badgerx16

Battalion

According to this report, whilst CO2 levels are far lower than they were 150 million years ago, ( as per GM's post ), there is no 'trend' of atmospheric depletion, as claimed, that indicates it would have fallen below levels necessary to support life. https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/ But then again, NASA are Government funded, so obviously this data has to be treated with suspicion. 😉

More like a pig's trotter ?

OK, provide a list of names of those posters who, in your eyes, are not 'gammon'.

"My name is Adam Armstrong and I have a problem."

You are getting more confusing with every post.

Would you swim in our coastal waters ?

On the other side of the fence: "Take the 2015 video “The Truth about [Carbon Dioxide],” presented by Patrick Moore, whose title is “co-founder of Greenpeace,” and produced by Prager University. On the surface, it’s a well-made video about CO2, featuring sharp visuals and an authoritative voice presenting the information at hand from a source with “university” in the name. But if you were to watch the video more fully, some elements might appear strange. Moore spends much of the video talking about the origins of CO2 in planetary history, making sweeping statements and implications that environmentalists want to eliminate all CO2 and carbon to the last atom. He says fossil fuels are “100% organic” and “were produced with solar energy,” which is technically true, but clearly misleading for a non-scientific audience. He also makes the case that there should be more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, drawing allusions to CO2 levels during the Cambrian explosion literally hundreds of millions of years ago before humans even existed. He even questions CO2’s status as a pollutant at all. Moore does not mention the temperature increase on Earth due to recent carbon emissions or what that means for the planet, as he would have to explain why eras with higher CO2 emissions have temperatures several degrees hotter than pre-industrial times, or talk about the astronomical rise in emissions in just the last hundred years. This kind of video, filled with dubious scientific information, would be incredibly easy to spread across the Internet. In fact, it already has been spread, accumulating millions of views. Fortunately, there are some critical steps that we can take to minimize the impact of climate misinformation, should you ever come across a post on climate change you’re not 100% sure is legitimately sourced or reported accurately." https://climate360news.lmu.edu/how-to-tell-if-theres-climate-misinformation-on-your-feed/

Posting without proof reading is a sure sign of anger getting in the way of sense.

#10 doing the Hokey Cokey; Are we 'in' or 'out' ?

And many others are funded by the fossil fuel corporations. They are surely completely honest and above board.

I wonder what Guided Missile's take on it is.

So, as you are a scientist, by your own definition - you lie.

All those that are "too good for the Championship", but last season proved not good enough for the Premier League.

cigar

No need for him to crow about it.

As would we all, but we were relegated last season and as a consequence this aspiration has become a lot harder.

To quote Pontius Pilate confronting Jesus in "Jesus Christ Superstar"; "But what is truth ? Is truth unchanging law ? We both have truths, are mine the same as yours ?"

If JWP had joined any other Prem club I would have taken a passing interest in his performances, but not with that shower.

Says a scientist.

Your rooster has a stammer.

Schooner

Chips

"Please accept my resignation. I don't care to belong to a club that would have me as a member".

Circle of trout