Remember me
▼ Content

What is the most climate friendly way to travel the from Copenhagen to Atlanta?


What is the most climate friendly way to travel the from Copenhagen to Atlanta?23-04-2022 15:01
KlimaKristian
☆☆☆☆☆
(1)
I will soon be going to Atlanta, GA, USA from Copenhagen, DK, and I would like know which of the following opportunities you think is the most climate-friendly way to travel:

Flying from CPH to Atlanta with transfer in Amsterdam (4.750 miles/7.650 km).
Taking train/bus from CPH to London (aprrox. 950 miles/1500km). Then flying from London to Boston (3.250 miles/5.250km). Then taking train/bus from Boston to Atlanta (1.050 miles/1.700km). Distance in total: 5.200 miles/8400km.
This trip is roughly 500 miles/1.000 km longer, but it's a 1.500 miles/2.400km shorter flight-trip. What do you think the difference in the CO2 emission will be?
23-04-2022 15:36
duncan61
★★★★★
(2003)
The plane is going anyway
23-04-2022 15:44
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(4327)
Bus, Train, Plane, all emit the evil, planet-scorching CO2. Not to mention exposing yourself to the deadly Covid-19 virus. Best bet, would be to just ignore the carbon-footprint, and take the cheapest, most direct route. Less risk to you, less expensive, and save time and money in the process. Besides, there is going to be a food shortage for a while, because of what the evil Russians, and liberals are doing in Ukraine. Plants (food) worldwide will benefit greatly from any additional CO2 we can feed them, in these troubling times. Plants grow their best around 800 ppm, but we only average around 400 ppm. So, every little bit of CO2 we can add, helps out.
Edited on 23-04-2022 15:59
24-04-2022 20:02
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19350)
KlimaKristian wrote:
I will soon be going to Atlanta, GA, USA from Copenhagen, DK, and I would like know which of the following opportunities you think is the most climate-friendly way to travel:

Flying from CPH to Atlanta with transfer in Amsterdam (4.750 miles/7.650 km).
Taking train/bus from CPH to London (aprrox. 950 miles/1500km). Then flying from London to Boston (3.250 miles/5.250km). Then taking train/bus from Boston to Atlanta (1.050 miles/1.700km). Distance in total: 5.200 miles/8400km.
This trip is roughly 500 miles/1.000 km longer, but it's a 1.500 miles/2.400km shorter flight-trip. What do you think the difference in the CO2 emission will be?

Don't worry about it. There is nothing wrong with CO2.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
24-04-2022 20:49
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2175)
KlimaKristian wrote:
I will soon be going to Atlanta, GA, USA from Copenhagen, DK, and I would like know which of the following opportunities you think is the most climate-friendly way to travel:

Flying from CPH to Atlanta with transfer in Amsterdam (4.750 miles/7.650 km).
Taking train/bus from CPH to London (aprrox. 950 miles/1500km). Then flying from London to Boston (3.250 miles/5.250km). Then taking train/bus from Boston to Atlanta (1.050 miles/1.700km). Distance in total: 5.200 miles/8400km.
This trip is roughly 500 miles/1.000 km longer, but it's a 1.500 miles/2.400km shorter flight-trip. What do you think the difference in the CO2 emission will be?


None of the above, the most climate friendly way to travel this distance is by sailboat
24-04-2022 22:27
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12600)
Swan wrote:... the most climate friendly way to travel this distance is by sailboat

In what way is that "climate friendly"?
25-04-2022 00:13
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2175)
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:... the most climate friendly way to travel this distance is by sailboat

In what way is that "climate friendly"?


No fumes retard, a sailboat uses the wind and the wind alone.

The only thing that I really wonder about you is if your mother dropped you too often, or perhaps she did not drop you enough.
25-04-2022 00:25
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(4327)
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:... the most climate friendly way to travel this distance is by sailboat

In what way is that "climate friendly"?


No fumes retard, a sailboat uses the wind and the wind alone.

The only thing that I really wonder about you is if your mother dropped you too often, or perhaps she did not drop you enough.


