scientists use your same arguments doesn't really support your claim.

True Scotsman fallacy again. You don't think scientists recognize the laws of thermodynamics and Planck's laws?

GreenMan wrote:
It just sounds like more bull shit.

Theories of science isn't bullshit.
GreenMan wrote:
Why don't you parrot a link that shows this?

Don't need to. You can look this stuff up in any physics book. There are numerous sites that explain it too. Wikipedia is not one of them.
GreenMan wrote:
Can you come up with a link that supports your claim that someone out there with a real brain also thinks that greenhouse gases violate the laws of physics, for anything close to the reasons you say.

Link not needed. It is YOU that has to come up with a way to make your theory either conform to the laws of thermodynamics or Planck's laws. It is YOU that has to make your theory work with the Stefan-Boltzmann law. Either make it work with these or show you are are falsifying these laws.
GreenMan wrote:
And no, I didn't say the Bible was wrong.

Yes you did.
GreenMan wrote:
The Bible is right, as far as I know.

You've said that too. It's one of your many paradoxes.
GreenMan wrote:
You are taking the place of a prophet, when you predict nothing will happen, whether you agree or not.

Not at all.
GreenMan wrote:
You are telling people to not concern themselves about Global Warming, because it isn't real.

It isn't.
GreenMan wrote:
That's prophecy, ****.

No, that's science and math.
GreenMan wrote:
And that is based on your emotional reaction to the news that humanity is in trouble. "No it's not." Yes, it is.

No, it is not. Humanity's biggest danger is it's own wars and disputes, not 'global warming' or 'climate change'.
GreenMan wrote:
And it doesn't matter if science doesn't work off of consensus.

Yes it does. You are denying science yet again. Consensus is a word only used in political or religious contexts.
GreenMan wrote:
Common Sense does work off of consensus.

Nope. Only politics and religions use consensus.
GreenMan wrote:
Common Sense is on my side, not yours.

You abandoned that when you started making irrational arguments.
GreenMan wrote:
Your side is simply Stupidity, supporting Stupidity.

Shall we visit your paradoxes again?


The Parrot Killer
13-11-2017 08:36
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
GreenMan wrote:
...deleted long Bible thumping...


This is a forum on climate, not the Bible or how it's interpreted.


The Parrot Killer
13-11-2017 08:46
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(621)
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
You have apparently convinced yourself that you are so wonderful that you don't have to justify the stupid things you say.

I have justified the things I say. I have pointed to the theories that you keep violating. I've shown you what they are. You continue to fail to reconcile your argument to them. You just deny them.

I have shown you the circular definition problem which you still haven't solved for the phrase 'global warming' or 'climate change'. No theory, not even a non-scientific one, can exist based on a void argument. Circular definitions are void arguments. They are just buzzwords.

I have pointed out your numerous paradoxes. You have not resolved ANY of them. You continue to make irrational arguments by continuing to use them.

GreenMan wrote:
Just saying that real scientists use your same arguments doesn't really support your claim.

True Scotsman fallacy again. You don't think scientists recognize the laws of thermodynamics and Planck's laws?

GreenMan wrote:
It just sounds like more bull shit.

Theories of science isn't bullshit.
GreenMan wrote:
Why don't you parrot a link that shows this?

Don't need to. You can look this stuff up in any physics book. There are numerous sites that explain it too. Wikipedia is not one of them.
GreenMan wrote:
Can you come up with a link that supports your claim that someone out there with a real brain also thinks that greenhouse gases violate the laws of physics, for anything close to the reasons you say.

Link not needed. It is YOU that has to come up with a way to make your theory either conform to the laws of thermodynamics or Planck's laws. It is YOU that has to make your theory work with the Stefan-Boltzmann law. Either make it work with these or show you are are falsifying these laws.
GreenMan wrote:
And no, I didn't say the Bible was wrong.

Yes you did.
GreenMan wrote:
The Bible is right, as far as I know.

You've said that too. It's one of your many paradoxes.
GreenMan wrote:
You are taking the place of a prophet, when you predict nothing will happen, whether you agree or not.

Not at all.
GreenMan wrote:
You are telling people to not concern themselves about Global Warming, because it isn't real.

It isn't.
GreenMan wrote:
That's prophecy, ****.

No, that's science and math.
GreenMan wrote:
And that is based on your emotional reaction to the news that humanity is in trouble. "No it's not." Yes, it is.

No, it is not. Humanity's biggest danger is it's own wars and disputes, not 'global warming' or 'climate change'.
GreenMan wrote:
And it doesn't matter if science doesn't work off of consensus.

Yes it does. You are denying science yet again. Consensus is a word only used in political or religious contexts.
GreenMan wrote:
Common Sense does work off of consensus.

Nope. Only politics and religions use consensus.
GreenMan wrote:
Common Sense is on my side, not yours.

You abandoned that when you started making irrational arguments.
GreenMan wrote:
Your side is simply Stupidity, supporting Stupidity.

Shall we visit your paradoxes again?


Yeah, sure, drag your list of my paradoxes out again. I could care less, becasue what you think creates a paradox on my part is just a misunderstanding on your part, which is easy to occur, since you are such a simple minded fool.

You keep saying that gases cannot cause the earth to warm, becasue that is a violation of the laws of physics. And I am saying that if that was so, that more people than just you would be saying it. And so far, no real scientist has used that as a reason for being a Skeptic.

So you are on an island, with your bull shit claims of Greenhouse Gases being a violation of the Laws of Physics. No Laws Violated.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~
13-11-2017 19:38
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
You have apparently convinced yourself that you are so wonderful that you don't have to justify the stupid things you say.

I have justified the things I say. I have pointed to the theories that you keep violating. I've shown you what they are. You continue to fail to reconcile your argument to them. You just deny them.

I have shown you the circular definition problem which you still haven't solved for the phrase 'global warming' or 'climate change'. No theory, not even a non-scientific one, can exist based on a void argument. Circular definitions are void arguments. They are just buzzwords.

I have pointed out your numerous paradoxes. You have not resolved ANY of them. You continue to make irrational arguments by continuing to use them.

GreenMan wrote:
Just saying that real scientists use your same arguments doesn't really support your claim.

True Scotsman fallacy again. You don't think scientists recognize the laws of thermodynamics and Planck's laws?

GreenMan wrote:
It just sounds like more bull shit.

Theories of science isn't bullshit.
GreenMan wrote:
Why don't you parrot a link that shows this?

Don't need to. You can look this stuff up in any physics book. There are numerous sites that explain it too. Wikipedia is not one of them.
GreenMan wrote:
Can you come up with a link that supports your claim that someone out there with a real brain also thinks that greenhouse gases violate the laws of physics, for anything close to the reasons you say.

Link not needed. It is YOU that has to come up with a way to make your theory either conform to the laws of thermodynamics or Planck's laws. It is YOU that has to make your theory work with the Stefan-Boltzmann law. Either make it work with these or show you are are falsifying these laws.
GreenMan wrote:
And no, I didn't say the Bible was wrong.

Yes you did.
GreenMan wrote:
The Bible is right, as far as I know.

You've said that too. It's one of your many paradoxes.
GreenMan wrote:
You are taking the place of a prophet, when you predict nothing will happen, whether you agree or not.

Not at all.
GreenMan wrote:
You are telling people to not concern themselves about Global Warming, because it isn't real.

It isn't.
GreenMan wrote:
That's prophecy, ****.

No, that's science and math.
GreenMan wrote:
And that is based on your emotional reaction to the news that humanity is in trouble. "No it's not." Yes, it is.

No, it is not. Humanity's biggest danger is it's own wars and disputes, not 'global warming' or 'climate change'.
GreenMan wrote:
And it doesn't matter if science doesn't work off of consensus.

Yes it does. You are denying science yet again. Consensus is a word only used in political or religious contexts.
GreenMan wrote:
Common Sense does work off of consensus.

Nope. Only politics and religions use consensus.
GreenMan wrote:
Common Sense is on my side, not yours.

You abandoned that when you started making irrational arguments.
GreenMan wrote:
Your side is simply Stupidity, supporting Stupidity.

Shall we visit your paradoxes again?


Yeah, sure, drag your list of my paradoxes out again. I could care less, becasue what you think creates a paradox on my part is just a misunderstanding on your part, which is easy to occur, since you are such a simple minded fool.

If that were the case, you should have been able to easily resolve them. You have not resolved a single one. You continue to argue the irrational position of both choices. I have reproduced a few recent ones below. See if you can resolved any of them. The only way to resolve a paradox is to choose one argument and reject the other.
GreenMan wrote:
You keep saying that gases cannot cause the earth to warm, becasue that is a violation of the laws of physics.

It is. That's why I keep saying it.
GreenMan wrote:
And I am saying that if that was so, that more people than just you would be saying it.

They are. You have been present with lists of people. You made the argument of the Stone against that one as well.
GreenMan wrote:
And so far, no real scientist has used that as a reason for being a Skeptic.

