Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote
>>> Trevor Wilson wrote
>>>> Peter Jason wrote
>>>>> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote

>>>>>> **Shoot the fucking lot of them and let the world move on and
>>>>>> away from fossil fuels.
>>>>>> Arrhenius proved AGW theory back in 1899 and those idiots are
>>>>>> still arguing about it. The planet is warming and it is due to
>>>>>> excessive CO2 emissions.
>>>>>> FACT.
>>>>> RUBBISH..!
>>>> **Nope. Fact, you fucking moron.
>>>>
>>>>> Any warming is due to.....
>>>>> Heat seeping up from the Earth's interior
>>>> **That's been happening for BILLIONS of years.
>>>
>>> in cycles
>>>
>>>> You need to explain
>>>> why the temperature of the planet is rising rapidly, since we began
>>>> burning fossil fuels.
>>
>>> I heard this theory about 20 years ago .....The Earth cycles hotter
>>> then colder .... been that way for yonks .... but, since about the
>>> time of The Industrial Revolution this 'hotter' is heading Hotter and
>>> Hotter.

>> That last is just plain wrong.

>>> Sure, some of it is natural (which we can't effect) but most of it is
>>> Man-made ....

>> That hasnt been established.

>>> which *WE* *MUST* *REDUCE* to try to reduce the impact on our children
>>> and out children's children!

>> And neither has that. It is very far from clear that
>> even if things are getting a little warmer by say a
>> degree or two, that that is even a bad thing.

>>> https://englishfinders.com/essay-on-climate-change/

>>> Quote
>>> Human Activities and Responsibility

>>> The vast body of scientific evidence indicates that human
>>> activity is the dominant cause of recent climate change,

>> That's a lie.

> Really?

Fraid so.

> OK, Roddles, present YOUR peer-reviewed paper that showsevery climate
> scientist, since Arrhenius to be wrong.

Every climate scientist since Arrhenius has never said
anything even remotely like what I said was wrong.

Its those who make that claim that need to substantiate that claim.

> I will remind you that NOT ONCE in the past 120+ yearshas anyone proven
> Arrhenius' theory to be incorrect.

Arrhenius' theory never said anything
even remotely like what I said was wrong.

> If you think you can, then do so. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.

Go and fuck yourself, again.

>>> even if natural forces contribute to climate variability.

>> There is no if about it. The ice ageswere clearly not caused by humans.

> Oviously. However, the present warmingtrend clearly IS being caused by
> humans.

Easy to claim. Pity that the greater
warming seen during the medieval
warm period can't have been.

> Arrhenius presented that theory more than 120 years ago

And could never explain why the medieval warm period wasnt.

> and his theory has never been successfully challenged.

That's a lie with the medieval warm period.

>>> An important turning point was the widespread use of fossil fuels
>>> during the Industrial Revolution, which sharply increased greenhouse
>>> gas emissions.

>> Nope. JUST CO2

> And methane and water vapour, et al.

Those were not sharply increased by the Industrial Revolution.

>>> The issue has been made worse by deforestationbrought on by
>>> urbanization and agricultural growth.

>> That happened LONG before the industrial revolution.

> Not so:

Fraid so, most obviously in western europe and
where the only fuel for cooking and heating was wood.

> https://rainforests.mongabay.com/general_tables.htm

That's not just about RAIN forests, stupid.

>>> Acknowledging human activity’s contribution to climate
>>> change is a critical first step toward accountability.

>> But it is very far from clear that it is actually true
>> given the medieval warm period which saw much
>> higher temperatures than we are seeing now.

> Wrong, as usual.

We'll see...

> The Medieval Warm period was not a planet-wide event. It was localised..

BULLSHIT. And irrelevant to whether it was human caused.

>>> It suggests that individual and group efforts are crucialto lessen
>>> the effects of climate change. It is imperativefor governments,
>>> corporations, and individuals to embracesustainable behaviors, shift
>>> towards renewable energy sources, and enact legislation aimed at
>>> curbing carbon emissions.

>> Just more mindless green bullshit.

> Nope. It's what needs to be done.

Wrong, as always, particularly given that it is far from clear that
what minimal warming there might have been is even a bad thing.

>> Just like the other mindless rabid claim that Trevor keeps
>> mindlessly shouting, that EVERYONE MUST DO SOMETHING.
>> That is complete and utter bullshit, most obviously with
>> those who walk everywhere and grow all their own food
>> and never ever eat any meat except chooks and rabbits etc.

> Which is a very tiny proportion of the population.

Irrelevant. Those clearly don't need to do anything.

And it isnt a very tiny proportion of the population in some areas.

Petz is blasting bullshit with gale force GoonCon4 brainfarting

/Autosnip all inputs of mentally deranged home grown and septic trash
malicious wankers residing in my killfile/

> Trevor Wilson
>>> Trevor Wilson
>>>> **Shoot the fucking lot of them and let the world move on and away from
>>>> fossil fuels.

Violence is never a solution.
However removing these despicable creeps from any access to media
outlets/social media and than forcing them to perform compulsory lengthy
community service as a penalty serves society much better.

>> **Nope. Fact, you fucking moron.

The lowlife loon you are responding to is a raving mad, waste of space
and good oxygen, brain dead hard right wanker. You won't be able to talk
good sense into him.
/snip/
>>
> You still the big Bawana (great white) Grandma's cat hunter?
> Tou have been PYSOP'ed into believing the Kenyan born Moslem Obama!

Yeah...this is just the typical conspiracy kookery GoonBag fume which
emanates from your piehole... fuck your cyber sewers quality alt-right
crap sources.

