Soooooo, where is the Warming?

[Xuperman]

Precisely!

Does a global reduction of 0.6% of CO2 make a difference?

If so, at what cost, and is the cost worth the benefit?

This dovetails nicely!

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/stu...goals-intended

Not one of these Green Crazies can get this through there thick heads.

The obvious infrastructure and production carbon emissions, along with the massive toll required to generate the electricity and SOURCE the rare materials, makes achieving a net positive reduction highly questionable. I am thinking that the batteries in a large percentage of EVs will have to be replaced before getting to a net positive, thus resetting the clock.

Solar, and especially WIND, benefits are simply ridiculous in that regard. In fact, I truly believe that further studies will eventually expose this crap for the fraud it is and become obsolete. When that happens the damage is irreversible. The catastrophic environmental cost and the devastating global economic ramifications of this Green insanity will unfathomable!!

Advanced safety technology in Nuclear energy production is, currently, the only way to achieve a substantial reduction of Global Carbon emissions. Not acceptable in the Cult of Green religion..... because there is more to their agenda than carbon reduction.

[XU_Lou]

It's hilarious that some on this board still think that cow farts are to blame for "global warming"... LOL!!!


Eight Important Facts – NOT Opinions – That Totally Debunk the Human-Caused Global Warming Hypothesis

7) Blaming methane and nitrous oxide for contributing to climate change is now being used as an excuse to steal farms from their owners and otherwise (under ESG mandates) destroy agriculture. Yet the truth is that the incidence of methane is just TWO parts per million, totally insignificant. This graph shows the small effect of carbon dioxide and the truly minuscule effect of methane and nitrous oxide compared to water vapor.




https://joehoft.com/eight-important-...ng-hypothesis/

[xeus]

It's hilarious that some on this board still think that cow farts are to blame for "global warming"... LOL!!!


Eight Important Facts – NOT Opinions – That Totally Debunk the Human-Caused Global Warming Hypothesis

7) Blaming methane and nitrous oxide for contributing to climate change is now being used as an excuse to steal farms from their owners and otherwise (under ESG mandates) destroy agriculture. Yet the truth is that the incidence of methane is just TWO parts per million, totally insignificant. This graph shows the small effect of carbon dioxide and the truly minuscule effect of methane and nitrous oxide compared to water vapor.




https://joehoft.com/eight-important-...ng-hypothesis/

LOL

You just played a Joe Hoft article as your Trump card? (No pun intended.)

Keep up the good work.

[bjf123]

LOL

You just played a Joe Hoft article as your Trump card? (No pun intended.)

Keep up the good work.

I have no idea who Joe Hoft is, but seeing his name is enough for you to completely disregard what is said? Also, if you actually look, you’ll see he didn’t write the article. Also have no idea who Lynne Balzer is, but it’s her article.

I love how people on both sides of this will look at the source of something and immediately dismiss it in total, without addressing any of the points raised.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[xeus]

I have no idea who Joe Hoft is, but seeing his name is enough for you to completely disregard what is said? Also, if you actually look, you’ll see he didn’t write the article. Also have no idea who Lynne Balzer is, but it’s her article.

I love how people on both sides of this will look at the source of something and immediately dismiss it in total, without addressing any of the points raised.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I didn’t just see his name before disregarding the article. I read about him. I took note of the “facts not opinion” claim in the title of a clear opinion piece. I read the article (which opens with “By Joe Hoff” despite the “guest author”)

The reason I replied to Louis is because he posted that like it settled the whole debate. Like he just won with a clear and compelling scientific argument debunking the climate crisis. Just found it funny.

And by the way - since you mentioned it - I look at the source first, before spending any time on the merits. If it’s not worth taking on point by point because the source is crap, or merely opinion, why bother? The article is clearly opinion, and, in my view, from a suspect source.

[Masterofreality]

Our Electric power went out this week cause of storms that happen all the time.
Here’s a question for the greens. You guys want to ban gas stoves, and gas fireplaces.
If your electric power goes out, and that’s all you have, how can you cook or stay warm when your electricity is gone?
Solar or windmills won’t supply enough in most parts of the world.

On another topic, if you watched the British Open this week, you saw how ugly those windmills looked that were out in the sea. Talk about vision pollution!!!

[bobbiemcgee]

Propane

[XU_Lou]

So Xeus, are you going to enlighten us all with your rebuttal of the data presented in the article? Or is this just another example of how you Dems debate? Attack the messenger, while avoiding the substance of the topic.

And while you're at it, type in "is warming faster than the rest of the world" into Google, and then scroll thru several pages and see if the joke finally dawns on you.

[Masterofreality]

Propane

Oh, you’ll ban that too. What the hell you think “Natural Gas” is?
It’s what comes out of YOUR mouth?
Here’s a question. What’s worse? Cow farts or propane???

[UCGRAD4X]

Oh, you’ll ban that too. What the hell you think “Natural Gas” is?
It’s what comes out of YOUR mouth?
Here’s a question. What’s worse? Cow farts or propane???

Depends on how close you are standing to the source.