The list is signed by real scientists.
GreenMan wrote:
So you are on an island,

Nope. That would be YOU. The Church of Global Warming is dying. Fewer a and fewer people are believing your bullshit anymore.
GreenMan wrote:
with your bull shit claims of Greenhouse Gases being a violation of the Laws of Physics.

Science isn't bullshit. You ARE violating the laws of physics.
GreenMan wrote:
No Laws Violated.

The laws of thermodynamics, sometimes the 1st, but especially the 2nd law, and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

You are also making numerous egregious math errors.

You are also still arguing irrrational positions.

Now let's see if you can resolve any of these. To resolve one, you must choose one argument and reject the other. If you reject an argument, you cannot use it again without re-instituting the paradox.

1) We must do something about greenhouse gas or suffer horrible death.
2) $20000 is too expensive for a fuel cell.

1) Corporations are evil.
2) Farms are good (even though they are corporations).

1) Boycotts end in war.
2) Boycotts do not start wars.

1) The only energy in storms is charge in clouds.
2) Wind power and hydroelectric power are renewable energy.

1) Why should I care about future generations?
2) I do care about future generations.

1) People didn't know the world was round until recently.
2) People new the world was round thousands of years ago.

1) No one is trying to prove global warming with storm activity.
2) Storms are getting more intense and frequent as predicted by global warming.

1) Accepting a source of a prophecy is not religion.
2) Accepting the interpretation of a prophecy (and therefore
acceptance of the source) is religion.

1) Lower atmosphere stays hotter due to greenhouse effect.
2) Lower atmosphere does not stay hotter.

1) Surface does not emit.
2) Surface does emit.

1) Thermal resistance is storage (inertia is energy).
2) Thermal resistance is why we can change temperature.

1) Lower air does not heat upper air or space.
2) Lower air DOES heat upper air and space.

1) Agreed with O2 and N2 absorb and emit infrared light.
2) We are not talking about O2 and N2, just substances that absorb and
emit infrared light.

1) Climate change has occurred in the last 60 years.
2) Records are not long enough to observe climate change since the
industrial revolution.

1) The only place to observe the Earth is from space.
2) The S-B law for Earth does not have to be observed from space.

1) Water vapor warms the Earth.
2) Water vapor cools the Earth by blocking the Sun.

1) only urban temperatures are used.
2) There are no cities in Alaska to provide heat islands.

1) No one told me what to believe in.
2) My religion originated with someone initially telling me.

1) There is no way to measure absolute temperature.
2) We can measure absolute temperature with thermometers around the
world.

1) I don't force my views on others.
2) People like you should all eat a plate of shit and die.

1) Give me a quote of <whatever>
2) You simply copy and paste.

1) The warmer it gets the more clouds we get.
2) the colder it gets the more clouds we get.

1) same radiation goes into space
2) less radiation goes into space

1) Those who fight global warming will be allowed to reincarnate to
some existing body on Earth.
2) The planet will become uninhabitable, according to scripture.


The Parrot Killer
14-11-2017 08:27
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(621)
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
You have apparently convinced yourself that you are so wonderful that you don't have to justify the stupid things you say.

I have justified the things I say. I have pointed to the theories that you keep violating. I've shown you what they are. You continue to fail to reconcile your argument to them. You just deny them.

I have shown you the circular definition problem which you still haven't solved for the phrase 'global warming' or 'climate change'. No theory, not even a non-scientific one, can exist based on a void argument. Circular definitions are void arguments. They are just buzzwords.

I have pointed out your numerous paradoxes. You have not resolved ANY of them. You continue to make irrational arguments by continuing to use them.

GreenMan wrote:
Just saying that real scientists use your same arguments doesn't really support your claim.

True Scotsman fallacy again. You don't think scientists recognize the laws of thermodynamics and Planck's laws?

GreenMan wrote:
It just sounds like more bull shit.

Theories of science isn't bullshit.
GreenMan wrote:
Why don't you parrot a link that shows this?

Don't need to. You can look this stuff up in any physics book. There are numerous sites that explain it too. Wikipedia is not one of them.
GreenMan wrote:
Can you come up with a link that supports your claim that someone out there with a real brain also thinks that greenhouse gases violate the laws of physics, for anything close to the reasons you say.

Link not needed. It is YOU that has to come up with a way to make your theory either conform to the laws of thermodynamics or Planck's laws. It is YOU that has to make your theory work with the Stefan-Boltzmann law. Either make it work with these or show you are are falsifying these laws.
GreenMan wrote:
And no, I didn't say the Bible was wrong.

Yes you did.
GreenMan wrote:
The Bible is right, as far as I know.

You've said that too. It's one of your many paradoxes.
GreenMan wrote:
You are taking the place of a prophet, when you predict nothing will happen, whether you agree or not.

Not at all.
GreenMan wrote:
You are telling people to not concern themselves about Global Warming, because it isn't real.

It isn't.
GreenMan wrote:
That's prophecy, ****.

No, that's science and math.
GreenMan wrote:
And that is based on your emotional reaction to the news that humanity is in trouble. "No it's not." Yes, it is.

No, it is not. Humanity's biggest danger is it's own wars and disputes, not 'global warming' or 'climate change'.
GreenMan wrote:
And it doesn't matter if science doesn't work off of consensus.

Yes it does. You are denying science yet again. Consensus is a word only used in political or religious contexts.
GreenMan wrote:
Common Sense does work off of consensus.

Nope. Only politics and religions use consensus.
GreenMan wrote:
Common Sense is on my side, not yours.

You abandoned that when you started making irrational arguments.
GreenMan wrote:
Your side is simply Stupidity, supporting Stupidity.

Shall we visit your paradoxes again?


Yeah, sure, drag your list of my paradoxes out again. I could care less, becasue what you think creates a paradox on my part is just a misunderstanding on your part, which is easy to occur, since you are such a simple minded fool.

If that were the case, you should have been able to easily resolve them. You have not resolved a single one. You continue to argue the irrational position of both choices. I have reproduced a few recent ones below. See if you can resolved any of them. The only way to resolve a paradox is to choose one argument and reject the other.
GreenMan wrote:
You keep saying that gases cannot cause the earth to warm, becasue that is a violation of the laws of physics.

It is. That's why I keep saying it.
GreenMan wrote:
And I am saying that if that was so, that more people than just you would be saying it.

They are. You have been present with lists of people. You made the argument of the Stone against that one as well.
GreenMan wrote:
And so far, no real scientist has used that as a reason for being a Skeptic.

The list is signed by real scientists.
GreenMan wrote:
So you are on an island,

Nope. That would be YOU. The Church of Global Warming is dying. Fewer a and fewer people are believing your bullshit anymore.
GreenMan wrote:
with your bull shit claims of Greenhouse Gases being a violation of the Laws of Physics.

Science isn't bullshit. You ARE violating the laws of physics.
GreenMan wrote:
No Laws Violated.

The laws of thermodynamics, sometimes the 1st, but especially the 2nd law, and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

You are also making numerous egregious math errors.

You are also still arguing irrrational positions.

Now let's see if you can resolve any of these. To resolve one, you must choose one argument and reject the other. If you reject an argument, you cannot use it again without re-instituting the paradox.

1) We must do something about greenhouse gas or suffer horrible death.
2) $20000 is too expensive for a fuel cell.

1) Corporations are evil.
2) Farms are good (even though they are corporations).

1) Boycotts end in war.
2) Boycotts do not start wars.

1) The only energy in storms is charge in clouds.
2) Wind power and hydroelectric power are renewable energy.

1) Why should I care about future generations?
2) I do care about future generations.

1) People didn't know the world was round until recently.
2) People new the world was round thousands of years ago.

1) No one is trying to prove global warming with storm activity.
2) Storms are getting more intense and frequent as predicted by global warming.

1) Accepting a source of a prophecy is not religion.
2) Accepting the interpretation of a prophecy (and therefore
acceptance of the source) is religion.

1) Lower atmosphere stays hotter due to greenhouse effect.
2) Lower atmosphere does not stay hotter.

1) Surface does not emit.
2) Surface does emit.

1) Thermal resistance is storage (inertia is energy).
2) Thermal resistance is why we can change temperature.

1) Lower air does not heat upper air or space.
2) Lower air DOES heat upper air and space.

1) Agreed with O2 and N2 absorb and emit infrared light.
2) We are not talking about O2 and N2, just substances that absorb and
emit infrared light.

1) Climate change has occurred in the last 60 years.
2) Records are not long enough to observe climate change since the
industrial revolution.

1) The only place to observe the Earth is from space.
2) The S-B law for Earth does not have to be observed from space.

1) Water vapor warms the Earth.
2) Water vapor cools the Earth by blocking the Sun.

1) only urban temperatures are used.
2) There are no cities in Alaska to provide heat islands.

1) No one told me what to believe in.
2) My religion originated with someone initially telling me.

1) There is no way to measure absolute temperature.
2) We can measure absolute temperature with thermometers around the
world.

1) I don't force my views on others.
2) People like you should all eat a plate of shit and die.