/snip as a generous service to Usenet/

NOTE:
Your idiotic extremist and/or Xtian fundy hate propaganda and high
octane Goon-bag fumes induced fantasy sig (that quite often contains
uncredited, therefore clearly plagiarised material pinched from
countless alt-right sources) was flushed down the gurgler, as always,
without reading!

--
The ever present and ever vigilant newsgroup devil at your service.

Alzheimer Rod on his typical *it's bullshit* spewing rampage

> Ozix
>> Petz
>>> Obama/Biden ...blah...blah...blah
/cyber sewer links removed with pleasure/
>> Nah, just need to look at the average ocean temperature. 2022
>> wasabove  the normal band of fluctuations, and 2023 it has really
>> taken off.
>
> Bullshit.

Your lazy poster reply is the actual bullshit here, beyond what Petz is
defecating into the newsgroup, Alzheimer Rod!

--
The ever present and ever vigilant newsgroup devil at your service.

Petz is still blasting nonsense

/snip/

> You believe all sorts of journalist rubbish but not the bible or your own eyes!.

/snip/

The Bible says absolutely nothing about CO2 levels, nor the greenhouse
effect, nor the resulting global warming, nor fossil fuel merchant
billionaires, nor their alt-right political henchmen, nor full idiots
like you who spews insane rubbish into this newsgroup. :-P

Alas you keep proving that you ain't capable concentrating on any stated
discussion topic longer than just a few microseconds. Hence all your
replies end up as fully meaningless word-salads.

NOTE:
Your idiotic extremist and/or Xtian fundy hate propaganda and high
octane Goon-bag fumes induced fantasy sig (that quite often contains
uncredited, therefore clearly plagiarised material pinched from
countless alt-right sources) was flushed down the gurgler, as always,
without reading!

--
The ever present and ever vigilant newsgroup devil at your service.

On 10/12/2023 7:18 am, Rod Speed wrote:
> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote
>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote
>>>>> Peter Jason wrote
>>>>>> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote
>
>>>>>>> **Shoot the fucking lot of them and let the world move on and
>>>>>>> away from fossil fuels.
>>>>>>>  Arrhenius proved AGW theory back in 1899 and those idiots are
>>>>>>> still arguing about it. The planet is warming and it is due to
>>>>>>> excessive CO2 emissions.
>>>>>>>  FACT.
>>>>>>  RUBBISH..!
>>>>>  **Nope. Fact, you fucking moron.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Any warming is due to.....
>>>>>>  Heat seeping up from the Earth's interior
>>>>>  **That's been happening for BILLIONS of years.
>>>>
>>>> in cycles
>>>>
>>>>> You need to explain
>>>>> why the temperature of the planet is rising rapidly, since we began
>>>>> burning fossil fuels.
>>>
>>>> I heard this theory about 20 years ago .....The Earth cycles hotter
>>>> then colder .... been that way for yonks .... but, since about the
>>>> time of The Industrial Revolution this 'hotter' is heading Hotter
>>>> and Hotter.
>
>>>  That last is just plain wrong.
>
>>>> Sure, some of it is natural (which we can't effect) but most of it
>>>> is Man-made ....
>
>>>  That hasnt been established.
>
>>>> which *WE* *MUST* *REDUCE* to try to reduce the impact on our
>>>> children and out children's children!
>
>>>  And neither has that. It is very far from clear that
>>> even if things are getting a little warmer by say a
>>> degree or two, that that is even a bad thing.
>
>>>> https://englishfinders.com/essay-on-climate-change/
>
>>>> Quote
>>>> Human Activities and Responsibility
>
>>>> The vast body of scientific evidence indicates that human
>>>> activity is  the dominant cause of recent climate change,
>
>>>  That's a lie.
>
>> Really?
>
> Fraid so.
>
>> OK, Roddles, present YOUR peer-reviewed paper that showsevery  climate
>> scientist, since Arrhenius to be wrong.
>
> Every climate scientist since Arrhenius has never said
> anything even remotely like what I said was wrong.

**Every climate scientist agrees with Arrhenius' theory.

>
> Its those who make that claim that need to substantiate that claim.

**Arrhenius substantiated his theory back in 1899.

>
>> I will remind you that NOT ONCE in the past 120+ yearshas anyone
>> proven  Arrhenius' theory to be incorrect.
>
> Arrhenius' theory never said anything
> even  remotely like what I said was wrong.

**You claimed that Arrhenius' theory was a "lie".

>
>> If you think you can, then do so. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.
>
> Go and fuck yourself, again.

**I note your inability to prove Arrhenius wrong.

>
>>>> even if natural forces  contribute to climate variability.
>
>>> There is no if about it. The ice ageswere  clearly not caused by humans.
>
>> Oviously. However, the present warmingtrend clearly IS being caused
>> by humans.
>
> Easy to claim. Pity that the greater
> warming seen during the medieval
> warm period can't have been.

**Points:

* The Medieval Warming period was not a planet-wide event.
* We don't know precisely what caused the warming. It may have been
increased Solar flux, or some other factor.
* We KNOW that the planet is warming, right now.
* We KNOW that the warming is due to increased CO2 and other GHG emissions.
* We KNOW that, despite the last couple of decades of reduced Solar
flux, that the planet is still warming.
* We KNOW that it is highly likely that the Sun will resume it's normal
level of activity. We do not know when. It may be in 500 years, or it
may be the next cycle. Either way, WHEN the Sun resumes it's normal
level of activity, then the warming trend will accelerate.

>
>> Arrhenius presented that theory more than 120 years ago
>
> And could never explain why the medieval warm period wasnt.

**Sure. Arrhenius wasn't alive back then. He did, however, prove that
increased CO2 emissions will lead to warming.

>
>> and  his theory has never been successfully challenged.
>
> That's a lie with the medieval warm period.