Nope, sailboats that large are required to have a motor. The wind isn't reliable enough for ports, and docking maneuvers. They are tiny, compared to commercial boats in shipping lanes.

Even Greta's racing yacht had a motor. Supposedly, it was never used...
25-04-2022 00:36
James_
★★★★☆
(1099)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:... the most climate friendly way to travel this distance is by sailboat

In what way is that "climate friendly"?


No fumes retard, a sailboat uses the wind and the wind alone.

The only thing that I really wonder about you is if your mother dropped you too often, or perhaps she did not drop you enough.


Nope, sailboats that large are required to have a motor. The wind isn't reliable enough for ports, and docking maneuvers. They are tiny, compared to commercial boats in shipping lanes.

Even Greta's racing yacht had a motor. Supposedly, it was never used...



Maybe you need to get laid? It is well know that sailboats have motors.
How would you expect them to maneuver close to land or in a marina?
Back in your time they dropped anchor offshore. And then a row boat
was used to ferry its passengers to and from the ship.
And yet you are okay with avoiding mass transit so you won't save energy
by riding with minorities. And then you have a problem with sailboats.
Just an FYI, white Americans also use mass transit. Today, fewer white Americans like yourself are getting a driver's license. Commuting by mass transit allows
them to spend their hard earned American dollar on something other than gas.
25-04-2022 01:12
Spongy Iris
★★★★☆
(1169)
James_ wrote:

Back in your time they dropped anchor offshore. And then a row boat
was used to ferry its passengers to and from the ship.


Michael row the boat ashore. Hallelujah.


25-04-2022 01:32
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12600)
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:... the most climate friendly way to travel this distance is by sailboat

In what way is that "climate friendly"?


No fumes retard, a sailboat uses the wind and the wind alone.

Great, ... but you answered a question that I did not ask, and you did not answer the question that I asked.

Let's assume I know how a sailboat works. How is the lack of "fumes", say, somehow good for an unspecified climate?

Sometimes I wonder if you miraculously survived abortion only to be condemned to existing in a persistent vegetative state. I'm not suggesting that anyone pull your life support but you should be aware that people will eventually make that cost-benefit analysis. Jussayn.
25-04-2022 02:20
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2175)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:... the most climate friendly way to travel this distance is by sailboat

In what way is that "climate friendly"?


No fumes retard, a sailboat uses the wind and the wind alone.

The only thing that I really wonder about you is if your mother dropped you too often, or perhaps she did not drop you enough.


Nope, sailboats that large are required to have a motor. The wind isn't reliable enough for ports, and docking maneuvers. They are tiny, compared to commercial boats in shipping lanes.

Even Greta's racing yacht had a motor. Supposedly, it was never used...


How large does a sailboat need to be to move 1 or 2 people.

PS. The required motor does not need to be used however, so I am correct as usual.
25-04-2022 02:28
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2175)
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:... the most climate friendly way to travel this distance is by sailboat

In what way is that "climate friendly"?


No fumes retard, a sailboat uses the wind and the wind alone.

Great, ... but you answered a question that I did not ask, and you did not answer the question that I asked.

Let's assume I know how a sailboat works. How is the lack of "fumes", say, somehow good for an unspecified climate?

Sometimes I wonder if you miraculously survived abortion only to be condemned to existing in a persistent vegetative state. I'm not suggesting that anyone pull your life support but you should be aware that people will eventually make that cost-benefit analysis. Jussayn.


Actually I answered your question perfectly as sailboats emit no fumes that can damage the environment in any way.

If I am wrong you can tell us how a sailboat in motion is not climate friendly?

That said please take your Lithium
25-04-2022 02:45
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12600)
Swan wrote:Actually I answered your question perfectly as sailboats emit no fumes that can damage the environment in any way.

Once again, I realize that you are about as proficient in English comprehension as ancient Egyptians' were at programming in FORTRAN, but I'll try to go a bit more slowly for you.

I did not ask about the "environment". I specifically asked about the word you used "climate."

So let's try this yet again ... How is the lack of fumes climate-friendly?.
25-04-2022 03:06
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(4327)
James_ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:... the most climate friendly way to travel this distance is by sailboat

In what way is that "climate friendly"?