1) Give me a quote of <whatever>
2) You simply copy and paste.

1) The warmer it gets the more clouds we get.
2) the colder it gets the more clouds we get.

1) same radiation goes into space
2) less radiation goes into space

1) Those who fight global warming will be allowed to reincarnate to
some existing body on Earth.
2) The planet will become uninhabitable, according to scripture.


As previously stated, your supposed list of my paradoxes is just your deliberate misunderstanding, which is obvious by the way you regurgitate what I supposedly said.

I love your last one, especially. You can't seem to get your head around people having to live through a period of time when the earth is uninhabitable.

People won't be able to go to the SuperMarket anymore, because there won't be any SuperMarket anymore. The only food people will have is food they have stored away. When the dust has settled enough, they will begin to go out of their dwellings, and start trying to grow crops. That will be difficult, because there still won't be much sunlight getting through the remaining dust in the air. So the first several years, there won't be much of a yield.

But eventually, those who had enough food stores, and were in a good location, live long enough to see the earth recover. That's what the prophecy of the Bible says. And that is what humanity faces now. It's time to get ready for it. Waiting till the last minute is not the thing to do.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~
14-11-2017 18:28
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
[quote]GreenMan wrote:
You have apparently convinced yourself that you are so wonderful that you don't have to justify the stupid things you say.

I have justified the things I say. I have pointed to the theories that you keep violating. I've shown you what they are. You continue to fail to reconcile your argument to them. You just deny them.

I have shown you the circular definition problem which you still haven't solved for the phrase 'global warming' or 'climate change'. No theory, not even a non-scientific one, can exist based on a void argument. Circular definitions are void arguments. They are just buzzwords.

I have pointed out your numerous paradoxes. You have not resolved ANY of them. You continue to make irrational arguments by continuing to use them.

GreenMan wrote:
Just saying that real scientists use your same arguments doesn't really support your claim.

True Scotsman fallacy again. You don't think scientists recognize the laws of thermodynamics and Planck's laws?

GreenMan wrote:
It just sounds like more bull shit.

Theories of science isn't bullshit.
GreenMan wrote:
Why don't you parrot a link that shows this?

Don't need to. You can look this stuff up in any physics book. There are numerous sites that explain it too. Wikipedia is not one of them.
GreenMan wrote:
Can you come up with a link that supports your claim that someone out there with a real brain also thinks that greenhouse gases violate the laws of physics, for anything close to the reasons you say.

Link not needed. It is YOU that has to come up with a way to make your theory either conform to the laws of thermodynamics or Planck's laws. It is YOU that has to make your theory work with the Stefan-Boltzmann law. Either make it work with these or show you are are falsifying these laws.
GreenMan wrote:
And no, I didn't say the Bible was wrong.

Yes you did.
GreenMan wrote:
The Bible is right, as far as I know.

You've said that too. It's one of your many paradoxes.
GreenMan wrote:
You are taking the place of a prophet, when you predict nothing will happen, whether you agree or not.

Not at all.
GreenMan wrote:
You are telling people to not concern themselves about Global Warming, because it isn't real.

It isn't.
GreenMan wrote:
That's prophecy, ****.

No, that's science and math.
GreenMan wrote:
And that is based on your emotional reaction to the news that humanity is in trouble. "No it's not." Yes, it is.

No, it is not. Humanity's biggest danger is it's own wars and disputes, not 'global warming' or 'climate change'.
GreenMan wrote:
And it doesn't matter if science doesn't work off of consensus.

Yes it does. You are denying science yet again. Consensus is a word only used in political or religious contexts.
GreenMan wrote:
Common Sense does work off of consensus.

Nope. Only politics and religions use consensus.
GreenMan wrote:
Common Sense is on my side, not yours.

You abandoned that when you started making irrational arguments.
GreenMan wrote:
Your side is simply Stupidity, supporting Stupidity.

Shall we visit your paradoxes again?


Yeah, sure, drag your list of my paradoxes out again. I could care less, becasue what you think creates a paradox on my part is just a misunderstanding on your part, which is easy to occur, since you are such a simple minded fool.

If that were the case, you should have been able to easily resolve them. You have not resolved a single one. You continue to argue the irrational position of both choices. I have reproduced a few recent ones below. See if you can resolved any of them. The only way to resolve a paradox is to choose one argument and reject the other.
GreenMan wrote:
You keep saying that gases cannot cause the earth to warm, becasue that is a violation of the laws of physics.

It is. That's why I keep saying it.
GreenMan wrote:
And I am saying that if that was so, that more people than just you would be saying it.

They are. You have been present with lists of people. You made the argument of the Stone against that one as well.
GreenMan wrote:
And so far, no real scientist has used that as a reason for being a Skeptic.

The list is signed by real scientists.
GreenMan wrote:
So you are on an island,

Nope. That would be YOU. The Church of Global Warming is dying. Fewer a and fewer people are believing your bullshit anymore.
GreenMan wrote:
with your bull shit claims of Greenhouse Gases being a violation of the Laws of Physics.

Science isn't bullshit. You ARE violating the laws of physics.
GreenMan wrote:
No Laws Violated.

The laws of thermodynamics, sometimes the 1st, but especially the 2nd law, and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

You are also making numerous egregious math errors.

You are also still arguing irrrational positions.

Now let's see if you can resolve any of these. To resolve one, you must choose one argument and reject the other. If you reject an argument, you cannot use it again without re-instituting the paradox.

1) We must do something about greenhouse gas or suffer horrible death.
2) $20000 is too expensive for a fuel cell.

1) Corporations are evil.
2) Farms are good (even though they are corporations).

1) Boycotts end in war.
2) Boycotts do not start wars.

1) The only energy in storms is charge in clouds.
2) Wind power and hydroelectric power are renewable energy.

1) Why should I care about future generations?
2) I do care about future generations.

1) People didn't know the world was round until recently.
2) People new the world was round thousands of years ago.

1) No one is trying to prove global warming with storm activity.
2) Storms are getting more intense and frequent as predicted by global warming.

1) Accepting a source of a prophecy is not religion.
2) Accepting the interpretation of a prophecy (and therefore
acceptance of the source) is religion.

1) Lower atmosphere stays hotter due to greenhouse effect.
2) Lower atmosphere does not stay hotter.

1) Surface does not emit.
2) Surface does emit.

1) Thermal resistance is storage (inertia is energy).
2) Thermal resistance is why we can change temperature.

1) Lower air does not heat upper air or space.
2) Lower air DOES heat upper air and space.

1) Agreed with O2 and N2 absorb and emit infrared light.
2) We are not talking about O2 and N2, just substances that absorb and
emit infrared light.

1) Climate change has occurred in the last 60 years.
2) Records are not long enough to observe climate change since the
industrial revolution.

1) The only place to observe the Earth is from space.
2) The S-B law for Earth does not have to be observed from space.

1) Water vapor warms the Earth.
2) Water vapor cools the Earth by blocking the Sun.

1) only urban temperatures are used.
2) There are no cities in Alaska to provide heat islands.

1) No one told me what to believe in.
2) My religion originated with someone initially telling me.

1) There is no way to measure absolute temperature.
2) We can measure absolute temperature with thermometers around the
world.

1) I don't force my views on others.
2) People like you should all eat a plate of shit and die.

1) Give me a quote of <whatever>
2) You simply copy and paste.

1) The warmer it gets the more clouds we get.
2) the colder it gets the more clouds we get.

1) same radiation goes into space
2) less radiation goes into space

1) Those who fight global warming will be allowed to reincarnate to
some existing body on Earth.
2) The planet will become uninhabitable, according to scripture.

GreenMan wrote:
As previously stated, your supposed list of my paradoxes is just your deliberate misunderstanding, which is obvious by the way you regurgitate what I supposedly said.


You have said all of these. If these are 'misunderstandings' as you call them, you should be able to resolve them all easily. Choose one argument and reject the other, or reject both arguments and never make a rejected argument again.
GreenMan wrote:
I love your last one, especially. You can't seem to get your head around people having to live through a period of time when the earth is uninhabitable.

If the Earth is uninhabitable, who is living through it?

Welcome to your new paradox. That's two in more of them in just this post alone.
GreenMan wrote:
People won't be able to go to the SuperMarket anymore, because there won't be any SuperMarket anymore.

Why? Will trade suddenly become illegal? Did you know you can't kill the free market? It's immortal.
GreenMan wrote:
The only food people will have is food they have stored away.

And how long will that last? What about those supplies you forgot to store away? What about all the food that is stored now?
GreenMan wrote:
When the dust has settled enough, they will begin to go out of their dwellings, and start trying to grow crops.

Where did the dust come from? Is your wind generator producing it?
GreenMan wrote:
That will be difficult, because there still won't be much sunlight getting through the remaining dust in the air.

Dust settles rather quickly. Where did the dust come from?
GreenMan wrote:
So the first several years, there won't be much of a yield.

Dust doesn't stay in the air more than a few hours. What kind of magick dust are you describing here?
GreenMan wrote:
But eventually, those who had enough food stores, and were in a good location, live long enough to see the earth recover.

