The Energon Pub

HoosierDaddy wrote:

Tammuz wrote:and you're data is incorrect, over the last 10 millenia the atmospheric CO2 levels fluctuate between 260 and 280ppm; it's only after the 17th century that they start rising significantly

I completely understand the way emissions equipment works on automobiles. I am a certified mechanic. It's my livelyhood.

But I really want to respond to the above section of your post. First, I don't have any data because I didn't look it up. I was going by an earlier post (one of yours I think?) that said CO2 levels have been rising and gave my answer accordingly. Secondly, you say it's only after the 17th century that CO2 levels have begun to rise. What started it then? Maybe it was because people like Isaac Newton and Galileo wouldn't stop driving their gas guzzling SUV's and settle for Mini's instead? I'm sure the untimely death of Elizibeth 1 affected alot since she was the biggest advocate to cap how much polution the factories were pumping out? Sound silly? Well, so does the fact that humans are now, all of a sudden, responsible for something that has been going on for the entire life of the Earth.

i'm an autocatlyst technologist, i prototype them, it's my livlyhood. right that's that argument from authority mooted.

for someone who completely understands autocats why did you think the mandatory fitting of auto-cats should not lead to an increase in C02?

at the end of the 17th centurey the western world really started using gunpowder at an unprecedented scale, and there was the start of an exponential increase in world population.

I didn't read your post, Tammuz, and I'm not going to, but for your viewing pleasure I present to thee:

• The data Hansen uses as his source; and
• How he used the data.

Nasa's GISS for those who still doubt it's existence and credibility.

It's so wonderfully ironic that when the GISS Open Leaderboard supported Global Warming every one of you tools fanatically believed every word out of Hansen's keyboard and now that the bumbling GISS head had to fess up and work his data correctly he's magically lost all credibility. I love it. You people make me feel wonderfully intelligent, thanks

lkavadas wrote:I didn't read your post, Tammuz, and I'm not going to, but for your viewing pleasure I present to thee:

• The data Hansen uses as his source; and
• How he used the data.

Nasa's GISS for those who still doubt it's existence and credibility.

It's so wonderfully ironic that when the GISS Open Leaderboard supported Global Warming every one of you tools fanatically believed every word out of Hansen's keyboard and now that the bumbling GISS head had to fess up and work his data correctly he's magically lost all credibility. I love it. You people make me feel wonderfully intelligent, thanks

How can you say that when most of us that post here that are in favor of Global Warming existing have never heard of the Giss until you brought it up?

And speaking of irony, look at what I found on the GISS website:

http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20070509/

or this:

http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20070530/

So I really do not see how the GISS changing which year is hotter affects where they stand on Global Warming.

In addition to this, as a staff member, let me advise you that your last comment is close to baiting. Defending your opinion is fine, trying to get those that oppose you to flame you is not.

Ikavadas, I'll actually be the first to say that I actually buy a lot of what you're saying. It is upsetting that someone found evidence that would upturn the scientific community, so he hid it. That's exactly the kind of thing that went on all through the middle ages and it pisses me off every time I read about it.

Hell, maybe you're right on the money.

But that's not my point, and you can break it down simply all you want and it won't change anything.

You only post to piss people off. You're so convinced people that don't agree with you are worthless, so you come on here posting angry ****.

lkavadas wrote:1998 the hottest year ever? No, 1934 was. And quite a few 1990s years got bumped down the list for years in 1930s. This is factual evidence. There is no bias. Unless you're saying that the GISS, a sub-organization of NASA run by a global warming lunatic, is actually a puppet of the Cheney administration.

No, I'm not saying that, but thank you for inventing the straw man idea to pin on me. I appreciate it.

The bias I was referring to was the bias of your source saying, and I quote "the global warming myth". Therefore, I will not listen to a word it says because the issue is not being taken seriously. It's a tone of mockery from the start, but you don't see that because you're so married to the idea.

lkavadas wrote:Why don't you global warming tree huggers just admit that you think GISS is a fraud, James Hansen is really Cheney in disguise, and then just dismiss it? I mean hell, it's only NASA saying this. WTF do they know about anything, right? Right?

We don't admit that because we don't think it. Here we have yet another example of your troublemaking bullshit.

lkavadas wrote:Btw, 911 is a lie. It was Bush, right? Get over it.

Where the holy hell did that come from? I really hope you're not lumping me together with that lot. I haven't believed in that **** for years, and when I did it was because I was scared and afraid and didn't look at the facts.

Thanks, however, for assuming right off the bat that I must believe every cockamemee story out there just because I believe one. Pretty arrogant of you.

lkavadas wrote:Oh, and you're right. I do think most people are complete pussies and as my drill sergeant used to say, "There's no such thing as arrogance." Mmmmm, I love saying that.

I love how you said you think most people are complete pussies and "there's no such thing as arrogance" in the same sentence. What a riot. Let's look at some other examples of your arrogance, just in this thread:

lkavadas wrote: I didn't read your post, Tammuz, and I'm not going to,

lkavadas wrote:every one of you tools fanatically believed

lkavadas wrote:You people make me feel wonderfully intelligent, thanks

lkavadas wrote:He's leftie enough to be a NY Times editor.

lkavadas wrote:

Dark Zarak wrote:Whinefest here.

I'll break this down simply for you.

lkavadas wrote:Simply awesome. Now all of the global warming psychos can stfu and let me drive my '72 Buick in peace.

lkavadas wrote:Way to comprehend.

lkavadas wrote:So wow, you've really impressed me by listing organizations which supports historical climate change. What a bold proposition.

and of course:

lkavadas wrote:Oh, and you're right. I do think most people are complete pussies and as my drill sergeant used to say, "There's no such thing as arrogance." Mmmmm, I love saying that.

Yeah, with all of the quotes Dark Zarak bunched together, it is clear this thread really needs to be locked. I see nothing but flaming evolving (pardon the pun) from this.

Consider this hypothetically locked until a mod can deal with this.