**We don't know what caused the Medieval warming period. We DO know what
is causing the present warming trend.

>
>>>> An important turning point was the widespread use of fossil fuels
>>>> during the Industrial Revolution, which sharply increased greenhouse
>>>> gas emissions.
>
>>>  Nope. JUST CO2
>
>> And methane and water vapour, et al.
>
> Those were not sharply increased by the Industrial Revolution.

**Methane has sharply increased due to increased levels of ruminants.
Methane is also increasing due to melting permafrost.

>
>
>>>> The issue has been made  worse by deforestationbrought on by
>>>> urbanization and agricultural  growth.
>
>>>  That happened LONG before the industrial revolution.
>
>> Not so:
>
> Fraid so, most obviously in western europe and
> where the only fuel for cooking and heating was wood.
>
>> https://rainforests.mongabay.com/general_tables.htm
>
> That's not just about RAIN forests, stupid.
>
>>>> Acknowledging human activity’s contribution to climate
>>>> change is a  critical first step toward accountability.
>
>>>  But it is very far from clear that it is actually true
>>> given the medieval warm period which saw much
>>> higher temperatures than we are seeing now.
>
>> Wrong, as usual.
>
> We'll see...
>
>> The Medieval Warm period was not a planet-wide event. It was localised.
>
> BULLSHIT.

**Then prove that it was a planet-wide event.

And irrelevant to whether it was human caused.
>
>>>> It suggests that individual  and group efforts are crucialto lessen
>>>> the effects of climate change.  It is imperativefor governments,
>>>> corporations, and individuals to  embracesustainable behaviors,
>>>> shift towards renewable energy sources, and enact legislation aimed
>>>> at curbing carbon emissions.
>
>>>  Just more mindless green bullshit.
>
>> Nope. It's what needs to be done.
>
> Wrong, as always, particularly given that it is far from clear that
> what minimal warming there might have been is even a bad thing.

**Are you fucking serious? Really?

>
>>>  Just like the other mindless rabid claim that Trevor keeps
>>> mindlessly shouting, that EVERYONE MUST DO SOMETHING.
>>>  That is complete and utter bullshit, most obviously with
>>> those who walk everywhere and grow all their own food
>>> and never ever eat any meat except chooks and rabbits etc.
>
>> Which is a very tiny proportion of the population.
>
> Irrelevant. Those clearly don't need to do anything.
>
> And it isnt a very tiny proportion of the population in some areas.

**In developed nations, it most certainly is.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On 10/12/2023 5:41 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 9/12/2023 8:29 pm, Daniel65 wrote:
>> Trevor Wilson wrote on 9/12/23 10:21 am:
>>> On 9/12/2023 9:51 am, Peter Jason wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 09:43:30 +1100, Trevor Wilson
>>>> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> **Shoot the fucking lot of them and let the world move on and
>>>>> away from fossil fuels.
>>>>>
>>>>> Arrhenius proved AGW theory back in 1899 and those idiots are
>>>>> still arguing about it. The planet is warming and it is due to
>>>>> excessive CO2 emissions.
>>>>>
>>>>> FACT.
>>>>
>>>> RUBBISH..!
>>>
>>> **Nope. Fact, you fucking moron.
>>>
>>>> Any warming is due to.....
>>>>
>>>> Heat seeping up from the Earth's interior
>>>
>>> **That's been happening for BILLIONS of years.
>>
>> in cycles
>>
>>> You need to explain
>>> why the temperature of the planet is rising rapidly, since we began
>>> burning fossil fuels.
>>
>> I heard this theory about 20 years ago .....The Earth cycles hotter
>> then colder .... been that way for yonks
>
>
> **Cite.

FFS Trevor! We've ALL heard about those cycles as would you have done!

I assume that a cite from the NAA should be good enough for you???????:
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/hasnt-earth-warmed-and-cooled-naturally-throughout-history
"Yes. Earth has experienced cold periods (informally referred to as “ice
ages,” or "glacials") and warm periods (“interglacials”) on roughly
100,000-year cycles for at least the last 1 million years."

Read the rest of what Daniel wrote before trying to shoot the messenger.
I also can't see a problem with the rest of Daniel's post about human
induced climate change.

On 9/12/2023 2:38 pm, Ozix wrote:
> Petzl wrote:
>>>
>> Obama/Biden enforced the fraud "Global Warming" Scam
>> See part 1 of BBC 2013 "Yes Prime Minster" that was mystically
>> cancelled (Obama didn't like the actual truth being known)
>> https://vimeo.com/124391891
>>>
>> then look for part 2 for how money is made from it!
>> https://vimeo.com/231081036
>>>
>
> Nah, just need to look at the average ocean temperature. 2022 was above
> the normal band of fluctuations, and 2023 it has really taken off. The
> alt.right nutters blame this on the banning of dirty fuel oil in ships,
> so less smut in the upper atmosphere. It doesn't matter anymore, we are
> past the tipping point.

I suspect that last paragraph may be true but have you got any cites to
support that claim? Just out of interest as I don't really care if the
nutters come out to slam both of us for even mentioning it as a
possibility.

On 9/12/2023 2:45 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 9/12/2023 2:38 pm, Ozix wrote:
>> Petzl wrote:
>>>>
>>> Obama/Biden enforced the fraud "Global Warming" Scam
>>> See part 1 of BBC 2013 "Yes Prime Minster" that was mystically
>>> cancelled (Obama didn't like the actual truth being known)
>>> https://vimeo.com/124391891
>>>>
>>> then look for part 2 for how money is made from it!
>>> https://vimeo.com/231081036
>>>>
>>
>> Nah, just need to look at the average ocean temperature. 2022 was
>> above the normal band of fluctuations, and 2023 it has really taken
>> off. The alt.right nutters blame this on the banning of dirty fuel oil
>> in ships, so less smut in the upper atmosphere. It doesn't matter
>> anymore, we are past the tipping point.
>
> **Sadly, I think you may be correct. We may well be fucked. The fossil
> fuel shits have made lots of money, so they're happy.