From what?
GreenMan wrote:
That's what the prophecy of the Bible says. And that is what humanity faces now. It's time to get ready for it. Waiting till the last minute is not the thing to do.

Thumping the Bible is not the purpose of this forum.


The Parrot Killer
15-11-2017 03:17
litesong
★★★★☆
(1861)
[b]Into the Night wrote: Thumping the Bible is not the purpose of this forum.
But, old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threateners constructed this webcyst(no misspelling) to thump oil, coal, fossil fuel energy, business & re-pubic-lick-un AGW PR propaganda poop.
Edited on 15-11-2017 03:22
15-11-2017 03:40
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(791)
Good grief I'm so confused.
What are we going to die from again?
Is it the 30-40 degree rise your climate model randomly selected?
Or is it the dust from the huge volcano you predicted?
Look, it has become clear to me that your doomsday prophecy beliefs came first.
Now you are simple looking for the best vehicle to ride them with.
Right now it appears you are riding the global warming, but now and then you swerve into this volcano, no sunlight, freezing thing. Can you clear this up please?

ITN, the paradox list was pure gold.

Edited on 15-11-2017 03:41
15-11-2017 05:56
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(621)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Good grief I'm so confused.
What are we going to die from again?
Is it the 30-40 degree rise your climate model randomly selected?
Or is it the dust from the huge volcano you predicted?
Look, it has become clear to me that your doomsday prophecy beliefs came first.
Now you are simple looking for the best vehicle to ride them with.
Right now it appears you are riding the global warming, but now and then you swerve into this volcano, no sunlight, freezing thing. Can you clear this up please?

ITN, the paradox list was pure gold.


Most of his paradox list was just intentional misquotes on his part. Some of it is misunderstandings on his part.

Your observation that my doomsday prophecy beliefs came first, is absolutely correct. I began studying the prophecies following the 911 attack, because I saw one of the signs, and figured out who one of the players is. I worked through the prophecies and realized that the war is described just so we would know that it was time for the fulfillment. And that is supposed to trigger us to look around, and see what the real problem is. The prophecy says that people will be dying and having to hide from the heat. That's Global Warming.

But there is more than just global warming to be concerned with, because the prophecies say there will also be a period of time when the Sun is blocked out. There's only a couple of things that could do that. One is a volcanic eruption or immense proportions, and the other is an asteroid impact of immense proportions. I choose a volcanic eruption as the most likely.

I actually built my Climate Model because I wanted to know for sure if Global Warming was real, because it is easy to find in the prophecies. I wanted to know for sure, and that was the only way I could really tell. Funny how it is almost a decade later, and it is still the only way I can really tell. Looks like someone by know would have come up with some absolute proof that Climate Change is real, and that it is a threat, because people need to know.

But anyway, back to the prophecy of what we are going through. It starts with a war, people struggling for control of Jerusalem. In fact, Jerusalem was supposed to be occupied for a period of about 78 years [I believe it is, but writing from memory]. A prophet is sent by God to destroy the people who occupy Jerusalem and those who support that occupation. That of course is going on now, and was described for us so that we would know that it is for real this time. That is necessary, because every generation has a freak or two that wants to declare the end of time is near, and many people believe that shit.

So, a war was described in detail, so that we would know.

When you dig on into the prophecies, you find that the war is going on as it begins to get warmer, like what is going on. But it's not like what we are experiencing so far. This is like ultra slow motion, compared to what I expected. But as time marches on, it will continue to get warmer, and our crops will fail, and the fish in the oceans and in the rivers will die. And then, when you think it can't get any worse, guess what happens. If you guessed that it just gets worse, then you guessed correctly. It just gets worse.

Have you ever heard of the Abomination that Makes Desolation? It's a term that Daniel used, to describe something about this period that we are going through. As far as I know, no one has ever been able to determine exactly what that term means. An Abomination is a horrible thing, like what we are doing to the atmosphere by polluting it with Greenhouse Gases. It's an abomination, because it threatens the future of humanity itself. And of course, Desolation is what Climate Change will bring. The Abomination that Makes Desolation is a prophecy of AGW.

But guess what. That isn't the end of it. No sir, not the end at all. Something stops the warming, because the prophecy itself says that it will get colder. The term, End of Days, is actually a poor translation. The Hebrew words actually mean, End of the Warm Period. So the term, End of Days, from which we get the term, End of the World from, is actually predicting the end of this Interglacial Period.

So what makes it cold?

I'll tell you what makes it cold.

A Supervolcano erupting makes it cold. It blocks out the Sun for days and even weeks, and eventually spreads a blanket of dust completely around the globe, which cools the planet for thousands of years. I'm about to show that to Parrot in another response, so I'm not going to show the evidence of what I'm talking about here. But I can assure you, you can see Supervolcanoes going off in the Dust, locked in the ice in Antarctica.

So anyway, when Campi Flegrei or Yellowstone pop their lid, everyone who lives through that gets to enter the Kingdom of God.

Not what you thought the Kingdom of God was about, was it?

Oh, no, you've probably got this picturesque image in your mind of beautiful women parading around in thongs and splashing in the pool, which is full of Bud Light, and a barbecue grill going at every corner.

But nope, sorry. It's not like that. Instead, the Kingdom of God begins with people that just made it through the worst natural disaster that has ever struck humanity.

It will take several generations of people after that, before the earth will return to somewhat normal. And it will most likely continue getting cold, as the earth moves into the next Ice Age.

Ok, so I hope I cleared that up. And I'm not ashamed that I get my understanding of what to do about this situation we are in, from the Bible first, and Science second. To me, they go hand in hand.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~
15-11-2017 08:25
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(621)
Into the Night wrote: a challenge for me to resolve my paradoxes.

So here goes.

1) We must do something about greenhouse gas or suffer horrible death.
2) $20000 is too expensive for a fuel cell.

Not a paradox at all, idiot. There are less expensive things we can do to reduce our personal CO2 footprint.

1) Corporations are evil.
2) Farms are good (even though they are corporations).

Corporate Farms are evil too, lol. but I'm thinking you are replacing something I said, with the word "evil." I think corporations operate in their best interests, and give 2 shits about the future of humanity.

1) Boycotts end in war.
2) Boycotts do not start wars.

That's a totally deliberate twisting of what I said, idiot. I said first comes a boycott, and when that doesn't work then comes a war, because the rest of the world isn't going to stand for us letting them pay for cleaning up the mess. and then, when you first made your idiotic connection and subsequent challenge, I explained that no, boycotts don't start wars. The boycott doesn't start the war, dumbass, it just come ahead of the war.

1) The only energy in storms is charge in clouds.
2) Wind power and hydroelectric power are renewable energy.

What kind of bull shit is that? I never said the only energy in storms is charge in clouds. There's obvious a lot of wind and kinetic energy in the rain drops.

1) Why should I care about future generations?
2) I do care about future generations.

Taken totally out of context, idiot. I was referring to your attitude, when I said, "Why should I care about future generation?" And you know it. I said that because you will obviously have no children, since you prefer to sleep with men, than women.

1) People didn't know the world was round until recently.
2) People new the world was round thousands of years ago.

Some people did know the world was round thousands of years ago, but it wasn't a world wide accepted understanding until a few hundred years ago. Again, not a paradox, just an idiot trying to prove how brilliant he is, but trying to create conflicts where there are none.

1) No one is trying to prove global warming with storm activity.
2) Storms are getting more intense and frequent as predicted by global warming.

Ok, pointing out that previous predictions of more frequent storms is right, is actually proof that global warming is real and happening. Sue me.

1) Accepting a source of a prophecy is not religion.
2) Accepting the interpretation of a prophecy (and therefore
acceptance of the source) is religion.

Not a paradox at all. It's just the idiot way you state it that is confusing.

Prophets are given things that they don't necessarily understand, both visually, and audibly, among other. They hear words, internally, for example, and write those words down. Or they go on an internal vision quest, and when they come back they write down what they say and heard.

What a prophet writes down is prophecy, which is not religion.

Religions are made up of a prophet's followers, usually after the prophet has died, for example Christianity and Islam. Yes, they both started while the prophets were alive, and then grew from his direct followers to religions following their deaths.

Leaders rise in religions, to lead those who want to continue following in the great prophet's ways. Those leaders are always faced with decisions they have to make, so they always consult the scripture, to see what the great prophet said about that subject. "Ah yes, here it is. The great prophet said, 'blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.'" So, yup, that's what we're going to do. From now on, all male babies will have their foreskin snipped at birth. All because the religious leader didn't understand what the prophet meant, when. The prophet said that all who enter the Kingdom of God, must be circumcised.

Getting your foreskin snipped is therefore a religious act, that is forced on you by your family's religion, and it is based on what a prophet said about being circumcised. Don't laugh, this shit carries over into some Islamic Cults that think that a woman should also be hacked up a bit at birth, so they remove her clit.

