Remember me
▼ Content

The Last 4,000 Years


The Last 4,000 Years23-02-2019 17:34
James___
★★★★★
(3164)
Some people will find this interesting and some will say "That's why I don't bother learning, I prefer my opinion. Others can do my learning for me because my leisure time is too valuable to understand issues and why they matter".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThcLJdIpKDI&lc=z22zzzmhlrizz113pacdp43134y0bdd443m0ss2dmldw03c010c.1550537544348111
23-02-2019 17:55
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
James___ wrote:
Some people will find this interesting and some will say "That's why I don't bother learning, I prefer my opinion. Others can do my learning for me because my leisure time is too valuable to understand issues and why they matter".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThcLJdIpKDI&lc=z22zzzmhlrizz113pacdp43134y0bdd443m0ss2dmldw03c010c.1550537544348111


James, there is so much real science out there that it isn't funny. But the media is hiding it so you have to work at finding it. It is difficult to find the papers on CO2 analysis even in Ice Core research.

http://nov79.com/gbwm/fakery.html

You have to remember that the research grants only go to those willing to follow the narative. Researchers have to eat too, so it should come as no surprise that there is a great deal of falsified research out there.

The New Green Deal should open your eyes to what these politicians are willing to do TO YOU in the name of nothing more than control. Socialism murdered 200 million people in the name of "the public good" in the 20th century. Are you willing to see a repeat performance in the 21st?
Edited on 23-02-2019 17:55
23-02-2019 19:03
James___
★★★★★
(3164)
Wake wrote:
James___ wrote:
Some people will find this interesting and some will say "That's why I don't bother learning, I prefer my opinion. Others can do my learning for me because my leisure time is too valuable to understand issues and why they matter".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThcLJdIpKDI&lc=z22zzzmhlrizz113pacdp43134y0bdd443m0ss2dmldw03c010c.1550537544348111


James, there is so much real science out there that it isn't funny. But the media is hiding it so you have to work at finding it. It is difficult to find the papers on CO2 analysis even in Ice Core research.

http://nov79.com/gbwm/fakery.html

You have to remember that the research grants only go to those willing to follow the narative. Researchers have to eat too, so it should come as no surprise that there is a great deal of falsified research out there.

The New Green Deal should open your eyes to what these politicians are willing to do TO YOU in the name of nothing more than control. Socialism murdered 200 million people in the name of "the public good" in the 20th century. Are you willing to see a repeat performance in the 21st?


Often times I'll post on yahoo.com when it's appropriate and give a different perspective. We also don't get along wake because we have different opinions. My considerations are different than yours. How do you think I found that webpage? What was my personal Rosetta Stone For Climate Change was this https://www.nbi.ku.dk/english/sciencexplorer/earth_and_climate/golden_spike/video/spoergsmaal_svar1/. I have internet access and can surf the internet.
With me, I could go into the astrophysics and geology of what I think but most people wouldn't be able to follow it. What people miss is that like with India saying it will divert water from Pakistan https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-21/india-to-stop-its-share-of-water-from-flowing-into-pakistan-jseqzqv0?srnd=premium-asia and Pakistan has promised to escalate.things, what will happen when our planet starts cooling? The glacial melt from the Himalayas will decrease and the river level of the Ganges and other rivers in India will decrease.
Then there's Russia. It will become much colder there just as in Canada, the US and Europe.
23-02-2019 20:34
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
There will always be wars and rumors of wars. The idea is to keep them small enough that a breakdown in all law doesn't occur. Since WW II there has been nothing that even came even as close as that.

Why do you suppose that the media doesn't cover things like the bombing of London? Because the English aristocracy was fine. And to hell with the common man. That is what the move towards socialism is - keep you in the dark and feed you BS so that you have the mental ability of a mushroom.

Dr. Steffanson is plainly in the "denier" camp and poses the very plain question - if we could control the climate what should it be?

So exactly WHY do you say we disagree and then say that you agree with him when he and I agree completely down to the slightest detail? Is it because you don't like how plainly I state it? That I can show large errors in the AGW papers that are plainly from false datasets? Do you want to deny that the datasets are true but that Dr. Steffanson is wrong? If so why?
23-02-2019 21:30
James___
★★★★★
(3164)
Wake wrote:
There will always be wars and rumors of wars. The idea is to keep them small enough that a breakdown in all law doesn't occur. Since WW II there has been nothing that even came even as close as that.

