"0NBZ0" <0N...@doooooooooooooooodoooooooooo.com> wrote in message

news:480d8cc2$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...



"Fran" <Fran.B...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8717a79a-9eac-4c83-8a3b-7fc4d0f1dbc8@x19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 22, 1:17 pm, "Seon Ferguson" <seo...@gmail.com> wrote:
"Robert Blass" <bl...@messenger.xcx> wrote in message
I like to use the phrase global warming religion for man made global
warming
religious theorists.
You can use any phrase you like, but in this case you'd be debauching
the language. Religious belief makes no testable claims, whereas in
the case of AGW, one can see how the group of hypotheses might be
disproved. These haven't been disproved however,
*************************

No proof exists for AGW!

Actually that's a good point. Science can be tested and makes clames based
on facts. Religion can not be proven or disproven its up to the individual
to decide what his or her faith is. Man made global waming can also be dis
proven. So maybe I should start calling it something else.

"Government Shill #2" <gov.shill@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ictq04tkbqalkm60alcei87rfa4nj18tb3@4ax.com...
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:58:14 +1000, "Seon Ferguson" <seongf@gmail.com
wrote:
Huh? Holy shit! Did you miss the bit where CO2, in large quantities,
traps heat
like a blanket, or greenhouse glass? Hence the name greenhouse gas.


Holy shit yourself.

Wake up buddy.
Although CO2 has long been recognized as a greenhouse gas, it makes up
only ~0.03% of the atmosphere (Figure 3), far less than water vapor
(2-4%). Atmospheric CO2 levels have risen sharply since 1945 to 0.038%,
but the question is whether or not an increase of only 0.008%

Call me stupid

but don't humans, plants and in fact all living things send out CO2?

So how then is CO2 supposed to damage our atmosphere if CO2 has been sent
to it since the beginning of history?

"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
news:674ckaF2mlt5vU1@mid.individual.net...

"Seon Ferguson" <seongf@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:480c6fb2$0$18474$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...

2. The science is settled -- CO2 causes global warming.


This is my favorite one. Call me stupid but don't humans, plants and in
fact all living things send out CO2? So how then is CO2 supposed to
damage our atmosphere if CO2 has been sent to it since the beginning of
history?

**Have you been living under a rock? Or are you really THAT stupid? CO2
levels are rising faster than at any time in history. The last time CO2
levels were higher than they are now (more than 400,000 years ago) there
was a mass extinction. Wanna speculate as to what will happen WHEN CO2
levels rise further? Do you know what mass extinction means?

Sheesh!

Trevor Wilson

I don't speculate any more. Speculation can result in Bush carried out 911
or something. I prefer to rely on facts and the facts are 400,000 years
ago there was no oil companies or whatnot. How did the CO2 levels get so
high without pollution?

similar reasons?

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:58:14 +1000, "Seon Ferguson" <seongf@gmail.com
wrote:


"Government Shill #2" <gov.shill@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c9dp04980rl09siha8qnfnp969umgg49m4@4ax.com...
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:41:54 +1000, "Seon Ferguson" <seongf@gmail.com
wrote:


2. The science is settled -- CO2 causes global warming.


This is my favorite one. Call me stupid but don't humans, plants and in
fact
all living things send out CO2? So how then is CO2 supposed to damage
our
atmosphere if CO2 has been sent to it since the beginning of history?

You're (not your) stupid.

Because... there is *so* much more of it being produced now than at any
time
since the beginning of history. Until about 150 odd years ago there were
no
cars, trucks, buses, coal fired power plants, ships used the wind not
oil
or
coal... The list goes on.

How can you compare the previous history of the world with the past 150
years?

Amazing.

But if we produce CO2 how can CO2 be bad for the atmosphere? CO2 is just
carbon dioxide, harmless. Otherwise wouldnt it be bad for us if we produce
it?

Huh? Holy shit! Did you miss the bit where CO2, in large quantities, traps
heat
like a blanket, or greenhouse glass? Hence the name greenhouse gas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggccebro/chapter1.html
http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/society/greenhouse.htm
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/index.html

More
http://www.google.com.au/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=greenhouse+gas&meta=

Arent there people saying the Earth is getting cooler?

Also you do realize Polar Bears can swim and that ice always melts, right?

Polar Bears? WTF?

You know the one's Al Gore shows in his movie to make us go "aww the poor

"Seon Ferguson" <seongf@gmail.com> wrote
But if we produce CO2 how can CO2 be bad for the atmosphere? CO2 is just
carbon dioxide, harmless. Otherwise wouldnt it be bad for us if we
produce
it?

How could eating your own shit be bad for you? You produce it.

CO2 is a metabolic waste product. That's why you get rid of it.

MMMMMMMOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNNNN

This is what I'm talking about. Man made global warming religion at its

"Seon Ferguson" <seongf@gmail.com> wrote
I don't speculate any more. Speculation can result in Bush carried out
911
or something. I prefer to rely on facts and the facts are 400,000 years
ago
there was no oil companies or whatnot. How did the CO2 levels get so high
without pollution? Could it be possible the CO2 levels are high because
of
similar reasons?

Nope. Atmospheric CO2 has an isotopic signature and so does oil in the
ground. Those signatures are now overlapping in the atmosphere, hence the
excess CO2 is from oil/coal



Oh so what's the signature of oil? See I thought you people thought CO2

"Seon Ferguson" <seongf@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:480d2c1f$0$18479$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...

"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
news:674ckaF2mlt5vU1@mid.individual.net...

"Seon Ferguson" <seongf@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:480c6fb2$0$18474$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...

2. The science is settled -- CO2 causes global warming.


This is my favorite one. Call me stupid but don't humans, plants and in
fact all living things send out CO2? So how then is CO2 supposed to
damage our atmosphere if CO2 has been sent to it since the beginning of
history?

**Have you been living under a rock? Or are you really THAT stupid? CO2
levels are rising faster than at any time in history. The last time CO2
levels were higher than they are now (more than 400,000 years ago) there
was a mass extinction. Wanna speculate as to what will happen WHEN CO2
levels rise further? Do you know what mass extinction means?

Sheesh!

Trevor Wilson

I don't speculate any more. Speculation can result in Bush carried out
911 or something. I prefer to rely on facts and the facts are 400,000
years ago there was no oil companies or whatnot. How did the CO2 levels
get so high without pollution?

**OK. CO2 _is_ a pollutant. It got high due to production from single
celled critters.

Could it be possible the CO2 levels are high because of
similar reasons?

**IT DOESN'T MATTER. It rose due to different reasons millennia ago. Many
species were exterminated. It is rising today, due to CO2 production from
mankind. Many species will be exterminated.

Well what were the reasons and it does matter because if were going to

"Fran" <Fran.Beta@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8717a79a-9eac-4c83-8a3b-7fc4d0f1dbc8@x19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 22, 1:17 pm, "Seon Ferguson" <seo...@gmail.com> wrote:
"Robert Blass" <bl...@messenger.xcx> wrote in message
I like to use the phrase global warming religion for man made global
warming
religious theorists.
You can use any phrase you like, but in this case you'd be debauching
the language. Religious belief makes no testable claims, whereas in
the case of AGW, one can see how the group of hypotheses might be
disproved. These haven't been disproved however,
*************************

No proof exists for AGW!

Actually that's a good point. Science can be tested and makes clames based

2. The science is settled -- CO2 causes global warming.

"Seon Ferguson" <seongf@gmail.com> wrote
This is my favorite one. Call me stupid but don't humans, plants and in
fact
all living things send out CO2?

You are stupid, since plants are net absorbers of CO2..

NEXT.............



Well we still produce it. I just cant see how something we produce is doing

"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
news:675qcgF2lt891U1@mid.individual.net...

"Seon Ferguson" <seongf@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:480d2c1f$0$18479$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...

"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
news:674ckaF2mlt5vU1@mid.individual.net...

"Seon Ferguson" <seongf@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:480c6fb2$0$18474$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...

2. The science is settled -- CO2 causes global warming.


This is my favorite one. Call me stupid but don't humans, plants and
in fact all living things send out CO2? So how then is CO2 supposed to
damage our atmosphere if CO2 has been sent to it since the beginning
of history?

**Have you been living under a rock? Or are you really THAT stupid? CO2
levels are rising faster than at any time in history. The last time CO2
levels were higher than they are now (more than 400,000 years ago)
there was a mass extinction. Wanna speculate as to what will happen
WHEN CO2 levels rise further? Do you know what mass extinction means?

Sheesh!

Trevor Wilson

I don't speculate any more. Speculation can result in Bush carried out
911 or something. I prefer to rely on facts and the facts are 400,000
years ago there was no oil companies or whatnot. How did the CO2 levels
get so high without pollution?

**OK. CO2 _is_ a pollutant. It got high due to production from single
celled critters.

Could it be possible the CO2 levels are high because of
similar reasons?

**IT DOESN'T MATTER. It rose due to different reasons millennia ago. Many
species were exterminated. It is rising today, due to CO2 production from
mankind. Many species will be exterminated.

Well what were the reasons

introduce global taxes we have to remove all doupt from sceptics like me.

Also I wonder if the Sun cycles were simular back then. Thats something
for me to research...

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 06:43:34 +1000, "Trevor Wilson"
trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio.com.au> sayd the following:

The last time CO2
levels were higher than they are now (more than 400,000 years ago) there was
a mass extinction.

CO2 levels are in cycles just like everything else on this Planet.

You guys cause panic over something that is natural.

Your true goals have NOTHING to do with saving our planet.

One only needs to look at the gov't grants for 'global warming
research' and of course all those thousands of taxes/tax hikes to pay
for 'green energy'

You guys must REALLY hate poor people because they're the ones who
will be fucked in the ass the most by your stupid conclusions.

"Government Shill #2" <gov.sh...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:ictq04tkbqalkm60alcei87rfa4nj18tb3@4ax.com...

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:58:14 +1000, "Seon Ferguson" <seo...@gmail.com
wrote:
Huh? Holy shit! Did you miss the bit where CO2, in large quantities,
traps heat
like a blanket, or greenhouse glass? Hence the name greenhouse gas.

Holy shit yourself.

Wake up buddy.
Although CO2 has long been recognized as a greenhouse gas, it makes up
only ~0.03% of the atmosphere (Figure 3), far less than water vapor
(2-4%). Atmospheric CO2 levels have risen sharply since 1945 to 0.038%,
but the question is whether or not an increase of only 0.008% can
overshadow the effects of water vapor and solar changes. The answer to
this question may be found in the geologic record of global climate
changes and changes in atmospheric CO2.

http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/responses/2007AM/281.doc

The 0.03% is the blanket and the additional 0.008%
has miniscule effect because the effect is LOGARITHMIC,
IOW any additional CO2 has "diminishing returns".

Also, the origin of this additional CO2 is UNCERTAIN!

So much for global warming crap!

Warmest Regards

Bonzo

".it should not be surprising to see hordes of former Reds, or of those
who otherwise would have become Reds, turning from Marxism and becoming
the Greens of the ecology movement. It is the same fundamental
philosophy in a different guise, ready as ever to wage war on the
freedom and well-being of the individual." Dr. George Reisman's book
Capitalism

"Government Shill #2" <gov.sh...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:ictq04tkbqalkm60alcei87rfa4nj18tb3@4ax.com...

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:58:14 +1000, "Seon Ferguson" <seo...@gmail.com
wrote:

"Government Shill #2" <gov.sh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c9dp04980rl09siha8qnfnp969umgg49m4@4ax.com...
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:41:54 +1000, "Seon Ferguson" <seo...@gmail.com
wrote:

2. The science is settled -- CO2 causes global warming.

This is my favorite one. Call me stupid but don't humans, plants and in
fact
all living things send out CO2? So how then is CO2 supposed to damage
our
atmosphere if CO2 has been sent to it since the beginning of history?

You're (not your) stupid.

Because... there is *so* much more of it being produced now than at any
time
since the beginning of history. Until about 150 odd years ago there were
no
cars, trucks, buses, coal fired power plants, ships used the wind not
oil
or
coal... The list goes on.

How can you compare the previous history of the world with the past 150
years?

Amazing.

But if we produce CO2 how can CO2 be bad for the atmosphere? CO2 is just
carbon dioxide, harmless. Otherwise wouldnt it be bad for us if we produce
it?

Huh? Holy shit! Did you miss the bit where CO2, in large quantities, traps
heat
like a blanket, or greenhouse glass? Hence the name greenhouse gas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggccebro/chapter1.html
http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/society/greenhouse.htm
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/index.html

More
http://www.google.com.au/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=greenhouse+gas...

Arent there people saying the Earth is getting cooler?

Do you really believe a carbon tax which will hurt 3rd world countries even
more and wont even be paid to our government is the way to go?

Also you do realize Polar Bears can swim and that ice always melts, right?

Polar Bears? WTF?

You know the one's Al Gore shows in his movie to make us go "aww the poor
Polar Bears"

"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio.com.au> wrote in message

news:675qcgF2lt891U1@mid.individual.net...



"Seon Ferguson" <seo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:480d2c1f$0$18479$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...

"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
news:674ckaF2mlt5vU1@mid.individual.net...

"Seon Ferguson" <seo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:480c6fb2$0$18474$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...

2. The science is settled -- CO2 causes global warming.

This is my favorite one. Call me stupid but don't humans, plants and in
fact all living things send out CO2? So how then is CO2 supposed to
damage our atmosphere if CO2 has been sent to it since the beginning of
history?

**Have you been living under a rock? Or are you really THAT stupid? CO2
levels are rising faster than at any time in history. The last time CO2
levels were higher than they are now (more than 400,000 years ago) there
was a mass extinction. Wanna speculate as to what will happen WHEN CO2
levels rise further? Do you know what mass extinction means?

Sheesh!

Trevor Wilson

I don't speculate any more. Speculation can result in Bush carried out
911 or something. I prefer to rely on facts and the facts are 400,000
years ago there was no oil companies or whatnot. How did the CO2 levels
get so high without pollution?

**OK. CO2 _is_ a pollutant. It got high due to production from single
celled critters.

Could it be possible the CO2 levels are high because of
similar reasons?

**IT DOESN'T MATTER. It rose due to different reasons millennia ago. Many
species were exterminated. It is rising today, due to CO2 production from
mankind. Many species will be exterminated.

Well what were the reasons and it does matter because if were going to
introduce global taxes we have to remove all doupt from sceptics like me.

Also I wonder if the Sun cycles were simular back then. Thats something for
me to research...