But what the prophet said was that you had to be circumcised, which could be and most likely is symbolic for something other than the removal of the foreskin. But then again, who knows, lol. Maybe there is some reason that a man without his foreskin has some advantage of a man who has his? Beats the shit out of me. What do you girls think?

1) Lower atmosphere stays hotter due to greenhouse effect.
2) Lower atmosphere does not stay hotter.

Greenhouse Gases do warm the lower atmosphere.
Lower atmosphere does not stay hotter, when?
Sounds like you are just twisting something around.

1) Surface does not emit.
2) Surface does emit.

All Surfaces emit radiation, as long as they are above absolute 0. The radiation that a surface emits can be absorbed as soon as it leaves the surface. The radiation was still emitted though. You seem to have a problem resolving that in your mind though. To you, if Greenhouse Gases absorb all the infrared radiation being emitted by earth, then it violates the Stefan-Boltzmann Law. Because to you, that energy has to make it all the way out to space. And that's just because you are an idiot, who memorized the Stefan-Boltzmann Law, but doesn't understand what it really means.

1) Thermal resistance is storage (inertia is energy).
2) Thermal resistance is why we can change temperature.

Thermal resistance actually causes a slowdown in thermal transfer [heating]. That will cause whatever the heat source is to increase in temperature. If the heat source is earth, and the thermal resistance is the air, then increasing the air temperature increases the thermal resistance of the air, which should increase the temperature of the surface as long as the incoming radiation is constant or greater.

1) Lower air does not heat upper air or space.
2) Lower air DOES heat upper air and space.

I'm thinking lower air doe heat upper air, to a point, and not space. Air can't heat space, because there is nothing in space to absorb thermal energy.

1) Agreed with O2 and N2 absorb and emit infrared light.
2) We are not talking about O2 and N2, just substances that absorb and
emit infrared light.

Didn't mean to say O2 or N2 absorb infrared light and produce thermal energy. They don't

1) Climate change has occurred in the last 60 years.
2) Records are not long enough to observe climate change since the
industrial revolution.

A sparrow lands on a cable holding the Golden Gate Bridge up. Did you see that cable stretch? It did stretch just a little bit when that sparrow landed, but you couldn't observe a change, could you?

1) The only place to observe the Earth is from space.
2) The S-B law for Earth does not have to be observed from space.

The S-B law does not have to be observed from anywhere, moron.

1) Water vapor warms the Earth.
2) Water vapor cools the Earth by blocking the Sun.

Believe it or not, it can and does do both. Whether it warms or cools depends on the amount of vapor present. Is there enough to form a cloud? Yes = Cools No = Warms
Idiot

1) only urban temperatures are used.
2) There are no cities in Alaska to provide heat islands.

Yeah, I still get use urban bassackwards. Sue me.

1) No one told me what to believe in.
2) My religion originated with someone initially telling me.

Yes, like everyone else in America, I had to hear about Jesus in School when I was a kid, because it wasn't illegal back then to threaten kids with Demi-gods.

I don't really have a religion. I am a Shaman, and think that everyone will eventually learn to look within themselves for the answers to spiritual questions. So, I don't need anyone to tell me what to believe in.

1) There is no way to measure absolute temperature.
2) We can measure absolute temperature with thermometers around the
world.

So what? I don't care if it takes more thermometers than grains of sand on the ocean floor. Just do it, and let me know what it really really is, to the sixth decimal point.

1) I don't force my views on others.
2) People like you should all eat a plate of shit and die.

What's wrong with that advice? Perhaps you should put some cianide in it to make sure it works.

Forcing you would be more like pointing a gun at you, like Wake would do. I'm just making a suggestion, for humanity's sake.

1) Give me a quote of <whatever>
2) You simply copy and paste.

Not a paradox idiot. Nothing wrong with asking a Parrot to provide a little back up for their bull shit.

1) The warmer it gets the more clouds we get.
2) the colder it gets the more clouds we get.

Not a paradox. Just your inability to understand what causes clouds to form. Extreme differences in air temperature, so either warmer air or colder air can cause clouds to form. Besides that, I'm just guessing. I have no clue what causes clouds to form. Nor do I give a shit.

1) same radiation goes into space
2) less radiation goes into space

WTF?

If it's not absorbed, it goes into space. If it's absorbed, it doesn't go into space.

1) Those who fight global warming will be allowed to reincarnate to
some existing body on Earth.
2) The planet will become uninhabitable, according to scripture.

Yeah, but it eventually recovers. It's not my fault that you are so spritually illiterate.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~
15-11-2017 10:12
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(621)
Into the Night wrote:
Dust doesn't stay in the air more than a few hours. What kind of magick dust are you describing here?


I'm not talking about magick dust. I'm talking about dust from volcanic eruptions, like the one that occurred 39,000 years ago. Campi Flegrei wiped out just about all of the Neanderthal population, when it blew. Ash deposits were found 700 miles away that were 3 feet thick, from that eruption. The wind carried the majority of that ash over the main population, ending them almost. A group down in Spain survived, and were eventually absorbed into our population.

But that's not the dust that I'm talking about. I'm talking about this dust, that didn't settle back down to the ground for about 10,000 years.


http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/attachments/dusttemplines2.jpg

I put the graph marks on this chart, so it would be easy to see what year things happened in. For example, Campi Flegrei blew a VEI 7 load all over creation 39,000 years ago. So find the graph mark that goes up at 40,00 years ago, since it is the closest. 39,000 years ago will be just to the left of the graph mark. Ok, first notice the temperature drop. It was going up, then at 39,000 years, it abruptly took a nose dive. Now look up to where that graph mark intersects the dust concentration. Do you see that at about 39,000 years ago the dust concentration started increasing? It had been decreasing, and then abruptly started increasing at the exact same time the temperature started dropping.

That may sound coincidental, but it's not. It's repeatable. The same thing can be seen when Toba blew it's VEI 8 load about 73~74,000 years ago. That's the one that bottlenecked humanity, by killing the population back to just over 1,000 breeding couples.

I'm sure you are still doubtful, even if you went to the trouble of looking at the chart, because you do not think that the data I use is good data. But strange how the data I use matches up with things that can be confirmed, like those eruptions.

Give it a shot. Get a list of know eruptions of VEI 6 or greater, and see if you can't find an increase in the dust concentration when those volcanoes erupted. There are some known eruptions that didn't increase the dust concentration, but most of them did.

This information that I am providing to you and those who are reading this, is from my own research, which began a few years ago, when I was interested in what would stop Global Warming. It's a supervolcano, as described in prophecy, and common knowledge now. If you did your own research on Dust concentrations in the EPICA Dome C ice cores, you could actually find a remark placed in with the data about why that particular scientist thought there was so much dust in the air during ice ages. His thought was that the air was much drier then, allowing dust to float in the air longer. I think he's nuts, lol. It's because all that dust is part of what's causing the ice age itself.

I think I have covered what happens when a VEI 8 Supervolcano blows his load, and it fell of deaf ears. So of course, I will gladly cover it again. To start with, a Supervolcano erupts with so much force, that it blows the dirt above it away, instead of leaving behind a giant mountain. Some of that dirt begins to orbit the planet. Imagine a smoke stack on the side a spinning top. There would be a circle of smoke around the top after just a few revolutions. Dust from a supervolcano erupting would look about the same, after an eruption that lasted 3 days. It would hang above the earth for years, as it gradually spread out to cover the entire planet in a dusty shade. Even if the eruption is in the northern hemisphere, the dust eventually makes it all the way down to Antarctica, where it falls on ice. It takes a few years to spread out that far, but it eventually does.

Let me know if there is anything else I can help you understand.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~
15-11-2017 16:47
Wake
★★★★★
(2586)
GreenMan wrote: Oh, I see we have someone who thinks they know something about the Bible, lol. Too bad you never bothered to read it. But feel free to try and argue something that you think everyone agrees on, just because everyone agrees on it. How could everyone be wrong?

The answer to that is easy. Until the modern age, it was impossible to use the Isaiah Code, just because of the way it works. The book of Isaiah uses words as pointers to stories that are details in prophecy that was being given. For example, Isaiah might have said something about some battle that would be waged like the one in Dijon back during the days of old King Muckimuck, before some other major event was to take place. You can do a search on Dijon and read the stories in the earlier parts of the Bible and see what happened in Dijon. Isaiah is saying that whatever happened then in Dijon was going to happen again, somewhere else. Isaiah did that throughout his book, and used the names of places and people this way. So you can use those names to extract more details about the prophecy than were directly included in the prophecy. Basically, it gives you a storehouse of unmolested details, if you ever want to totally understand the prophecy.

But the problem is. Try doing a cross reference on the Bible using a name. That's easy to do now, with an online search engine, like at BibleGateway. But imagine trying to do it 20 years ago. It would have been almost impossible, unless you had a team of helpers, who could go through and find where a name was used, so you could just read about that particular event.

So, until recently, the Isaiah Code remained hidden in plain sight. And until you have used it, you have no reason to consider the older books of the Bible as anything as they were intentionally presented. I see that as a very clever time lock on the prophecy, and the Bible, put there by God, so that we could unlock it when we needed to.