No fumes retard, a sailboat uses the wind and the wind alone.

The only thing that I really wonder about you is if your mother dropped you too often, or perhaps she did not drop you enough.


Nope, sailboats that large are required to have a motor. The wind isn't reliable enough for ports, and docking maneuvers. They are tiny, compared to commercial boats in shipping lanes.

Even Greta's racing yacht had a motor. Supposedly, it was never used...



Maybe you need to get laid? It is well know that sailboats have motors.
How would you expect them to maneuver close to land or in a marina?
Back in your time they dropped anchor offshore. And then a row boat
was used to ferry its passengers to and from the ship.
And yet you are okay with avoiding mass transit so you won't save energy
by riding with minorities. And then you have a problem with sailboats.
Just an FYI, white Americans also use mass transit. Today, fewer white Americans like yourself are getting a driver's license. Commuting by mass transit allows
them to spend their hard earned American dollar on something other than gas.


Mass transit at 2:00 AM? Not here...Liberal play the minority game. We are all people, all Americans. Well, except those sneaking past Joe at the southern border, by the hundreds each day... But, you have fun riding the covid bus. The vaccines will protect you. Too bad we slacked off on the cold and flu herd immunity for two years. Better stock up on tissue paper, before hyper-inflation kicks in. The hoarders will clear the shelves again.

Maybe you can supplement you SSD here. Our new climate hero is looking for a few henchmen, to join his horde of minion. The pay is 'crap' though, literally...
25-04-2022 04:07
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2175)
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:Actually I answered your question perfectly as sailboats emit no fumes that can damage the environment in any way.

Once again, I realize that you are about as proficient in English comprehension as ancient Egyptians' were at programming in FORTRAN, but I'll try to go a bit more slowly for you.

I did not ask about the "environment". I specifically asked about the word you used "climate."

So let's try this yet again ... How is the lack of fumes climate-friendly?.


OK I have the answer about fumes, but you will need to understand what happens to a person who locks the garage door then starts the car and guzzled a quart of vodka. The answer will follow.

That said the question was not posed by you unless you were using one of your schizzo personas so you just gave up the boat Sybil. If one understands that some people believe that degrading the atmosphere of the Earth with petroleum based fumes changes the climate then one would traverse the ocean by sailboat as no pollution would be created which would be a plus under all circumstances whether the climate would be effected or not. That said you enjoy the climate in the garage with the Yugo running, so have fun
25-04-2022 04:18
James_
★★★★☆
(1099)
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:Actually I answered your question perfectly as sailboats emit no fumes that can damage the environment in any way.

Once again, I realize that you are about as proficient in English comprehension as ancient Egyptians' were at programming in FORTRAN, but I'll try to go a bit more slowly for you.

I did not ask about the "environment". I specifically asked about the word you used "climate."

So let's try this yet again ... How is the lack of fumes climate-friendly?.


OK I have the answer about fumes, but you will need to understand what happens to a person who locks the garage door then starts the car and guzzled a quart of vodka. The answer will follow.

That said the question was not posed by you unless you were using one of your schizzo personas so you just gave up the boat Sybil. If one understands that some people believe that degrading the atmosphere of the Earth with petroleum based fumes changes the climate then one would traverse the ocean by sailboat as no pollution would be created which would be a plus under all circumstances whether the climate would be effected or not. That said you enjoy the climate in the garage with the Yugo running, so have fun



Actual research shows emissions over the oceans are insignificant. I started watching a show about the Empire State building in NYC going green. Over 70%
of the carbon emissions in NYC come from its buildings.
Basically heating and cooling a confined area creates more carbon than traffic does. This means that when carbon footprints are discussed, where is the CO2 coming from?
As for myself, I think I can improve both the solar panel and wind turbine. If so, then the carbon footprint from heating or cooling occupied spaces would become greener.
25-04-2022 04:26
James_
★★★★☆
(1099)
HarveyH55 wrote:
James_ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:... the most climate friendly way to travel this distance is by sailboat

In what way is that "climate friendly"?


No fumes retard, a sailboat uses the wind and the wind alone.