Why do you suppose that the media doesn't cover things like the bombing of London? Because the English aristocracy was fine. And to hell with the common man. That is what the move towards socialism is - keep you in the dark and feed you BS so that you have the mental ability of a mushroom.

Dr. Steffanson is plainly in the "denier" camp and poses the very plain question - if we could control the climate what should it be?

So exactly WHY do you say we disagree and then say that you agree with him when he and I agree completely down to the slightest detail? Is it because you don't like how plainly I state it? That I can show large errors in the AGW papers that are plainly from false datasets? Do you want to deny that the datasets are true but that Dr. Steffanson is wrong? If so why?



Wake,
He's not in the "denier" camp. You didn't read between the lines and what obviously disagrees with those who say CO2 is responsible for Global Warming.
Ice cores from both Antarctica and Greenland show that the last ice age started to become milder 19.000 years ago, completely in accordance with increased solar radiation from the earth's favourable orientation in its orbit around the sun.

If you understand the argument for why CO2 is causing our climate to warm, it is because it ended the last ice age. Dr. Steffanson clearly stated that it was the Earth's favorable position orientation to it's orbit around the Sun. This means that CO2 didn't cause Global Warming at the end of the last ice age.
What you need to understand is that IMHO if he doesn't include CO2 in some way then as a scientist his opinion will become meaningless.
In conclusion he said
One can conclude that man had nothing to do with the end of the ice age. CO2 and climate continued to change at the same rate until industrialisation. I could be worried that our CO2 emissions could very well go and have serious consequences; but one should not believe that nature will just remain at rest if we let it be: Ice ages and climate ripples are good examples that nature is neither environmentally neutral or politically correct.

He understands the importance of being politically correct. This is another reason why I like him, he did say "nature is neither environmentally neutral or politically correct". But as a scientist, he does need to be mindful of political correctness.
23-02-2019 21:49
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13280)
James___ wrote:
Wake wrote:
James___ wrote:
Some people will find this interesting and some will say "That's why I don't bother learning, I prefer my opinion. Others can do my learning for me because my leisure time is too valuable to understand issues and why they matter".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThcLJdIpKDI&lc=z22zzzmhlrizz113pacdp43134y0bdd443m0ss2dmldw03c010c.1550537544348111


James, there is so much real science out there that it isn't funny. But the media is hiding it so you have to work at finding it. It is difficult to find the papers on CO2 analysis even in Ice Core research.

http://nov79.com/gbwm/fakery.html

You have to remember that the research grants only go to those willing to follow the narative. Researchers have to eat too, so it should come as no surprise that there is a great deal of falsified research out there.

The New Green Deal should open your eyes to what these politicians are willing to do TO YOU in the name of nothing more than control. Socialism murdered 200 million people in the name of "the public good" in the 20th century. Are you willing to see a repeat performance in the 21st?


Often times I'll post on yahoo.com when it's appropriate and give a different perspective. We also don't get along wake because we have different opinions. My considerations are different than yours. How do you think I found that webpage? What was my personal Rosetta Stone For Climate Change was this https://www.nbi.ku.dk/english/sciencexplorer/earth_and_climate/golden_spike/video/spoergsmaal_svar1/. I have internet access and can surf the internet.
With me, I could go into the astrophysics and geology of what I think but most people wouldn't be able to follow it. What people miss is that like with India saying it will divert water from Pakistan https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-21/india-to-stop-its-share-of-water-from-flowing-into-pakistan-jseqzqv0?srnd=premium-asia and Pakistan has promised to escalate.things, what will happen when our planet starts cooling? The glacial melt from the Himalayas will decrease and the river level of the Ganges and other rivers in India will decrease.
Then there's Russia. It will become much colder there just as in Canada, the US and Europe.

Won't have to worry about that for about 40,000 years. Don't think you need to make an issue of it, James.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
23-02-2019 21:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13280)
James___ wrote:
Wake wrote:
There will always be wars and rumors of wars. The idea is to keep them small enough that a breakdown in all law doesn't occur. Since WW II there has been nothing that even came even as close as that.

Why do you suppose that the media doesn't cover things like the bombing of London? Because the English aristocracy was fine. And to hell with the common man. That is what the move towards socialism is - keep you in the dark and feed you BS so that you have the mental ability of a mushroom.

Dr. Steffanson is plainly in the "denier" camp and poses the very plain question - if we could control the climate what should it be?