Another of your contradictions: you don't believe in religion but you believe that the Dead Sea Scrolls predicted thousands of years into the future. Your mythology is really something to behold. And laugh at. You aren't even aware that they can't be properly translated!

It's pretty easy to see why someone like you could become a member of the Church of Global Warming. You will believe ANYTHING.
15-11-2017 16:59
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(791)
What really pickles my mind is how he firmly believes God's prophecies(how he interprets them) will be carried out, yet he believes there is something we can do to "solve the problem". What?
Edited on 15-11-2017 17:04
15-11-2017 17:21
Wake
★★★★★
(2586)
GasGuzzler wrote:
What really pickles my mind is how he firmly believes God's prophecies will be carried out, yet he believes there is something we can do to "solve the problem". What?


I think he thinks it has something to so with slaughtering people in this world by the millions which he is perfectly willing to do because there is a secret code in the Dead Sea Scrolls telling him to do so.

You will notice that both he a Monckton started out reasonable and presenting more or less the standard global warmies propaganda. When we had the answers countering this rediculous BS they were forced to say things like "NASA knows better than you do". When this was countered by the honest scientists who were pushed out of NASA by the government who detected a means to control people saying that none of this was true, they did the only thing they could - they showed their hands. Monckton is a communist of the first rank and greenman showed himself to be one of these religious extremists who actually never read the bible but only the excerpts that were pointed out by other nut cases and which he himself doesn't understand in the slightest.

I have a brother who will argue all day long that the CIA blew up the Trade Towers and not that some terrorists flew airplanes into them. Even the pictures of it happening he will claim are photoshopped. He will tell me that an airplane couldn't possibly fly into one side of a building and have the nose showing out the other side.

I explain patiently to him that the Trade Towers were constructed the same way that ALL modern buildings are - with the OUTSIDE of the building supporting each floor. There is nothing in the middle of the building in the way of structure except elevator shafts. This is also the reason that the buildings don't fall over but instead collapse downwards into itself.

He showed me a picture of a beam that was cut at about a 33 degree angle and said, "Some airplane didn't do that". I showed him the side construction of the building and how that cut was in fact nothing more than part of the construction of the building.

But NOTHING will change his mind. It is an absolute religion with him and then he will start quoting the bible about how this was all predicted.

This is what we see from greenman. And monckton is not far behind. His spectacular demonstration of how he really believes in communism demonstrates that.

Too bad that none of the true believers understand the strength of the American people. They are inner city losers and think that the whole world is like them.

And what is likely that they are going to gain is to be locked away in an asylum where both belong.
15-11-2017 21:01
Wake
★★★★★
(2586)
GreenMan wrote: As previously stated, your supposed list of my paradoxes is just your deliberate misunderstanding, which is obvious by the way you regurgitate what I supposedly said.

I love your last one, especially. You can't seem to get your head around people having to live through a period of time when the earth is uninhabitable.

People won't be able to go to the SuperMarket anymore, because there won't be any SuperMarket anymore. The only food people will have is food they have stored away. When the dust has settled enough, they will begin to go out of their dwellings, and start trying to grow crops. That will be difficult, because there still won't be much sunlight getting through the remaining dust in the air. So the first several years, there won't be much of a yield.

But eventually, those who had enough food stores, and were in a good location, live long enough to see the earth recover. That's what the prophecy of the Bible says. And that is what humanity faces now. It's time to get ready for it. Waiting till the last minute is not the thing to do.


Why are YOU of all people talking about deliberate misunderstandings?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YMttEhtgpk
16-11-2017 03:36
Wake
★★★★★
(2586)
Wake wrote: Why are YOU of all people talking about deliberate misunderstandings?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YMttEhtgpk


The world is walking away from the nialists. The world sees the cowards like litebrain, mockton the identify thief, and the others as useless and without reasons to live.

We laugh in your faces. We don't care what you think of what you have to say. We don't care if you are alive or dead.
16-11-2017 07:29
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(621)
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote: Oh, I see we have someone who thinks they know something about the Bible, lol. Too bad you never bothered to read it. But feel free to try and argue something that you think everyone agrees on, just because everyone agrees on it. How could everyone be wrong?

The answer to that is easy. Until the modern age, it was impossible to use the Isaiah Code, just because of the way it works. The book of Isaiah uses words as pointers to stories that are details in prophecy that was being given. For example, Isaiah might have said something about some battle that would be waged like the one in Dijon back during the days of old King Muckimuck, before some other major event was to take place. You can do a search on Dijon and read the stories in the earlier parts of the Bible and see what happened in Dijon. Isaiah is saying that whatever happened then in Dijon was going to happen again, somewhere else. Isaiah did that throughout his book, and used the names of places and people this way. So you can use those names to extract more details about the prophecy than were directly included in the prophecy. Basically, it gives you a storehouse of unmolested details, if you ever want to totally understand the prophecy.

But the problem is. Try doing a cross reference on the Bible using a name. That's easy to do now, with an online search engine, like at BibleGateway. But imagine trying to do it 20 years ago. It would have been almost impossible, unless you had a team of helpers, who could go through and find where a name was used, so you could just read about that particular event.

So, until recently, the Isaiah Code remained hidden in plain sight. And until you have used it, you have no reason to consider the older books of the Bible as anything as they were intentionally presented. I see that as a very clever time lock on the prophecy, and the Bible, put there by God, so that we could unlock it when we needed to.


Another of your contradictions: you don't believe in religion but you believe that the Dead Sea Scrolls predicted thousands of years into the future. Your mythology is really something to behold. And laugh at. You aren't even aware that they can't be properly translated!

It's pretty easy to see why someone like you could become a member of the Church of Global Warming. You will believe ANYTHING.


It is not a contradiction to believe in prophecy but not religion. Religion is men's misunderstanding of prophecy. Why should I believe someone else's interpretation of prophecy that I can read and interpret for myself? Especially when their interpretation is slanted to present their past hero as someone other than a dead wannabe.

I don't recall mentioning the Dead Sea Scrolls, but since you bring them up, we can go there. Why do you think they can not be properly translated? I went through the Isaiah Scroll and found the translation that some guy did to be very accurate. I can look up the link, if you are interested. He even provides pictures of each of scrolls, so you can check his work, if you know ancient Hebrew. The New King James Version is very close to the same thing as the Isaiah Scroll from the Dead Sea though.

And yes, that scroll does predict thousands of years into the future, because it goes into the details of events that lead up to God's Judgement, or the End of the Warm Part [End of Days, translated correctly], or the End of the Word [as misinformed religious fanatics call it]. Those scrolls were buried hundreds of years before Jesus blessed humanity with his presence, so they do obviously predict thousands of years into the future, since it is now 2017 and those prophecies are yet to be fulfilled.

Oh yeah, there is one little difference in the two versions of Isaiah. I forget exactly which verse it is, but it's a famous one used by Christians to promote Jesus as the Messiah. In the New King James Version, it says that the Messiah would give up his life for the sake of humanity, which is what they consider he did when he was nailed to the cross. But in the Dead Sea Scrolls version, it says that the Messiah would trade his grave to the rich. If you are interested in that, I can look it up for you. I found it quite interesting, and pondered quite a while on what trading your grave to the rich meant, or how it could be done. Then I realized that it meant that he was a modest man, who did not rely on wealth to live. That detail of him is also mentioned elsewhere, and by prophecy from outside the Bible. But anyway, it has to do with how he handles the events that unfold during his life as Messiah. Basically, he lets the rich die, and the humble, who follow/listen to him get to live.

Did I mention yet that he should be around? Yup, he should be, if we are indeed living in the age of fulfillment. I know for sure that we are, so he has to be alive somewhere in the world. If you understand how life works, you know that he has to be born, just like everyone else. He doesn't get to just pop his magick ass in here on us. He has to go to school, just like everyone else. He has to go through puberty, and feel a few girls up, before he finally figures out how to get laid, just like everyone else. Then after he does that, he gets to live a normal life, until he realizes that it's time for him to take a look around, and see what he needs to do.

Yeah, I know, you guys think he is God, so he knows everything, and doesn't need to figure out what to do. But he is not God. He is just a normal man, who allows God to lead him where he needs to go, and be where he needs to be, and say the things that he needs to say. He doesn't get to float around in the clouds, unless he pays for his seat on the airplane. But no, if that is what you expect, then you are going to really be disappointed when he comes along and spanks your silly ass.

Nah, I don't think he will be interested in spanking your silly ass Wake, lol. I'm thinking he will be more interested in leading people into dealing with Climate Change. The prophecy says that he will basically suck his people out of the religions of the day. They will begin to form little groups, that eventually get so powerful that the king begins to attack them. It's all over when that starts to happen. The rest is written. By the time they figure out he is around, his movement is so large that they just swat his silly ass aside and do what they want. Well, it probably won't be that easy, but that's what happens in the end. He sits all the kings down. One humble man, led by God.

Imagine if he came through here Wake. How would you react if you found out that he was someone who you had been disrespectful to, and even invited him to come see you in Oakland?

It's probably fortunate for you that if he is here, he is probably way too busy to come in here. Why would he come in here anyway? This is just a Climate Debate Forum, where Alarmists come to enjoy getting laughed at. Remember, they aren't laughing with you, they are laughing at you. So don't have any sympathy for the idiots when you are chilled out, enjoying the heat waves from the comfort of your own naturally powered abode.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~
16-11-2017 08:21
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(621)
GasGuzzler wrote:
What really pickles my mind is how he firmly believes God's prophecies(how he interprets them) will be carried out, yet he believes there is something we can do to "solve the problem". What?


Gassy, you do know I can hear you, right?

A couple things. It depends on which problem you are talking about. I do not think that we can solve the Climate Change problem that we are currently faced with. I know beyond a doubt, that even if we did cut our production of CO2 and CH4 completly out, that the average temperature of the planet will continue to climbe for hundreds if not thousands of years, because of the concentrations already present, unless something else happens to stop the warming.

As far as I can tell, there is no solution. We have to just take what's coming, and deal with it. Ok, if nothing comes, then we don't have to deal with anything. You think nothing is coming. I do. I base my opinion on prophecy [yes, my interpretation, not some religious idiot's] and science [yes, my own research, not some religious idiot's].

The problem as I see it, is survival. And I think that it will come to every man for himself way before the average global temperature exceeds the magic 2C limit that the IPCC wishes to impose. That's from the prophecy side of my brain. The scientific side actually agrees with you, and thinks that business as usual would be nice. Unfortunately for my scientific side, my prophetic side wins out on my course of action. Oh, and that is because back in 2003, after some rough spots, I decided that it would be best if I stopped worrying about the prophecy and Global Warming.

I made the decision one night, after I laid down to go to sleep, that I would no longer concern myself with prophecy or Climate Change, or anything that was considered unusual by others around me. My goal from then on would be to just work like hell and make as much money as I could, because that is what a person has to have in this world to survive. That night, as I lay in bed, I suddenly found myself hanging out in outer space, looking down at the planet. I saw the continent of Africa, and zoomed in. I could see that the entire continent had become a grassland. Nothing but grass across the entire continent. I woke up, and thought that was weird, but didn't relate it to anything. Soon after falling to sleep again, I find myself again floating in space, looking down on the planet. This time, a male voice from behind me says "that is your home," as I look down at the southeastern coast of North America. The problem is, I remember those two dreams today, and I know what was on my mind when I went to sleep that night. And I analyze dreams and know what they mean. And what I saw when I looked down at my "home" was that it was now under water, because the ocean now came up to Greenville, SC, which is around 1050 ft above sea level.

So you know what I did, Gassy? If you guessed that I put my nose right back into the prophecies and started researching Climate Change, so I would know for sure what I was talking about when I was talking about either. To me, they are one in the same, because the prophecy warns us about the consequences of Climate Change. I can prove either, and both, to a rational man that doesn't already have his mind made up about Climate Change or Religion.

And you know what else I did Gassy? I worked through in my mind what the people who do find and follow the Messiah will do, when they realize that they have lived through the worst of it, and it's now time to design their "new world." Remember Gassy, the Messiah does not get to go with them into the New World. Moses dies on Mt Pisgah, before the actual crossing of the Jordon. So the people will have to develope their New World Structure on their own, without his direct leadership. Do you think they will even think about using oil, or coal or natural gas to power their world, after seeing what doing that causes?

Nope. They will figure out how to use technology to provide them with power, that doesn't affect the climate. And hopefully, they will do that before losing the technology that we currently have, and reverting back into Stone Age life. That can actually happen you know. All it would really take is the loss of communication for a few years. People would have to go back to just farming and/or foraging for survival. Soon, computers are no good, and the books are all gone. One generation later, and the world is full of illiterate people, like it was 50,000 years ago. But at least those guys back then knew how to survive.

So let's hope the Maya are right about their prophecies, because they say that guy with the magic ass just keeps coming back to life, with a new magic ass, every time he gets killed, and eventually leads humanity to the next level of existence, which they call the 5th world.

Yeah, yeah, I know. You don't believe in that shit either.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~
16-11-2017 08:44
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(621)
Wake wrote:
Wake wrote: Why are YOU of all people talking about deliberate misunderstandings?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YMttEhtgpk


The world is walking away from the nialists. The world sees the cowards like litebrain, mockton the identify thief, and the others as useless and without reasons to live.

We laugh in your faces. We don't care what you think of what you have to say. We don't care if you are alive or dead.


[pecks on screen]

Uh, you do know that this is the Internet, and we aren't really face to face, don't you? So you might be laughing your silly ass off, but you aren't really laughing in anyone's face.

Oh, I see you found another YouTube link that supports some point that you would like to make, but don't have the intelligence to explain what it is. My ex ole lady's cousin was like that. He would sit around and drink and watch all of these YouTube videos to figure out what his opinion on everything was. Then of course, he would want to show everyone his videos, so they would understand why he is like he is. And of course, he would appreciate some agreement after making you watch the goofy video.

It's you that is useless, Wake. Those who are out there leading the way through this problem by informing others of the reality of it are the ones that are helping people. It's idiots like you that are in the way that are beyond useless. Useless would be if you just went to your home, drank your alcohol and thought about what a wonderful person you are. No, you are worse than that. You think you need to drag your useless ass out in the way of those who are trying to help others, so you are hindering progress, or at least trying to.

I want to say it's not doing any good, because this problem isn't going to go away, just because you don't want to deal with it. But that isn't entirely true, because there are so many of you dumb mother f^ers out there that you managed to elect a president that is as stupid as you are.

But he only gets his 8 years at the helm, tops. And I don't think he quite makes it that long. After that, the tax man cometh. And he gonna raise your taxes, boy. So you might as well get ready for it. I recommend some KY spray, because he ain't gonna be playing, and he's gonna get in just as deep as he can. Then he ain't just gonna break it off and move on to the next a$$ hole. Nope, he gonna have em all lined up, like in AFEEs, and just go down the line like that doctor did. But when you cough, that won't be his hand on your nuts, that's gonna be his fist, going deep. He's gonna reach all the way up through you, and catch the coins that you cough up. And if you dont cough up no coins, he gonna grab your tongue and drag it right back out your a$$ hole.

So you might as well get your coins out and have them ready when he shows up. Maybe you can just hand them to him.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~
16-11-2017 15:50
Wake
★★★★★
(2586)
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Dust doesn't stay in the air more than a few hours. What kind of magick dust are you describing here?


I'm not talking about magick dust. I'm talking about dust from volcanic eruptions, like the one that occurred 39,000 years ago. Campi Flegrei wiped out just about all of the Neanderthal population, when it blew. Ash deposits were found 700 miles away that were 3 feet thick, from that eruption. The wind carried the majority of that ash over the main population, ending them almost. A group down in Spain survived, and were eventually absorbed into our population.

But that's not the dust that I'm talking about. I'm talking about this dust, that didn't settle back down to the ground for about 10,000 years.


http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/attachments/dusttemplines2.jpg

I put the graph marks on this chart, so it would be easy to see what year things happened in. For example, Campi Flegrei blew a VEI 7 load all over creation 39,000 years ago. So find the graph mark that goes up at 40,00 years ago, since it is the closest. 39,000 years ago will be just to the left of the graph mark. Ok, first notice the temperature drop. It was going up, then at 39,000 years, it abruptly took a nose dive. Now look up to where that graph mark intersects the dust concentration. Do you see that at about 39,000 years ago the dust concentration started increasing? It had been decreasing, and then abruptly started increasing at the exact same time the temperature started dropping.

That may sound coincidental, but it's not. It's repeatable. The same thing can be seen when Toba blew it's VEI 8 load about 73~74,000 years ago. That's the one that bottlenecked humanity, by killing the population back to just over 1,000 breeding couples.

I'm sure you are still doubtful, even if you went to the trouble of looking at the chart, because you do not think that the data I use is good data. But strange how the data I use matches up with things that can be confirmed, like those eruptions.

Give it a shot. Get a list of know eruptions of VEI 6 or greater, and see if you can't find an increase in the dust concentration when those volcanoes erupted. There are some known eruptions that didn't increase the dust concentration, but most of them did.

This information that I am providing to you and those who are reading this, is from my own research, which began a few years ago, when I was interested in what would stop Global Warming. It's a supervolcano, as described in prophecy, and common knowledge now. If you did your own research on Dust concentrations in the EPICA Dome C ice cores, you could actually find a remark placed in with the data about why that particular scientist thought there was so much dust in the air during ice ages. His thought was that the air was much drier then, allowing dust to float in the air longer. I think he's nuts, lol. It's because all that dust is part of what's causing the ice age itself.