The only thing that I really wonder about you is if your mother dropped you too often, or perhaps she did not drop you enough.


Nope, sailboats that large are required to have a motor. The wind isn't reliable enough for ports, and docking maneuvers. They are tiny, compared to commercial boats in shipping lanes.

Even Greta's racing yacht had a motor. Supposedly, it was never used...



Maybe you need to get laid? It is well know that sailboats have motors.
How would you expect them to maneuver close to land or in a marina?
Back in your time they dropped anchor offshore. And then a row boat
was used to ferry its passengers to and from the ship.
And yet you are okay with avoiding mass transit so you won't save energy
by riding with minorities. And then you have a problem with sailboats.
Just an FYI, white Americans also use mass transit. Today, fewer white Americans like yourself are getting a driver's license. Commuting by mass transit allows
them to spend their hard earned American dollar on something other than gas.


Mass transit at 2:00 AM? Not here...Liberal play the minority game. We are all people, all Americans. Well, except those sneaking past Joe at the southern border, by the hundreds each day... But, you have fun riding the covid bus. The vaccines will protect you. Too bad we slacked off on the cold and flu herd immunity for two years. Better stock up on tissue paper, before hyper-inflation kicks in. The hoarders will clear the shelves again.

Maybe you can supplement you SSD here. Our new climate hero is looking for a few henchmen, to join his horde of minion. The pay is 'crap' though, literally...



I'm actually hoping to move out of the U.S. I didn't serve in the U.S. military nor support the Constitution to be told what I have to do to have a life in the U.S.A.
People should be allowed to enjoy domestic tranquility and the pursuit of liberty.
That's according to the Constitution. Just not what England allowed for but what the Founding Fathers wanted for Americans.
Sadly, Americans today ignore those who wanted freedom and established the U.S.A. for that purpose. Kind of why in 1776 there was a need for the U.S.A.
25-04-2022 04:36
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12600)
Swan wrote: .. the question was not posed by you

I realize that being in a persistent vegetative state is a rather formidable handicap when it comes to answering questions, but I'm willing to work with as you take baby steps forward. Just hang in there.


My question was most certainly asked by me. But don't get distracted. Stay focused.

Swan wrote:If one understands that some people believe that degrading the atmosphere of the Earth with petroleum based fumes changes the climate

OK, maybe we need to take a couple steps back. I'll take the hit for this. I was clearly going too fast for you.

I did not ask about what some people believe.

I asked you how "fumes" are not climate-friendly.

I will now add another question to the list, effectively doubling the length of the list:

How do petroleum-based "fumes" degrade the atmosphere?

Perhaps we can start with definitions of "climate" and atmospheric "grading."

Swan wrote: ... then one would traverse the ocean by sailboat as no pollution would be created which would be a plus under all circumstances

How are you defining pollution? Are you including CO2?
25-04-2022 05:19
duncan61
★★★★★
(2003)
I went sailing once and found it to be extremely boring and everything is on an angle and you are too far of the coast to troll lures and there is crap everywhere.Not my thing but I get how others would enjoy it.Racing cats is good fun and a lot more going on.
25-04-2022 13:53
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2175)
James_ wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:Actually I answered your question perfectly as sailboats emit no fumes that can damage the environment in any way.

Once again, I realize that you are about as proficient in English comprehension as ancient Egyptians' were at programming in FORTRAN, but I'll try to go a bit more slowly for you.

I did not ask about the "environment". I specifically asked about the word you used "climate."

So let's try this yet again ... How is the lack of fumes climate-friendly?.


OK I have the answer about fumes, but you will need to understand what happens to a person who locks the garage door then starts the car and guzzled a quart of vodka. The answer will follow.

That said the question was not posed by you unless you were using one of your schizzo personas so you just gave up the boat Sybil. If one understands that some people believe that degrading the atmosphere of the Earth with petroleum based fumes changes the climate then one would traverse the ocean by sailboat as no pollution would be created which would be a plus under all circumstances whether the climate would be effected or not. That said you enjoy the climate in the garage with the Yugo running, so have fun



Actual research shows emissions over the oceans are insignificant. I started watching a show about the Empire State building in NYC going green. Over 70%
of the carbon emissions in NYC come from its buildings.
Basically heating and cooling a confined area creates more carbon than traffic does. This means that when carbon footprints are discussed, where is the CO2 coming from?
As for myself, I think I can improve both the solar panel and wind turbine. If so, then the carbon footprint from heating or cooling occupied spaces would become greener.