So do you have any cites to support the suspicions the 3 of us have
about that tipping point?

On 9/12/2023 8:41 pm, Daniel65 wrote:
> Trevor Wilson wrote on 9/12/23 2:45 pm:
>> On 9/12/2023 2:38 pm, Ozix wrote:
>>> Petzl wrote:
>>>>>
>>>> Obama/Biden enforced the fraud "Global Warming" Scam
>>>> See part 1 of BBC 2013 "Yes Prime Minster" that was mystically
>>>> cancelled (Obama didn't like the actual truth being known)
>>>> https://vimeo.com/124391891
>>>>>
>>>> then look for part 2 for how money is made from it!
>>>> https://vimeo.com/231081036
>>>
>>> Nah, just need to look at the average ocean temperature. 2022 was
>>> above the normal band of fluctuations, and 2023 it has really taken
>>> off. The alt.right nutters blame this on the banning of dirty fuel
>>> oil in ships, so less smut in the upper atmosphere. It doesn't matter
>>> anymore, we are past the tipping point.
>>
>> **Sadly, I think you may be correct. We may well be fucked. The fossil
>> fuel shits have made lots of money, so they're happy.
>>
> .... but what good is having 'made lots of money' if you're dead!!

Mankind won't be wiped out as a result of climate change. Our species
are adaptive and some/a lot of humanity will survive climate disaster.

On 9/12/2023 4:57 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 9/12/2023 3:50 pm, Petzl wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 11:38:11 +0800, Ozix <ozix@xizo.am> wrote:
>>
>>> Petzl wrote:
>>>>>
>>>> Obama/Biden enforced the fraud "Global Warming" Scam
>>>> See part 1 of BBC 2013 "Yes Prime Minster" that was mystically
>>>> cancelled (Obama didn't like the actual truth being known)
>>>> https://vimeo.com/124391891
>>>>>
>>>> then look for part 2 for how money is made from it!
>>>> https://vimeo.com/231081036
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Nah, just need to look at the average ocean temperature. 2022 was above
>>> the normal band of fluctuations, and 2023 it has really taken off. The
>>> alt.right nutters blame this on the banning of dirty fuel oil in ships,
>>> so less smut in the upper atmosphere. It doesn't matter anymore, we are
>>> past the tipping point.
>>>
>> All you have a rigged computere models designed to prove your PYSOP'ed
>> brain
>
> **You fucking moron.

Yes, he is a fucking moron. We all know it. He lost any marbles he
might have once had quite some time ago.

YOU need to explain the OBSERVED warming that has
> occurred over the past 150-odd years, if CO2 is not to blame.

He won't because he can't. He can't even explain how to boil a jug so
you are asking for the impossible.

> I will remind you once more: More than 120 years ago, Svante Arrhenius
> proved, via experimental data, that the planet would warm due to high
> levels of CO2 emissions. NOT ONCE in the past 120 has Arrhenius been
> proven incorrect.
>
> If you think you can provide an alternate hypothesis, then present it.
> We're waiting......
>
> In the meantime, see if you can find a 12 year old to explain the
> science to you:
>
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiUxKnO1YGDAxUXklYBHQ96Cs8QFnoECBEQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fskepticalscience.com%2FWhat-would-a-CO2-free-atmosphere-look-like.html&usg=AOvVaw0R8mBpTNMMwp1-8XXSU_4p&opi=89978449
>
>
> Over to you dickhead.
>
>

On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 08:59:29 +1100, Trevor Wilson
<trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> On 10/12/2023 7:18 am, Rod Speed wrote:
>> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote
>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote
>>>>>> Peter Jason wrote
>>>>>>> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote
>>
>>>>>>>> **Shoot the fucking lot of them and let the world move on and
>>>>>>>> away from fossil fuels.
>>>>>>>> Arrhenius proved AGW theory back in 1899 and those idiots are
>>>>>>>> still arguing about it. The planet is warming and it is due to
>>>>>>>> excessive CO2 emissions.
>>>>>>>> FACT.
>>>>>>> RUBBISH..!
>>>>>> **Nope. Fact, you fucking moron.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Any warming is due to.....
>>>>>>> Heat seeping up from the Earth's interior
>>>>>> **That's been happening for BILLIONS of years.
>>>>>
>>>>> in cycles
>>>>>
>>>>>> You need to explain
>>>>>> why the temperature of the planet is rising rapidly, since we began
>>>>>> burning fossil fuels.
>>>>
>>>>> I heard this theory about 20 years ago .....The Earth cycles hotter
>>>>> then colder .... been that way for yonks .... but, since about the
>>>>> time of The Industrial Revolution this 'hotter' is heading Hotter
>>>>> and Hotter.
>>
>>>> That last is just plain wrong.
>>
>>>>> Sure, some of it is natural (which we can't effect) but most of it
>>>>> is Man-made ....
>>
>>>> That hasnt been established.
>>
>>>>> which *WE* *MUST* *REDUCE* to try to reduce the impact on our
>>>>> children and out children's children!
>>
>>>> And neither has that. It is very far from clear that
>>>> even if things are getting a little warmer by say a
>>>> degree or two, that that is even a bad thing.
>>
>>>>> https://englishfinders.com/essay-on-climate-change/
>>
>>>>> Quote
>>>>> Human Activities and Responsibility
>>
>>>>> The vast body of scientific evidence indicates that human
>>>>> activity is the dominant cause of recent climate change,

>>>> That's a lie.

>>> Really?

>> Fraid so.

