Tesla is fast

Apr 13, 2022 Last reply: 3 years ago 626 Replies

Precisely. Why do these alarmists lack common sense?

Why did you type YOU in capitals? People WHO emphasize for NO reason at ALL are morons.

You f****ng idiot. More CO2 means more of every plant. More weeds, who cares, more crops, we eat more.

Bullshit. Just learn to predict better. We have more powerful computers now.

And since we can't predict the extremes, how are we able to predict there will be extremes? We can't. So shut up.

The increase of CO2 is f****ng negligible. It hasn't even doubled:

formatting link

The planet has been green for centuries, and it wasn't CO2 that did it.

Warm is not 'good'; good and evil are very broad concepts, and temperature is not a broad concept, it is well specified. That sentiment seems to calm your fears? It doesn't do anything else.

It can be greener and more luscious.

Get to the point.

The point being that John Larkin, as well as Commander Kinsey, are posting nonsense? I thought that was clear.

You're going to have to come up with some facts.

A lot of professional alarmists are in it for power and money. Their energy source is the fears of neurotic masses.

Actually, the public is mostly bored about AGW. They are not bored with $7 gasoline.

Hilarious. "How many armies does the IPCC have?"

Nope, they - and China - are burning coal.

Gasoline, as in petrol.

formatting link
Remember that -162 degrees C?

formatting link
Nope. That's the problem with hydrogen. It liquefies at −252.87 °C for atmospheric pressure. The payload of hydrogen on a tube trailer is ridiculously low although carbon fiber has reduced the tare somewhat.

formatting link
The market or desperation?

They'll get around to it by 2092...

What's required to prevent that is more energy. You don't have to burn oil or gas to get it, and it's cheaper to get it from solar cells and windmills.

What's required to prevent that is more energy. You don't have to burn oil or gas to get it, and it's cheaper to get it from solar cells and windmills.

The fossil carbon extraction industry isn't happy about that and they are paying for a lot of denialist propaganda to keep gullible twits like John Larkin and Commander Kinsey from noticing.

Get a better education, and you'd find out that there's all the proof you'd ever need, if you had the brains to get the education.

formatting link
might be a good place to start, if you'd graduated in phsyics. I found it easy to follow, but I've got a Ph.D. in Physical Chemistry. John Larkin seems to find that it makes unflattering demands on his mind.

The CO2 and water are recycled. The carbon in CO2 can end up locked up underground for quite a while as coal or carbonates, but volcanoes do eventually recycle it.

The sunlight is a consumabe, but the sun is actually making more of it every year. After another billion years there may be more of it than the current ecosystem. could handle.

Because the population can collapse to very low levels after it hits the limit, and you'll go hungry.

Even the Muslims are getting developed. Their resistance to educating females is a barrier, but economics tends to trump cultural preferences.

More CO2 in the atmosphere won't kill the world, but enough of it would kill quite a few human beings. Climate change is already killing off people in droughts, floods and bigger forest fires than people are used to.

He's been persuaded by some thoroughly immoral denialist propaganda that there actually isn't a problem. He's a gullible idiot, just like you.

Think about how much lack of food you would have to tolerate if the extra CO2 fed weeds well enough to let them out-compete our food crops.

Our current range lof food crops is exquisitely well adapted to our current environement. It's a bit rash to change that environment.

Just dumb.

And water, and fertiliser. Polytunnels are just cheap greenhouses.

Within limits. Global warming shifts the limits.

Not exactly. Name the ones that are doing better..

You are a denier because you are pig-ignorant. The idea that global warming was a real problem was originally an elite insight, because it took a lot of research to nail down the problem. It's now a truism, because the elite worked out how to present the case in a way that most of the population could understand. Dimbos like you and John Larkin still don't get it.

CO2 isn't actually greening enough of the planet to make much difference. Warm used to be good, now hot spells have taken to killing people.

<snipped graphs about what had happened in the past. The problem is what is likely to happen in the future.>

Hardly anybody is hysterical - you may be one of the exceptions. sensible people are worried about what looks increasingly likely to happen, at least to people with a better grasp of the science involved than you have.

Common sense is all about applying the lessons of the past without thinking too hard about what is actually going on. In this context it is more like ignoring the truck that is hurtling towards you because there has never been anything but bicycles on that track before.

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required