So exactly WHY do you say we disagree and then say that you agree with him when he and I agree completely down to the slightest detail? Is it because you don't like how plainly I state it? That I can show large errors in the AGW papers that are plainly from false datasets? Do you want to deny that the datasets are true but that Dr. Steffanson is wrong? If so why?



Wake,
He's not in the "denier" camp. You didn't read between the lines and what obviously disagrees with those who say CO2 is responsible for Global Warming.
Ice cores from both Antarctica and Greenland show that the last ice age started to become milder 19.000 years ago, completely in accordance with increased solar radiation from the earth's favourable orientation in its orbit around the sun.

If you understand the argument for why CO2 is causing our climate to warm, it is because it ended the last ice age. Dr. Steffanson clearly stated that it was the Earth's favorable position orientation to it's orbit around the Sun. This means that CO2 didn't cause Global Warming at the end of the last ice age.
What you need to understand is that IMHO if he doesn't include CO2 in some way then as a scientist his opinion will become meaningless.
In conclusion he said
One can conclude that man had nothing to do with the end of the ice age. CO2 and climate continued to change at the same rate until industrialisation. I could be worried that our CO2 emissions could very well go and have serious consequences; but one should not believe that nature will just remain at rest if we let it be: Ice ages and climate ripples are good examples that nature is neither environmentally neutral or politically correct.

He understands the importance of being politically correct. This is another reason why I like him, he did say "nature is neither environmentally neutral or politically correct". But as a scientist, he does need to be mindful of political correctness.


There is no importance to being 'politically correct'. That ia pompous attitude to believe it has any importance at all.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
24-02-2019 00:30
James___
★★★★★
(3164)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Wake wrote:
There will always be wars and rumors of wars. The idea is to keep them small enough that a breakdown in all law doesn't occur. Since WW II there has been nothing that even came even as close as that.

Why do you suppose that the media doesn't cover things like the bombing of London? Because the English aristocracy was fine. And to hell with the common man. That is what the move towards socialism is - keep you in the dark and feed you BS so that you have the mental ability of a mushroom.

Dr. Steffanson is plainly in the "denier" camp and poses the very plain question - if we could control the climate what should it be?

So exactly WHY do you say we disagree and then say that you agree with him when he and I agree completely down to the slightest detail? Is it because you don't like how plainly I state it? That I can show large errors in the AGW papers that are plainly from false datasets? Do you want to deny that the datasets are true but that Dr. Steffanson is wrong? If so why?



Wake,
He's not in the "denier" camp. You didn't read between the lines and what obviously disagrees with those who say CO2 is responsible for Global Warming.
Ice cores from both Antarctica and Greenland show that the last ice age started to become milder 19.000 years ago, completely in accordance with increased solar radiation from the earth's favourable orientation in its orbit around the sun.

If you understand the argument for why CO2 is causing our climate to warm, it is because it ended the last ice age. Dr. Steffanson clearly stated that it was the Earth's favorable position orientation to it's orbit around the Sun. This means that CO2 didn't cause Global Warming at the end of the last ice age.
What you need to understand is that IMHO if he doesn't include CO2 in some way then as a scientist his opinion will become meaningless.
In conclusion he said
One can conclude that man had nothing to do with the end of the ice age. CO2 and climate continued to change at the same rate until industrialisation. I could be worried that our CO2 emissions could very well go and have serious consequences; but one should not believe that nature will just remain at rest if we let it be: Ice ages and climate ripples are good examples that nature is neither environmentally neutral or politically correct.

He understands the importance of being politically correct. This is another reason why I like him, he did say "nature is neither environmentally neutral or politically correct". But as a scientist, he does need to be mindful of political correctness.


There is no importance to being 'politically correct'. That ia pompous attitude to believe it has any importance at all.



ITN,
I heard the best part of you ran down your mama's leg. Is that right?




Join the debate The Last 4,000 Years:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
The Godlike Lifestyle Formula Will Help You Get Smarter, Richer, More Beauty, Live To 200 Years1014-08-2020 18:35
SCIENTISTS: 30 Years Of Data Show The 'Godfather' Global Warming Was Wrong1711-02-2020 17:42
What makes IPCC scientists sure warmer air hundreds of millions of years ago due to7106-06-2019 23:39
If Democrats rule America then in 100 years America will be biggest CO2 emitter on the planet126-04-2019 00:41
Earth's carbon dioxide levels highest in 3 million years, study says019-04-2019 15:33
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact