Scientists Prove Man-Made Global Warming Is a Hoax

[tmttactical]

Okay, I am not sure hope I posted in the right spot.

Scientist have proven that 3,000,000 (3 million) years ago the CO2 levels were as high as they are today. That is before any recorded appearance of man. So maybe the aliens stopped by and had a few too many BBQ"s

"Current CO2 levels of 410 parts per million (ppm) were last seen on Earth three million years ago, according to the most detailed reconstruction of the Earth’s climate by researchers at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and published in Science Advances.?"

So now we have it, scientific proof -- not just the deniers but scientist, that we are NOT THE CAUSE of global warming.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...ists-prove-man-made-global-warming-is-a-hoax/

 

[Arcticdude]

Since when did the truth matter to the Democrat, Leftist, Socialist, green weenie, sissy snowflakes? The truth doesn't fit their agenda.

 

[bigpaul]

and all that man made pollution, the fogs and the smogs, the industrial pollution coming out of the factory chimneys, all the slash and burn in the forests, has not effect on climate change? yeah right.

 

[tmttactical]

and all that man made pollution, the fogs and the smogs, the industrial pollution coming out of the factory chimneys, all the slash and burn in the forests, has not effect on climate change? yeah right.

Oh the pollution may kill us but we are a drop in the bucket as far as our effect on the the climate. Pollution and weather are not mutually joined. Sure you can pour out so much particular matter as to block out the sun in that area but 200 miles down the road the sun is still shining through. Now nuclear winter or a volcanic winter and then the climate could be changed for a while but in time it would return to normal. Even those major disasters would not destroy the planet, just remove most of the life on it. Being the Apex specie, we think that when we die off the planet is destroyed. Not so, just another phase and a restart. Not sure if any humans will survive but some might.

 

[Arcticdude]

There are still people who refuse to listen to facts. They have a doom and gloom mentality and want to blame Mankind for any perceived world's problems. If more of the GW believers turned off the National Geographic Global Warming channel and actually traveled outside of their overpopulated neighborhood, they'd see that the majority of the planet is actually pretty clean and pristine. Of course there are polluted shitholes in many areas, but they are the exception not the norm.
Open your eyes, and your mind. Follow the money and the agenda.

 

[bigpaul]

oh i'm not saying some of climate change isn't natural, it is and it goes in cycles, but to infer that man can chuck out as much pollution and crap and it has no effect on the planet is rather naïve to my thinking.

 

[TexasFreedom]

BP,

You seem quick to blame mankind for our pollution causing 'climate change'. But do you factor in mankind's affect on things like stopping forest fires? From limiting erosion? From protecting species that are naturally going extinct (without fault of man, yes some are man-caused).

Think about natural forest fires. They would burn endlessly until heavy rains come. Think about the CO2 produced by those. Mankind stops those helping the environment. That alone might balance our CO2 production.

 

[Arcticdude]

Pollution certainly does have an affect in relatively small local areas. But it's naive to think that it could have a world wide impact on climate.

 

[bigpaul]

nope, every other country their population believes in climate change but not Americans it seems, it must be a cultural thing.
oh well, each to their own I suppose, there isn't much we can do about reversing climate change unless everyone does it at the same time.
I just think it is a bit silly to think that mankind's actions have no effect on the planet and that we can go on doing whatever we want and it has no effect on the world, now that really is niave.

 

[Brent S]

I think anyone that disbelieves in man made impact on the planet is much worse than naive. Right now 60% of all animal species are gone. That’s directly caused by man and is allready affecting our food supply, and will continue to get worse. Warming is happening. Yes the planet has been warm in the past, but it changed slowly. We are causing a fast change, which isn’t good for animals not being able to adapt fast enough. (Or us). Again, I like air conditioning and cars too. I do feel that changing over to cleaner fuels for these things should be a major priority though. We have the ability and technical know how to do it, just not the economical will or drive. Why would oil company’s want solar energy. They not only don’t want it but I believe have played a major role in influencing the political will against it.

 

[DrHenley]

Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah

The question is, what are you doing about it?

I sequester more carbon than I produce...waaaay more. In fact, I take as much carbon out of the atmosphere as produced by 7,200 humans.
http://www.arborenvironmentalalliance.com/carbon-tree-facts.asp

 

[grayghost668]

pfffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffft,,,,,,,,I think that sums it up pretty well

 

[Arcticdude]

Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah

The question is, what are you doing about it?

I sequester more carbon than I produce...

That's the problem Doc. All these global warming believers do nothing other than complain and call for more government regulations and control. Like you Doc I own a large tract of timber, which more than makes me carbon neutral, I'm 100% off grid and I provide a lot of protected area and water for the wildlife. I've put my money where my mouth is. How much does the global warming whinners invest personally for their cause? Anything?

 

[Proud Prepper]

I think anyone that disbelieves in man made impact on the planet is much worse than naive. Right now 60% of all animal species are gone. That’s directly caused by man and is allready affecting our food supply, and will continue to get worse. Warming is happening. Yes the planet has been warm in the past, but it changed slowly. We are causing a fast change, which isn’t good for animals not being able to adapt fast enough. (Or us). Again, I like air conditioning and cars too. I do feel that changing over to cleaner fuels for these things should be a major priority though. We have the ability and technical know how to do it, just not the economical will or drive. Why would oil company’s want solar energy. They not only don’t want it but I believe have played a major role in influencing the political will against it.

How are we naive? How many species of animals went extinct before man existed or in your mind the capability of causing an animal to go extinct? Do you realize the amount of pollution that the planet has generated naturally at time in the past? Man kind has not yet polluted the planet on a global scale that has not occurred naturally in the past. There has been fast changes in warming and cooling in the past before Mans existence. The planet has adapted and has had no long term pollution in a global way, not even localized damaged has remained in terms of the lifespan of our planet. Cleaner energy is a good thing to pursue, but not at the demise of cheap efficient use of other resources.
I would say those that believe as you do are not even naive, but deliberately ignorant.

 

[Brent S]

Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah

The question is, what are you doing about it?

I sequester more carbon than I produce...waaaay more. In fact, I take as much carbon out of the atmosphere as produced by 7,200 humans.
http://www.arborenvironmentalalliance.com/carbon-tree-facts.asp

I applaud you for your managed forest. I think talking about issues is a good first step, but it needs to be followed up by enough push that our govt actually begins to do something about it. I don’t believe that something of this scale can be solved by a handful of individuals trying to live a greener life. The govt has the ability to push industry in the right direction. I like the carrot and stick approach. Reward behaviors that are in line with greener energies and fine ones that’s aren’t. Nothing is going to be solved overnight, but as long as we see the needle or rudder being turned in the right direction then things have a chance of getting better.

 

[Brent S]

How are we naive? How many species of animals went extinct before man existed or in your mind the capability of causing an animal to go extinct? Do you realize the amount of pollution that the planet has generated naturally at time in the past? Man kind has not yet polluted the planet on a global scale that has not occurred naturally in the past. There has been fast changes in warming and cooling in the past before Mans existence. The planet has adapted and has had no long term pollution in a global way, not even localized damaged has remained in terms of the lifespan of our planet. Cleaner energy is a good thing to pursue, but not at the demise of cheap efficient use of other resources.
I would say those that believe as you do are not even naive, but deliberately ignorant.

I am certain of one thing. Fast changes on a global scale is very bad on species, including us. Yes, the planet has undergone dramatic changes before. Unfortunately for the majority of species around at those times, they died off and it is millions of years for ecosystems to adapt and thrive again. I have a sense of peace that the planet will recover from anything we do to it. I wish I felt the same about our chances of survival.

 

[tmttactical]

Pollution and climate change are separate issues. You can barely breath outdoor in Beijing China. School children have to play inside bubbles. That is air pollution but it did not warm the planet. The manufacture and disposal of Solar panels is not carbon neutral and poses a significant pollution problem when it is time to dispose of a solar panel. Mankind killed off million of buffalo and replaced them with cattle. Unless man quits building along the coast or major rivers or even small rivers, we are going to see damage by whether changes. It rains and then pours and then rivers flood and people get washed out. The ice caps melts (like it did 3 million years ago and the ocean rises. It is going to suck for a lot of coastal cities, should not have build on the coast. The point is this happened in the past and will happen again in the future. I doubt anybody on this forum will live long enough to see the change. I doubt our grandchildren will live to see the change. Too me, the governments of the world are a much bigger risk to us and out children.

 

[Arcticdude]

I applaud you for your managed forest. I think talking about issues is a good first step, but it needs to be followed up by enough push that our govt actually begins to do something about it. I don’t believe that something of this scale can be solved by a handful of individuals trying to live a greener life. The govt has the ability to push industry in the right direction. I like the carrot and stick approach. Reward behaviors that are in line with greener energies and fine ones that’s aren’t. Nothing is going to be solved overnight, but as long as we see the needle or rudder being turned in the right direction then things have a chance of getting better.

Its more than just a few of us Brent. There are millions and millions of acres of private timber lands set aside or managed for future sustainable harvest. There's also millions and millions of acres of formally agricultural lands that have been removed from farming and enrolled in the CRP program and set aside for wildlife. The timber industry plants far more trees than they harvest. So you see, saving the planet is already being done on a large scale. People can be the answer.

 

[Arcticdude]

.

 

[DrHenley]

I don’t believe that something of this scale can be solved by a handful of individuals trying to live a greener life. The govt has the ability to push industry in the right direction.

And therein lies the rub. Conservatives are the ones that actually do things. Study after study has shown that conservatives are much more charitable than liberals. Liberals are the ones that want the government to do something (meaning make someone else do something) but don't want to do anything themselves.