Larsen C Crack Is in Its Final Stages; Will Produce One of World's Largest Icebergs Ever Recorded

Hmmm, I wonder how we became the most powerful and influential people on earth? Because we ride bicycles, weave our own clothing and cook our meals by burning sticks?

Also, carbon dioxide is not "pollution." We have the cleanest cars and factories on earth, the strictest mining standards, and cleanest coal burning generators. In fact, we produce MASSIVE amounts of carbon dioxide because of clean exhaust requirements. Vehicle emissions control reduces motor efficiency by from 40 to 60%, meaning a 40 to 60% increase in fuel burned.

 

What's your's? The Paris agreement allows China, India and other particularly dirty countries to increase carbon emissions, while requiring the West to reduce. In that theory, carbon emissions are to a different atmosphere of another planet. Overall, the effect of most environmental laws are to shift pollution from the USA to other countries as if they are on another planet.

 

You have no way of knowing that, in fact, many plants and animals could flourish. If the planet's climate is changing, why is that a negative thing? Stop being a pessimist.

What's killing your side are the people who are pushing the global warming hysteria; they live like kings all while telling us to sacrifice and pay more. That should be the first clue that all this hysteria is BS.

 

Your 97% number is fake and a fraud - as is your assertion that high CO2 levels are inherently bad.

In the age of dinosaurs, CO2 levels were 500% higher than now. This produced a tremendously lush earth with the vast quantities of food necessary to support these massive creatures.

http://www.livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html

Given that dinosaurs lasted for 165 MILLION years, a convincing case can be made that in the long run high CO2 levels are desirable. Do you claim that dinosaurs had massive levels of industrialization as the explanation for such high CO2 emissions? Even in discussions of terra-forming other planets, it is understood this would be impossible without finding a method of generating massive levels of greenhouse gases.

It is ice ages, not climate warming, that has lead to mass extinctions and even the great plague killing 1/5th+ of all humans was caused by a mini-ice age. For decades, your scientists fretted of the next ice age being imminent. Possibly humans by increasing greenhouse gases have done a little to prevent this. An ice age could kill hundreds of millions of people by starvation.

The evolution of earth can't be changed because humans opted to build largely on low lying flood planes, too uninformed to know the sea levels are constantly changing regardless of anything humans do. Only really foolish people believe that humans are so great that they can stop the endlessly changing earth's evolution.

 

You, Mister T, are delusional, and not worth my reading another word you write. On to my Ignore List you go. Long overdue.

~ciao
He must think that carbon dioxide is pollution. The stuff we exhale, "dirty." The stuff in your soda and beer. Right.

http://wisetoast.com/top-17-dirtiest-cities-in-the-world/

 

Because the US paying $billions to Red China, India, and other major polluters (per the Paris Accord) would have prevented this. Der.

I wonder if we'll be able to buy it in bottled water form???

 

Exactly . The KEY to photosynthesis...a "pollutant". Yeegads...the idiocy of it all...

 

Yes there has been more ice forming in the continent because there has been an increase in precipitation but that does not mean GLOBAL (as in the entire world) warming is not happening

 

What's the current average worldwide temperature?

 

What a load of horse puckey!!

Everyone was to pay into the accord - some countries more than others and the USA DOES owe the world in this because for many many years you were the worlds biggest contributor to the problem - and now you want to continue to be a problem and stiff the payment

 

What am I - your unpaid researcher?

 

Anything in excess is a pollutant

SALT can be a pollutant

Dihydrogen Monoxide can be a pollutant......

 

You tube!!

More false news and less truth than a used car sales convention!!

And THIS Is where you are getting your information??

You don't think that actually reading a SCIENTIFIC PAPER would be a better source??

 

There are plants and animals, including humans, dying right NOW because of climate change. Corals in the GBR and the Syrian civil war are both directly linked to climate change. The conditions which created both (warm ocean waters and drought induced famine) are predicted to get worse. And I have no idea as to my prediction? Bullshit.

And I don't give two ****ing shits about people living like hogs while talking about climate change. Let's ignore that accusations of hypocrisy don't do ****ing **** to the merits of an argument.

I don't live like a hog and I am telling you about climate change. Climatologists, by and large, are not rich. And simultaneously, the industry which is funding the anti-warming narrative are coal aND gas. Let me guess, there's a lot of poor coal and gas CEOs, huh?

 

Why do we exhale carbon dioxide? Because it is a waste product for humans.

Is it possible to die from too much CO2? Yes.

It is also a greenhouse gas. Move on.

 

Yes I meant 2015, with the most Southern Hemisphere sea ice on record. You mean we we had the most southern sea ice during the second hottest year on record? Hmmm....

 

Hear is a pollution problem worth remediation:

'Your water is changing your sexuality' says Lib Dem candidate



A Liberal Democrat candidate has suggested that drinking water with plastic residue in it can turn people gay.

Susan King, who is standing in the west Midlands seat of Telford, said that "feminising hormones" are in the water supply, and can change sexuality.

She was asked about Tim Farron's prolonged inability to answer whether having gay sex was a sin in a live webchat with the Shropshire Star.

The Liberal Democrat then espoused her views about polluted water and sexuality.

She said: "I do feel environmental influences are affecting reproduction. All the pollution is having an effect on our DNA and our population is changing and evolving."

She added: "There are a lot of feminising hormones getting into the environment and that has to be taken into consideration.

"It's affecting people's sexuality basically. People are at liberty to interpret how they want to live themselves.

"Phthalates, the chemicals used in making plastics, children's toys are affected. Everything that's getting into the environment is disrupting the way industrialisation has changed our living conditions, residues of all sorts of feminising hormones in the water supply from pharmaceutical etc which is affecting gender of fish stock etc."

In 2015, Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron was criticised for a tweet from his account saying words to this effect.

A tweet from Mr Farron’s account wrote: “they can be, most sexual disorientation is caused by chemical leaching..check out the fish and frogs.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/02/water-changing-sexuality-says-lib-dem-candidate/

 

During one month of one portion of the planet, yes.

 

Physics and climate change are two entirelt differenf forms of science.

 

Can we pre-order some of the bottled water the Japanese will be selling off of it?

 

Yeah. They were "simple" alright.

 

What has this to do with the topic?

 

"There are a lot of feminising hormones getting into the environment and that has to be taken into consideration.'

WHA..???!!!!!


I think we should check this ice berg's hormones before the Japanese start selling it as bottled water !!!!!

 

Warming and CO^2 good. Plastics pollution, bad. It's important to keep that straight. As is, Leading is not following.

If I’m following the discussion tonight, the US can only exhibit climate leadership by following along with what everyone else is doing.

 

Great distinction. Add heavy metals to the "bad" list.