That actual research is nonsense because emissions and oil spills are very significant.

Try again
25-04-2022 14:16
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2175)
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote: .. the question was not posed by you

I realize that being in a persistent vegetative state is a rather formidable handicap when it comes to answering questions, but I'm willing to work with as you take baby steps forward. Just hang in there.


My question was most certainly asked by me. But don't get distracted. Stay focused.

Swan wrote:If one understands that some people believe that degrading the atmosphere of the Earth with petroleum based fumes changes the climate

OK, maybe we need to take a couple steps back. I'll take the hit for this. I was clearly going too fast for you.

I did not ask about what some people believe.

I asked you how "fumes" are not climate-friendly.

I will now add another question to the list, effectively doubling the length of the list:

How do petroleum-based "fumes" degrade the atmosphere?

Perhaps we can start with definitions of "climate" and atmospheric "grading."

Swan wrote: ... then one would traverse the ocean by sailboat as no pollution would be created which would be a plus under all circumstances

How are you defining pollution? Are you including CO2?


Again kid this is not your thread, or are you admitting to using multiple names?

LOL

Anyone who denies that there is a climate and that it is changing is retarded just like you. Again 20000 years ago the Earth was half covered in ice, then it melted itself because the climate changed. Not that the local schizzo YOU would be able to comprehend.

So you been on the communist government payroll for long?
25-04-2022 14:19
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12600)
Swan wrote:That actual research is nonsense because emissions and oil spills are very significant.

Try again

I don't know how you could say that when there hasn't been any of any significance, ever.

The earth is mighty. The ocean is mighty. We are insignificant relatively. There is nothing we can do of any significance.

Try again.
25-04-2022 17:31
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2175)
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:That actual research is nonsense because emissions and oil spills are very significant.

Try again

I don't know how you could say that when there hasn't been any of any significance, ever.

The earth is mighty. The ocean is mighty. We are insignificant relatively. There is nothing we can do of any significance.

Try again.


LOL so in your opinion there were no ecological impacts from the deepwater horizon oil spill in the gulf of mexico.

Funny is as funny does, now grow up turdy
25-04-2022 17:51
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12600)
Swan wrote:LOL so in your opinion there were no ecological impacts from the deepwater horizon oil spill in the gulf of Mexico.

LOL! LOL! So what impact are you claiming I can see today? Would you care to post some pics? ... of today.

What? There isn't any impact to be seen? It's funny how that works, as in funny is as funny does.

So no, there hasn't been any human activity that has had any significant impact on planet earth. Our ocean is a super-machine that breaks down everything. Our planet is a super-machine whose geological activity breaks down everything.

You went to school, didn't you?
25-04-2022 20:25
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2175)
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:LOL so in your opinion there were no ecological impacts from the deepwater horizon oil spill in the gulf of Mexico.

LOL! LOL! So what impact are you claiming I can see today? Would you care to post some pics? ... of today.

What? There isn't any impact to be seen? It's funny how that works, as in funny is as funny does.

So no, there hasn't been any human activity that has had any significant impact on planet earth. Our ocean is a super-machine that breaks down everything. Our planet is a super-machine whose geological activity breaks down everything.

You went to school, didn't you?


There is a dead zone on the bottom of the Gulf, but since you can not see it you just ignore reality

Keep your blinders on horsiepoo
25-04-2022 22:23
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12600)
Swan wrote:There is a dead zone on the bottom of the Gulf,


Why do you believe this? It would seem that you will regurgitate any WACKY story you are told to believe, LOL! LOL! LOLALOLAWROFTUTB-LOL!

Hey Swan, right next to the Dead Zone there's a Party Zone where the drinks are so much better and the music rocks all night! Look, I'm posting just as many pics of the Party Zone as you are posting of the Dead Zone!

I hope you aren't going to ignore the reality of the Party Zone just because you can't see it.

Keep your blinders on horsiepoo.
25-04-2022 23:27
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19350)
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:... the most climate friendly way to travel this distance is by sailboat

In what way is that "climate friendly"?


No fumes retard, a sailboat uses the wind and the wind alone.

Great, ... but you answered a question that I did not ask, and you did not answer the question that I asked.

Let's assume I know how a sailboat works. How is the lack of "fumes", say, somehow good for an unspecified climate?

Sometimes I wonder if you miraculously survived abortion only to be condemned to existing in a persistent vegetative state. I'm not suggesting that anyone pull your life support but you should be aware that people will eventually make that cost-benefit analysis. Jussayn.


Actually I answered your question perfectly as sailboats emit no fumes that can damage the environment in any way.

No, you never answered his question. Try again. What fumes are you concerned about? How do they damage the environment?
Swan wrote:
If I am wrong you can tell us how a sailboat in motion is not climate friendly?

Define 'climate friendly'.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
25-04-2022 23:33
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19350)
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:Actually I answered your question perfectly as sailboats emit no fumes that can damage the environment in any way.

Once again, I realize that you are about as proficient in English comprehension as ancient Egyptians' were at programming in FORTRAN, but I'll try to go a bit more slowly for you.

I did not ask about the "environment". I specifically asked about the word you used "climate."

So let's try this yet again ... How is the lack of fumes climate-friendly?.


OK I have the answer about fumes, but you will need to understand what happens to a person who locks the garage door then starts the car and guzzled a quart of vodka. The answer will follow.

Earth is not a closed garage.
Swan wrote:
That said the question was not posed by you unless you were using one of your schizzo personas so you just gave up the boat Sybil.

Sybil isn't here, Dutch. Your hallucination of this mysterious individual is in your mind only.
Swan wrote:
If one understands that some people believe that degrading the atmosphere of the Earth with petroleum based fumes

Please describe this 'degrading'. What petroleum based fumes??
Swan wrote:
changes the climate

Climate has no value. It cannot change.
Swan wrote:
then one would traverse the ocean by sailboat as no pollution would be created

Define 'pollution'. Buzzword fallacy.
Swan wrote:
which would be a plus under all circumstances whether the climate would be effected or not.

Climate has no value. It cannot change.
Swan wrote:
That said you enjoy the climate in the garage with the Yugo running, so have fun

A garage isn't a climate. It's a room.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
25-04-2022 23:38
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19350)
James_ wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:Actually I answered your question perfectly as sailboats emit no fumes that can damage the environment in any way.

Once again, I realize that you are about as proficient in English comprehension as ancient Egyptians' were at programming in FORTRAN, but I'll try to go a bit more slowly for you.

I did not ask about the "environment". I specifically asked about the word you used "climate."

So let's try this yet again ... How is the lack of fumes climate-friendly?.


OK I have the answer about fumes, but you will need to understand what happens to a person who locks the garage door then starts the car and guzzled a quart of vodka. The answer will follow.

That said the question was not posed by you unless you were using one of your schizzo personas so you just gave up the boat Sybil. If one understands that some people believe that degrading the atmosphere of the Earth with petroleum based fumes changes the climate then one would traverse the ocean by sailboat as no pollution would be created which would be a plus under all circumstances whether the climate would be effected or not. That said you enjoy the climate in the garage with the Yugo running, so have fun



Actual research shows emissions over the oceans are insignificant. I started watching a show about the Empire State building in NYC going green. Over 70%
of the carbon emissions in NYC come from its buildings.
Basically heating and cooling a confined area creates more carbon than traffic does. This means that when carbon footprints are discussed, where is the CO2 coming from?
As for myself, I think I can improve both the solar panel and wind turbine. If so, then the carbon footprint from heating or cooling occupied spaces would become greener.

About 1.5% of the surface area of Earth is urban. Carbon dioxide has absolutely no capability to warm the Earth.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
25-04-2022 23:43
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19350)
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote: .. the question was not posed by you

I realize that being in a persistent vegetative state is a rather formidable handicap when it comes to answering questions, but I'm willing to work with as you take baby steps forward. Just hang in there.


My question was most certainly asked by me. But don't get distracted. Stay focused.

Swan wrote:If one understands that some people believe that degrading the atmosphere of the Earth with petroleum based fumes changes the climate

OK, maybe we need to take a couple steps back. I'll take the hit for this. I was clearly going too fast for you.

I did not ask about what some people believe.

I asked you how "fumes" are not climate-friendly.

I will now add another question to the list, effectively doubling the length of the list:

How do petroleum-based "fumes" degrade the atmosphere?

Perhaps we can start with definitions of "climate" and atmospheric "grading."

Swan wrote: ... then one would traverse the ocean by sailboat as no pollution would be created which would be a plus under all circumstances

How are you defining pollution? Are you including CO2?


Again kid this is not your thread,

It doesn't have to be.
Swan wrote:
or are you admitting to using multiple names?

Typical of you. Anyone that doesn't agree with you is a 'sock'.
Swan wrote:
LOL

Anyone who denies that there is a climate and that it is changing

Climate has no value associated with it. It cannot change.
Swan wrote:
is retarded just like you.

Insult fallacy.
Swan wrote:
Again 20000 years ago the Earth was half covered in ice,

How do you know? Were you there?
Swan wrote:
then it melted itself because the climate changed.

Ice does not melt itself. Climate cannot change.
Swan wrote:
Not that the local schizzo YOU would be able to comprehend.

Psychoquackery.
Swan wrote:
So you been on the communist government payroll for long?

Irrelevance fallacy.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
25-04-2022 23:44
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19350)
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:That actual research is nonsense because emissions and oil spills are very significant.

Try again

I don't know how you could say that when there hasn't been any of any significance, ever.

The earth is mighty. The ocean is mighty. We are insignificant relatively. There is nothing we can do of any significance.

Try again.


LOL so in your opinion there were no ecological impacts from the deepwater horizon oil spill in the gulf of mexico.

Funny is as funny does, now grow up turdy


No, there were no lasting effects. Indeed, very little even reached the shoreline.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
25-04-2022 23:51
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19350)
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:LOL so in your opinion there were no ecological impacts from the deepwater horizon oil spill in the gulf of Mexico.

LOL! LOL! So what impact are you claiming I can see today? Would you care to post some pics? ... of today.

What? There isn't any impact to be seen? It's funny how that works, as in funny is as funny does.

So no, there hasn't been any human activity that has had any significant impact on planet earth. Our ocean is a super-machine that breaks down everything. Our planet is a super-machine whose geological activity breaks down everything.

You went to school, didn't you?


There is a dead zone on the bottom of the Gulf,

Fiction.
Swan wrote:
but since you can not see it you just ignore reality

The bottom of the Gulf can be seen. That's how I know you are lying and making shit up.


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

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
26-04-2022 00:56
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2175)
Into the Night wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:... the most climate friendly way to travel this distance is by sailboat

In what way is that "climate friendly"?


No fumes retard, a sailboat uses the wind and the wind alone.

Great, ... but you answered a question that I did not ask, and you did not answer the question that I asked.

Let's assume I know how a sailboat works. How is the lack of "fumes", say, somehow good for an unspecified climate?

Sometimes I wonder if you miraculously survived abortion only to be condemned to existing in a persistent vegetative state. I'm not suggesting that anyone pull your life support but you should be aware that people will eventually make that cost-benefit analysis. Jussayn.


Actually I answered your question perfectly as sailboats emit no fumes that can damage the environment in any way.

No, you never answered his question. Try again. What fumes are you concerned about? How do they damage the environment?
Swan wrote:
If I am wrong you can tell us how a sailboat in motion is not climate friendly?

Define 'climate friendly'.


I never said that I was concerned with fumes, I said that sailboats emit no fumes that could impact the environment, nor do they weep oil into the water.

That said if you are not concerned with fumes please Google locking the garage door with the car running
26-04-2022 01:02
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2175)
Into the Night wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:LOL so in your opinion there were no ecological impacts from the deepwater horizon oil spill in the gulf of Mexico.

LOL! LOL! So what impact are you claiming I can see today? Would you care to post some pics? ... of today.

What? There isn't any impact to be seen? It's funny how that works, as in funny is as funny does.

So no, there hasn't been any human activity that has had any significant impact on planet earth. Our ocean is a super-machine that breaks down everything. Our planet is a super-machine whose geological activity breaks down everything.

You went to school, didn't you?


There is a dead zone on the bottom of the Gulf,

Fiction.
Swan wrote:
but since you can not see it you just ignore reality

The bottom of the Gulf can be seen. That's how I know you are lying and making shit up.


And the pictures show a lack of life, or dead zone. Actually even the nutrients weeping out of the Mississippi river create a hypoxic dead zone.

LOL have you seen the bottom of the Gulf near the Deepwater Horizon leak?

Nope
https://gulfhypoxia.net/the-dead-zone-the-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-versus-the-dead-zone-in-the-northern-gulf-of-mexico-which-is-worse/
26-04-2022 01:02
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2175)
Into the Night wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:LOL so in your opinion there were no ecological impacts from the deepwater horizon oil spill in the gulf of Mexico.

LOL! LOL! So what impact are you claiming I can see today? Would you care to post some pics? ... of today.

What? There isn't any impact to be seen? It's funny how that works, as in funny is as funny does.

So no, there hasn't been any human activity that has had any significant impact on planet earth. Our ocean is a super-machine that breaks down everything. Our planet is a super-machine whose geological activity breaks down everything.

You went to school, didn't you?


There is a dead zone on the bottom of the Gulf,

Fiction.
Swan wrote:
but since you can not see it you just ignore reality

The bottom of the Gulf can be seen. That's how I know you are lying and making shit up.


Yet you have nothing to even indicate that I am not fully correct
Edited on 26-04-2022 01:24
26-04-2022 01:43
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(4327)
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:That actual research is nonsense because emissions and oil spills are very significant.

Try again

I don't know how you could say that when there hasn't been any of any significance, ever.

The earth is mighty. The ocean is mighty. We are insignificant relatively. There is nothing we can do of any significance.

Try again.


LOL so in your opinion there were no ecological impacts from the deepwater horizon oil spill in the gulf of mexico.

Funny is as funny does, now grow up turdy


The spill caused more economic problems, than ecological. You do realize that oil has been seeping out of the gulf, long before anyone thought to drill? You have to get use to the fact that everything is political, and gets over-hyped to mind-control the masses of morons. How many of these 'crisis s' do you thing you've lived through, that were resolved in a few years? Most would have fixed themselves anyway, maybe a few more years, but nature can handle it.
26-04-2022 02:01
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2175)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:That actual research is nonsense because emissions and oil spills are very significant.

Try again

I don't know how you could say that when there hasn't been any of any significance, ever.

The earth is mighty. The ocean is mighty. We are insignificant relatively. There is nothing we can do of any significance.

Try again.


LOL so in your opinion there were no ecological impacts from the deepwater horizon oil spill in the gulf of mexico.

Funny is as funny does, now grow up turdy


The spill caused more economic problems, than ecological. You do realize that oil has been seeping out of the gulf, long before anyone thought to drill? You have to get use to the fact that everything is political, and gets over-hyped to mind-control the masses of morons. How many of these 'crisis s' do you thing you've lived through, that were resolved in a few years? Most would have fixed themselves anyway, maybe a few more years, but nature can handle it.

So you are saying that you swim in crude oil.

Grow up already, you are mocking yourself




Join the debate What is the most climate friendly way to travel the from Copenhagen to Atlanta?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Travel restrictions1629-11-2021 19:16
The Best Last Method To Verify The Savior Messiah Buddha Is Using Time Travel Machine118-01-2021 11:09
You Are Living In A Trap Endless Matrix Worlds: Dejavu, Lucid Dream, Time Travel, Novels, Movies309-08-2020 04:34
Over 700 climate change activists arrested as protests disrupt travel in London020-04-2019 22:58
Strategies for Building More Environmentally Friendly Cities222-02-2018 01:03
▲ 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