I think I have covered what happens when a VEI 8 Supervolcano blows his load, and it fell of deaf ears. So of course, I will gladly cover it again. To start with, a Supervolcano erupts with so much force, that it blows the dirt above it away, instead of leaving behind a giant mountain. Some of that dirt begins to orbit the planet. Imagine a smoke stack on the side a spinning top. There would be a circle of smoke around the top after just a few revolutions. Dust from a supervolcano erupting would look about the same, after an eruption that lasted 3 days. It would hang above the earth for years, as it gradually spread out to cover the entire planet in a dusty shade. Even if the eruption is in the northern hemisphere, the dust eventually makes it all the way down to Antarctica, where it falls on ice. It takes a few years to spread out that far, but it eventually does.

Let me know if there is anything else I can help you understand.


Now not only do you believe that you're a paleontologist but that somehow the neanderthal man was tightly grouped within a 700 mile radius.

I really do think you should hurry and get on the appointment list for a good psychologist.
17-11-2017 04:46
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(621)
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Dust doesn't stay in the air more than a few hours. What kind of magick dust are you describing here?


I'm not talking about magick dust. I'm talking about dust from volcanic eruptions, like the one that occurred 39,000 years ago. Campi Flegrei wiped out just about all of the Neanderthal population, when it blew. Ash deposits were found 700 miles away that were 3 feet thick, from that eruption. The wind carried the majority of that ash over the main population, ending them almost. A group down in Spain survived, and were eventually absorbed into our population.

But that's not the dust that I'm talking about. I'm talking about this dust, that didn't settle back down to the ground for about 10,000 years.


http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/attachments/dusttemplines2.jpg

I put the graph marks on this chart, so it would be easy to see what year things happened in. For example, Campi Flegrei blew a VEI 7 load all over creation 39,000 years ago. So find the graph mark that goes up at 40,00 years ago, since it is the closest. 39,000 years ago will be just to the left of the graph mark. Ok, first notice the temperature drop. It was going up, then at 39,000 years, it abruptly took a nose dive. Now look up to where that graph mark intersects the dust concentration. Do you see that at about 39,000 years ago the dust concentration started increasing? It had been decreasing, and then abruptly started increasing at the exact same time the temperature started dropping.

That may sound coincidental, but it's not. It's repeatable. The same thing can be seen when Toba blew it's VEI 8 load about 73~74,000 years ago. That's the one that bottlenecked humanity, by killing the population back to just over 1,000 breeding couples.

I'm sure you are still doubtful, even if you went to the trouble of looking at the chart, because you do not think that the data I use is good data. But strange how the data I use matches up with things that can be confirmed, like those eruptions.

Give it a shot. Get a list of know eruptions of VEI 6 or greater, and see if you can't find an increase in the dust concentration when those volcanoes erupted. There are some known eruptions that didn't increase the dust concentration, but most of them did.

This information that I am providing to you and those who are reading this, is from my own research, which began a few years ago, when I was interested in what would stop Global Warming. It's a supervolcano, as described in prophecy, and common knowledge now. If you did your own research on Dust concentrations in the EPICA Dome C ice cores, you could actually find a remark placed in with the data about why that particular scientist thought there was so much dust in the air during ice ages. His thought was that the air was much drier then, allowing dust to float in the air longer. I think he's nuts, lol. It's because all that dust is part of what's causing the ice age itself.

I think I have covered what happens when a VEI 8 Supervolcano blows his load, and it fell of deaf ears. So of course, I will gladly cover it again. To start with, a Supervolcano erupts with so much force, that it blows the dirt above it away, instead of leaving behind a giant mountain. Some of that dirt begins to orbit the planet. Imagine a smoke stack on the side a spinning top. There would be a circle of smoke around the top after just a few revolutions. Dust from a supervolcano erupting would look about the same, after an eruption that lasted 3 days. It would hang above the earth for years, as it gradually spread out to cover the entire planet in a dusty shade. Even if the eruption is in the northern hemisphere, the dust eventually makes it all the way down to Antarctica, where it falls on ice. It takes a few years to spread out that far, but it eventually does.

Let me know if there is anything else I can help you understand.


Now not only do you believe that you're a paleontologist but that somehow the neanderthal man was tightly grouped within a 700 mile radius.

I really do think you should hurry and get on the appointment list for a good psychologist.


Only a complete idiot would equate a statement about 3 feet of ash 700 miles away to indicate that the ash field was just 700 miles in diameter. That ash field was several thousand miles in diameter, idiot. And the wind deposited right on top of where most of the Neandrathals lived at the time.

I still think suicide is your best option, because your stupidity is incurable.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~
17-11-2017 16:04
Wake
★★★★★
(2586)
GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Dust doesn't stay in the air more than a few hours. What kind of magick dust are you describing here?


I'm not talking about magick dust. I'm talking about dust from volcanic eruptions, like the one that occurred 39,000 years ago. Campi Flegrei wiped out just about all of the Neanderthal population, when it blew. Ash deposits were found 700 miles away that were 3 feet thick, from that eruption. The wind carried the majority of that ash over the main population, ending them almost. A group down in Spain survived, and were eventually absorbed into our population.

But that's not the dust that I'm talking about. I'm talking about this dust, that didn't settle back down to the ground for about 10,000 years.


http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/attachments/dusttemplines2.jpg

I put the graph marks on this chart, so it would be easy to see what year things happened in. For example, Campi Flegrei blew a VEI 7 load all over creation 39,000 years ago. So find the graph mark that goes up at 40,00 years ago, since it is the closest. 39,000 years ago will be just to the left of the graph mark. Ok, first notice the temperature drop. It was going up, then at 39,000 years, it abruptly took a nose dive. Now look up to where that graph mark intersects the dust concentration. Do you see that at about 39,000 years ago the dust concentration started increasing? It had been decreasing, and then abruptly started increasing at the exact same time the temperature started dropping.

That may sound coincidental, but it's not. It's repeatable. The same thing can be seen when Toba blew it's VEI 8 load about 73~74,000 years ago. That's the one that bottlenecked humanity, by killing the population back to just over 1,000 breeding couples.

I'm sure you are still doubtful, even if you went to the trouble of looking at the chart, because you do not think that the data I use is good data. But strange how the data I use matches up with things that can be confirmed, like those eruptions.

Give it a shot. Get a list of know eruptions of VEI 6 or greater, and see if you can't find an increase in the dust concentration when those volcanoes erupted. There are some known eruptions that didn't increase the dust concentration, but most of them did.

This information that I am providing to you and those who are reading this, is from my own research, which began a few years ago, when I was interested in what would stop Global Warming. It's a supervolcano, as described in prophecy, and common knowledge now. If you did your own research on Dust concentrations in the EPICA Dome C ice cores, you could actually find a remark placed in with the data about why that particular scientist thought there was so much dust in the air during ice ages. His thought was that the air was much drier then, allowing dust to float in the air longer. I think he's nuts, lol. It's because all that dust is part of what's causing the ice age itself.

I think I have covered what happens when a VEI 8 Supervolcano blows his load, and it fell of deaf ears. So of course, I will gladly cover it again. To start with, a Supervolcano erupts with so much force, that it blows the dirt above it away, instead of leaving behind a giant mountain. Some of that dirt begins to orbit the planet. Imagine a smoke stack on the side a spinning top. There would be a circle of smoke around the top after just a few revolutions. Dust from a supervolcano erupting would look about the same, after an eruption that lasted 3 days. It would hang above the earth for years, as it gradually spread out to cover the entire planet in a dusty shade. Even if the eruption is in the northern hemisphere, the dust eventually makes it all the way down to Antarctica, where it falls on ice. It takes a few years to spread out that far, but it eventually does.

Let me know if there is anything else I can help you understand.


Now not only do you believe that you're a paleontologist but that somehow the neanderthal man was tightly grouped within a 700 mile radius.

I really do think you should hurry and get on the appointment list for a good psychologist.


Only a complete idiot would equate a statement about 3 feet of ash 700 miles away to indicate that the ash field was just 700 miles in diameter. That ash field was several thousand miles in diameter, idiot. And the wind deposited right on top of where most of the Neandrathals lived at the time.

I still think suicide is your best option, because your stupidity is incurable.


I see that your highly educated knowledge of both geology and paleontology is showing. Not to mention your vast knowledge of volcanology. Let me applaud you after I stop laughing.
18-11-2017 17:25
litesong
★★★★☆
(1861)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rooting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time (plus 1) wake-me-up" wiffed: .... knowledge....
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rooting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" uses its knowledge to be an "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rooting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time (plus 1) threatener.
Page 2 of 2<12





Join the debate New Federal Report, Approved by White House, Predicts 5C Rise by 2100:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
US report contradicts Trump team: Warming mostly man-made7018-11-2017 08:59
House Vs Bridge Thanks to Philippe001-11-2017 03:54
Government 'tried to bury' its own alarming report on climate change3111-10-2017 05:11
Doomsday 2020 Haart Report2010-10-2017 02:50
Volcanic & Green House Gases, Melt Polar Caps925-02-2017 21:38
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Will Arctic summers be ice-free in this century?

Yes

No

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2017 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact