Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Sources Playing Down Climate Change
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="createdtoworship" data-source="post: 74677490" data-attributes="member: 29008"><p>This is reversing the burden of proof. Global warming alarmists are the ones making the entire argument. That temperatures are not just higher, but alarmingly higher. From what I have seen temperature is not faster or slower since the 50's it's just random. It speeds up and slows down. I don't know where I seen that, but I am sure I can find it but my argument does not really depend on that anyway, as my argument is simply a negation of global warming alarmist claims. The burden really relies on you guys to post peer reviews that show #1 co2 is causing the warming. Remember co2 is only about 5% of the green house gases. There are not good studies on that part because they don't want you understanding that. And 99% of the green house gases are naturally made. That is another figure they don't want you to know. I seen that on a blog somewhere, but he makes logical sense attesting to natural laws of co2 formation, it need not be peer review. But I feel we need to see some peer reviews that say that co2 is causing the warming, and that secondly the co2 man is providing is enough to cause global warming. Remember this is not just america putting out co2, we are talking enough co2 to warm the entire globe. So this would have to be a universal study. So I really don't think there is enough information out there supporting it. But feel free to find some.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="createdtoworship, post: 74677490, member: 29008"] This is reversing the burden of proof. Global warming alarmists are the ones making the entire argument. That temperatures are not just higher, but alarmingly higher. From what I have seen temperature is not faster or slower since the 50's it's just random. It speeds up and slows down. I don't know where I seen that, but I am sure I can find it but my argument does not really depend on that anyway, as my argument is simply a negation of global warming alarmist claims. The burden really relies on you guys to post peer reviews that show #1 co2 is causing the warming. Remember co2 is only about 5% of the green house gases. There are not good studies on that part because they don't want you understanding that. And 99% of the green house gases are naturally made. That is another figure they don't want you to know. I seen that on a blog somewhere, but he makes logical sense attesting to natural laws of co2 formation, it need not be peer review. But I feel we need to see some peer reviews that say that co2 is causing the warming, and that secondly the co2 man is providing is enough to cause global warming. Remember this is not just america putting out co2, we are talking enough co2 to warm the entire globe. So this would have to be a universal study. So I really don't think there is enough information out there supporting it. But feel free to find some. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Sources Playing Down Climate Change
Top
Bottom