>>> OK, Roddles, present YOUR peer-reviewed paper that shows
>>> every climate scientist, since Arrhenius to be wrong.

>> Every climate scientist since Arrhenius has never said
>> anything even remotely like what I said was wrong.

> Every climate scientist agrees with Arrhenius' theory.

Bullshit.

>> Its those who make that claim that need to substantiate that claim.

> Arrhenius substantiated his theory back in 1899.

He CLAIMED that theory, that's not substantiation.

Have fun explaining why we have seen a very dramatic
increase in atmospheric CO2 levels, but have seen
sweet fuck all change in world temperatures.

Arrhenius' theory is a dud.

>>> I will remind you that NOT ONCE in the past 120+ yearshas anyone
>>> proven Arrhenius' theory to be incorrect.

>> Arrhenius' theory never said anything
>> even remotely like what I said was wrong.

> You claimed that Arrhenius' theory was a "lie".

Every can see I did nothing of the sort. I actually said that the
claim that the vast body of scientific evidence indicates that
human activity is the dominant cause of recent climate change,

>>> If you think you can, then do so.Otherwise, shut the fuck up

>> Go and fuck yourself, again.

> I note your inability to prove Arrhenius wrong.

I just proved that his theory is a dud given that the undoubted
VAST increase in atmospheric CO2 levels has produced sweet
fuck all change in world temperatures, 1-2 degrees at most.

Some greenhouse effect.

>>>>> even if natural forces contribute to climate variability.

>>>> There is no if about it. The ice ages
>>>> were clearly not caused by humans.

>>> Oviously. However, the present warming
>>> trend clearly IS being caused by humans.

>> Easy to claim. Pity that the greater
>> warming seen during the medieval
>> warm period can't have been.

> Points:

Nope, just more of your mindless bullshit.

> * The Medieval Warming period was not a planet-wide event.

Irrelevant, what minimal climate change we
have seen is not a world wide event either.

And we do know that great swathes of the planet
did have immense forests at one time and no longer
did, long before there were ever any humans at all.

> * We don't know precisely what caused the warming.

Irrelevant, we do know that it can't have been due to human activity.

> It may have been increased Solar flux, or some other factor.

And that means in can't have been due to human activity.

> * We KNOW that the planet is warming, right now.

By sweet fuck all. Nothing even remotely like the change in atmospheric
CO2 levels.

> * We KNOW that the warming is due toincreased CO2 and other GHG
> emissions.

No we do not.

> * We KNOW that, despite the last couple of decadesof reduced Solar
> flux, that the planet is still warming.

By sweet fuck all. Nothing even remotely like the change in atmospheric
CO2 levels.

> * We KNOW that it is highly likely that the Sun will resume it's normal
> level of activity. We do not know when. It may be in 500 years, or it
> may be the next cycle. Either way, WHEN the Sun resumes it's normal
> level of activity, then the warming trend will accelerate.

We don't know that and we don't know whether we will
see another ice age or even another little ice age either.

>>> Arrhenius presented that theory more than 120 years ago

>> And could never explain why the medieval warm period wasnt.

> Sure. Arrhenius wasn't alive back then. He did, however,prove that
> increased CO2 emissions will lead to warming.

But the reality is that a very dramatic increase in atmospheric
CO2 levels produced sweet fuck all in the way of warming,
nothing even remotely like his stupid hysterical claim that
that is certain to produce the extinction of the human race.

>>> and his theory has never been successfully challenged.

>> That's a lie with the medieval warm period.

> We don't know what caused the Medieval warming period.We DO know what
> is causing the present warming trend.

By sweet fuck all and that isnt even a bad thing.

>>>>> An important turning point was the widespread use of fossil fuels
>>>>> during the Industrial Revolution, which sharply increased greenhouse
>>>>> gas emissions.

>>>> Nope. JUST CO2

>>> And methane and water vapour, et al.

>> Those were not sharply increased by the Industrial Revolution.

> Methane has sharply increased due to increased levels of ruminants.

BULLSHIT and that isnt due the INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION anyway.

> Methane is also increasing due to melting permafrost.

That isnt due the INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION.

And your line about water vapour is an even more pig
ignorant lie that there has been a sharp increase in that due
to the industrial revolution. If anything that has decreased
due to the loss of some forests and uncultivated land.

>>>>> The issue has been made worse by deforestation
>>>>> brought on by urbanization and agricultural growth.

>>>> That happened LONG before the industrial revolution.

>>> Not so:

>> Fraid so, most obviously in western europe and
>> where the only fuel for cooking and heating was wood.

>>> https://rainforests.mongabay.com/general_tables.htm
>> That's not just about RAIN forests, stupid.

>>>>> Acknowledging human activity’s contribution to climate
>>>>> change is a critical first step toward accountability.

>>>> But it is very far from clear that it is actually true
>>>> given the medieval warm period which saw much
>>>> higher temperatures than we are seeing now.

>>> Wrong, as usual.

>> We'll see...

>>> The Medieval Warm period was not a planet-wide event. It was localised.

>> BULLSHIT.

> Then prove that it was a planet-wide event.

YOU made the claim that it was localised.

On 10/12/2023 9:09 am, Fran wrote:
> On 9/12/2023 8:41 pm, Daniel65 wrote:
>> Trevor Wilson wrote on 9/12/23 2:45 pm:
>>> On 9/12/2023 2:38 pm, Ozix wrote:
>>>> Petzl wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>> Obama/Biden enforced the fraud "Global Warming" Scam
>>>>> See part 1 of BBC 2013 "Yes Prime Minster" that was mystically
>>>>> cancelled (Obama didn't like the actual truth being known)
>>>>> https://vimeo.com/124391891
>>>>>>
>>>>> then look for part 2 for how money is made from it!
>>>>> https://vimeo.com/231081036
>>>>
>>>> Nah, just need to look at the average ocean temperature. 2022 was
>>>> above the normal band of fluctuations, and 2023 it has really taken
>>>> off. The alt.right nutters blame this on the banning of dirty fuel
>>>> oil in ships, so less smut in the upper atmosphere. It doesn't
>>>> matter anymore, we are past the tipping point.
>>>
>>> **Sadly, I think you may be correct. We may well be fucked. The
>>> fossil fuel shits have made lots of money, so they're happy.
>>>
>> .... but what good is having 'made lots of money' if you're dead!!
>
>
> Mankind won't be wiped out as a result of climate change.  Our species
> are adaptive and some/a lot of humanity will survive climate disaster.

**Ironically, or perhaps, deliberately, those who made crap-loads of
money from flogging fossil fuels are likely to survive better than those
who have little.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On 10/12/2023 9:33 am, Rod Speed wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 08:59:29 +1100, Trevor Wilson
> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 10/12/2023 7:18 am, Rod Speed wrote:
>>> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote
>>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote
>>>>>>> Peter Jason wrote
>>>>>>>> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote
>>>
>>>>>>>>> **Shoot the fucking lot of them and let the world move on and
>>>>>>>>> away from fossil fuels.
>>>>>>>>>  Arrhenius proved AGW theory back in 1899 and those idiots are
>>>>>>>>> still arguing about it. The planet is warming and it is due to
>>>>>>>>> excessive CO2 emissions.
>>>>>>>>>  FACT.
>>>>>>>>  RUBBISH..!
>>>>>>>  **Nope. Fact, you fucking moron.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Any warming is due to.....
>>>>>>>>  Heat seeping up from the Earth's interior
>>>>>>>  **That's been happening for BILLIONS of years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> in cycles
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You need to explain
>>>>>>> why the temperature of the planet is rising rapidly, since we began
>>>>>>> burning fossil fuels.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I heard this theory about 20 years ago .....The Earth cycles
>>>>>> hotter then colder .... been that way for yonks .... but, since
>>>>>> about the time of The Industrial Revolution this 'hotter' is
>>>>>> heading Hotter and Hotter.
>>>
>>>>>  That last is just plain wrong.
>>>
>>>>>> Sure, some of it is natural (which we can't effect) but most of it
>>>>>> is Man-made ....
>>>
>>>>>  That hasnt been established.
>>>
>>>>>> which *WE* *MUST* *REDUCE* to try to reduce the impact on our
>>>>>> children and out children's children!
>>>
>>>>>  And neither has that. It is very far from clear that
>>>>> even if things are getting a little warmer by say a
>>>>> degree or two, that that is even a bad thing.
>>>
>>>>>> https://englishfinders.com/essay-on-climate-change/
>>>
>>>>>> Quote
>>>>>> Human Activities and Responsibility
>>>
>>>>>> The vast body of scientific evidence indicates that human
>>>>>> activity is  the dominant cause of recent climate change,
>
>>>>>  That's a lie.
>
>>>> Really?
>
>>>  Fraid so.
>
>>>> OK, Roddles, present YOUR peer-reviewed paper that shows
>>>> every  climate scientist, since Arrhenius to be wrong.
>
>>>  Every climate scientist since Arrhenius has never said
>>> anything even remotely like what I said was wrong.
>
>> Every climate scientist agrees with Arrhenius' theory.
>
> Bullshit.

**Name those who do not. Don't forget: CLIMATE SCIENTISTS.

>
>>>  Its those who make that claim that need to substantiate that claim.
>
>> Arrhenius substantiated his theory back in 1899.
>
> He CLAIMED that theory, that's not substantiation.

**Do you even know what a scientific theory entails? Like Einstein's
various theories. They were robust enough to develop nuclear weapons
and, later, cell 'phones and GPS. Still theories though. A scientific
theory is a VERY robust thing. It means that much
experimental/mathematical proof has already been demonstrated to the
satisfaction of the scientific community.

>
> Have fun explaining why we have seen a very dramatic
> increase in atmospheric CO2 levels, but have seen
> sweet fuck all change in world temperatures.

**Huh? What planet are you living on?

>
> Arrhenius' theory is a dud.

**Then YOU need to present your peer-reviewed proof that he was wrong.
Many have tried. All have failed. I have great confidence that you will
also fail miserably.

>
>>>> I will remind you that NOT ONCE in the past 120+ yearshas anyone
>>>> proven  Arrhenius' theory to be incorrect.
>
>>>  Arrhenius' theory never said anything
>>> even  remotely like what I said was wrong.
>
>> You claimed that Arrhenius' theory was a "lie".
>
> Every can see I did nothing of the sort. I actually said that the
> claim that the vast body of scientific evidence indicates that
> human activity is  the dominant cause of recent climate change,

**Which is precisely what Arrhenius said. You claimed that Arrhenius lied.

>
>>>> If you think you can, then do so.Otherwise, shut the fuck up
>
>>>  Go and fuck yourself, again.
>
>> I note your inability to prove Arrhenius wrong.
>
> I just proved that his theory is a dud given that the undoubted
> VAST increase in atmospheric CO2 levels has produced sweet
> fuck all change in world temperatures, 1-2 degrees at most.

**Those figures align with Arrhenius' theory perfectly.

>
> Some greenhouse effect.
>
>>>>>> even if natural forces  contribute to climate variability.
>
>>>>> There is no if about it. The ice ages
>>>>> were  clearly not caused by  humans.
>
>>>> Oviously. However, the present warming
>>>> trend clearly IS being caused  by humans.
>
>>>  Easy to claim. Pity that the greater
>>> warming seen during the medieval
>>> warm period can't have been.
>
>> Points:
>
> Nope, just more of your mindless bullshit.
>
>> * The Medieval Warming period was not a planet-wide event.
>
> Irrelevant, what minimal climate change we
> have seen is not a world wide event either.

**Yes, it is.

>
> And we do know that great swathes of the planet
> did have immense forests at one time and no longer
> did, long before there were ever any humans at all.

**Your point being?

>
>> * We don't know precisely what caused the warming.
>
> Irrelevant, we do know that it can't have been due to human activity.

**Which makes it irrelevant, unless we know what did cause it. Which we
don't.

>
>> It may have been  increased Solar flux, or some other factor.
>
> And that means in can't have been due to human activity.

**So?

>
>> * We KNOW that the planet is warming, right now.
>
> By sweet fuck all. Nothing even remotely like the change in atmospheric
> CO2 levels.

**The warming aligns perfectly with Arrhenius' theory.

>
>> * We KNOW that the warming is due toincreased CO2 and other GHG
>> emissions.
>
> No we do not.

**Yeah, we do. If you think it isn't, then present your peer-reviewed
data to prove otherwise.

>
>> * We KNOW that, despite the last couple of decadesof reduced Solar
>> flux, that the planet is still warming.
>
> By sweet fuck all. Nothing even remotely like the change in atmospheric
> CO2 levels.

**The warming aligns perfectly with Arrhenius' theory.

>
>> * We KNOW that it is highly likely that the Sun will resume it's
>> normal level of activity. We do not know when. It may be in 500 years,
>> or it may be the next cycle. Either way, WHEN the Sun resumes it's
>> normal level of activity, then the warming trend will accelerate.
>
> We don't know that and we don't know whether we will
> see another ice age or even another little ice age either.

**Just a reminder Roddles: One, very important, factor has preceded all
previous ice ages - Temperatures FELL.

Right now, temperatures are rising. As CO2 and methane levels increase,
we will see further temperature rise. With that temperature rise, we
will see more methane release and more CO2 release from the oceans.
Temperatures will rise still further. No ice age is possible with rising
temperatures. That is very basic science.

>
>>>> Arrhenius presented that theory more than 120 years ago
>
>>>  And could never explain why the medieval warm period wasnt.
>
>> Sure. Arrhenius wasn't alive back then. He did, however,prove that
>> increased CO2 emissions will lead to warming.
>
> But the reality is that a very dramatic increase in atmospheric
> CO2 levels produced sweet fuck all in the way of warming,
> nothing even remotely like his stupid hysterical claim that
> that is certain to produce the extinction of the human race.
>

On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 05:02:28 +1100, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

>Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Ozix <ozix@xizo.am> wrote
>>>> Petzl wrote
>
>>>>> Obama/Biden enforced the fraud "Global Warming" Scam
>>>>> See part 1 of BBC 2013 "Yes Prime Minster" that was mystically
>>>>> cancelled (Obama didn't like the actual truth being known)
>>>>> https://vimeo.com/124391891
>>>>>>
>>>>> then look for part 2 for how money is made from it!
>>>>> https://vimeo.com/231081036
>>>
>>>> Nah, just need to look at the average ocean temperature. 2022 wasabove
>>>> the normal band of fluctuations, and 2023 it has really taken off.
>
>>> Bullshit.
>
>> Sometimes go to Fort Denison (pinchgut), on Sydney Harbour, the tide
>> has been taken their since settlement 1788, been within, ins and outs
>> since King George III, not changed, the mad media will lie and say it
>> has! Computer models will say Polar Bears are vanishing, those that
>> count them say there are more now than 40 years ago.
>
>> CO2 if anything has come down,
>
>No it has not.
>
No?
Olsen hypothesized that even with extremely high atmospheric CO2
levels of 6,000 ppm that were recorded during the Age of Dinosaurs and
the subsequent global heating, humans could potentially survive —
thanks to technological advancements, rather than evolution.
>
>> Air temperatures are also within, ins and outs or no change.
>
The Black List of Climate Sceptics
<https://saltbushclub.com/2019/08/18/black-list-of-climate-sceptics/
or https://t.ly/Qzf2D
People with the temerity to correct the record on climate change must
be silenced.
That’s the outrageous point of a new study published in the journal
Nature Communication.
“The time has arrived for professional journalists and editors to
ameliorate the disproportionate attention given to (climate change
contrarians) by focusing instead on career experts and relevant calls
to action,” the authors said.>
--
Petzl
There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true;
the other is to refuse to believe what is true.
- Soren Kierkegaard

Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote
> Fran wrote
>> Daniel65 wrote
>>> Trevor Wilson wrote
>>>> Ozix wrote
>>>>> Petzl wrote

>>>>>> Obama/Biden enforced the fraud "Global Warming" Scam
>>>>>> See part 1 of BBC 2013 "Yes Prime Minster" that was mystically
>>>>>> cancelled (Obama didn't like the actual truth being known)
>>>>>> https://vimeo.com/124391891
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> then look for part 2 for how money is made from it!
>>>>>> https://vimeo.com/231081036
>>>>>
>>>>> Nah, just need to look at the average ocean temperature. 2022 was
>>>>> above the normal band of fluctuations, and 2023 it has really taken
>>>>> off. The alt.right nutters blame this on the banning of dirty fuel
>>>>> oil in ships, so less smut in the upper atmosphere. It doesn't
>>>>> matter anymore, we are past the tipping point.
>>>>
>>>> **Sadly, I think you may be correct. We may well be fucked. The
>>>> fossil fuel shits have made lots of money, so they're happy.
>>>>
>>> .... but what good is having 'made lots of money' if you're dead!!

>> Mankind won't be wiped out as a result of climate change.

There is no evidence that mankind will even be worse off due to climate
change.

>> Our species are adaptive

And we have proven that we can do fine ANYWHERE.

>> and some/a lot of humanity will survive climate disaster.

And may well be actually better off than we are now with many
places easier to live in and to grow crops in than they are now.

> Ironically, or perhaps, deliberately,

Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something...

> those who made crap-loads of money from flogging fossil fuels are likely
> to survive better than those who have little.

Ditto.

Petz, just misused the newsgroup as if it was his mental toilet

> Olsen hypothesized that even with extremely high atmospheric CO2
> levels of 6,000 ppm that were recorded during the Age of Dinosaurs and
> the subsequent global heating, humans could potentially survive —
> thanks to technological advancements, rather than evolution.

Key word: "hypothesized"
Thus not even a functional theorem, eh Petz dear!

Given the planets current population size, given that major population
centres and industries exist on the vulnerable locations on the
continents, given the increasing frequency of destructive weather events
(severe droughts, floods, extreme high temperatures, desertification of
previously productive land) and increasingly serious fresh water
scarcity in some areas technology will not likely to be able to save the
current level of inter dependent highly integrated industrial
civilisation o its own if climate change progresses as it is now.

Yes, humans will not necessarily go extinct but millions will be
displaced and without adequate food and water. And all that because
greedy bastard industrial barons can't keep a check on their own greed.
Sadly myriads of brain dead morons such as yourself support their
criminally negligent behavior and sociopathy. Rest assured that when all
goes down the gurgler for the bulk of us (as it certainly will) these
billionaire creeps you blindly support will still continue to live out
their days in walled off high security compounds well stocked with all
sorts of luxuries watching us drop dead on the outside without any
remorse.
Welcome to the dystopia you and ilk could have prevented.

>>> Air temperatures are also within, ins and outs or no change.
>>
> The Black List of Climate Sceptics ...

Why not just publish a list of insane asylum inmates...hardly makes a
difference. :-P

And of course, why not publish an accurate list of which oil
billionaires and corporate entities are pushing this climate science
denialist nonsense and with how much money and political influence?

NOTE:
Your idiotic extremist and/or Xtian fundy hate propaganda and high
octane Goon-bag fumes induced fantasy sig (that quite often contains
uncredited, therefore clearly plagiarised material pinched from
countless alt-right sources) was flushed down the gurgler, as always,
without reading!

--
The ever present and ever vigilant newsgroup devil at your service.

Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>> Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote
>>>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote
>>>>>>>> Peter Jason wrote
>>>>>>>>> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote

>>>>>>>>>> **Shoot the fucking lot of them and let the world move on and
>>>>>>>>>> away from fossil fuels.
>>>>>>>>>> Arrhenius proved AGW theory back in 1899 and those idiots are
>>>>>>>>>> still arguing about it. The planet is warming and it is due to
>>>>>>>>>> excessive CO2 emissions.
>>>>>>>>>> FACT.
>>>>>>>>> RUBBISH..!
>>>>>>>> **Nope. Fact, you fucking moron.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Any warming is due to.....
>>>>>>>>> Heat seeping up from the Earth's interior
>>>>>>>> **That's been happening for BILLIONS of years.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> in cycles
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You need to explain
>>>>>>>> why the temperature of the planet is rising rapidly, since we
>>>>>>>> began
>>>>>>>> burning fossil fuels.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I heard this theory about 20 years ago .....The Earth cycles
>>>>>>> hotter then colder .... been that way for yonks .... but, since
>>>>>>> about the time of The Industrial Revolution this 'hotter' is
>>>>>>> heading Hotter and Hotter.
>>>>
>>>>>> That last is just plain wrong.
>>>>
>>>>>>> Sure, some of it is natural (which we can't effect) but most of it
>>>>>>> is Man-made ....
>>>>
>>>>>> That hasnt been established.
>>>>
>>>>>>> which *WE* *MUST* *REDUCE* to try to reduce the impact on our
>>>>>>> children and out children's children!
>>>>
>>>>>> And neither has that. It is very far from clear that
>>>>>> even if things are getting a little warmer by say a
>>>>>> degree or two, that that is even a bad thing.
>>>>
>>>>>>> https://englishfinders.com/essay-on-climate-change/
>>>>
>>>>>>> Quote
>>>>>>> Human Activities and Responsibility
>>>>
>>>>>>> The vast body of scientific evidence indicates that human
>>>>>>> activity is the dominant cause of recent climate change,
>>
>>>>>> That's a lie.
>>
>>>>> Really?
>>
>>>> Fraid so.
>>
>>>>> OK, Roddles, present YOUR peer-reviewed paper that shows
>>>>> every climate scientist, since Arrhenius to be wrong.
>>
>>>> Every climate scientist since Arrhenius has never said
>>>> anything even remotely like what I said was wrong.

>>> Every climate scientist agrees with Arrhenius' theory.

>> Bullshit.

> Name those who do not.

Plenty don't buy the line that the greenhouse
effect ia the reason for the minimal warming
we have actually seen, given the immense
change in atmospheric CO2 levels that we
have seen since the industrial revolution.

>>>> Its those who make that claim that need to substantiate that claim..

>>> Arrhenius substantiated his theory back in 1899.

>> He CLAIMED that theory, that's not substantiation.

> Do you even know what a scientific theory entails?

Corse I do given my scientific qualifications, which you have none of.

> Like Einstein's various theories.

They were NEVER SUBSTANTIATED by him at the time he proposed them.

> They were robust enough to develop nuclear weapons

Nukes were not developed as a result of Einstein's theorys.

> and, later, cell 'phones and GPS.

Ditto.

> Still theories though.

Nope, proven fact, particularly with the one that
involved the theory that time changes with the
speed of movement of the device, proven when
we got satellites to move so fast and saw the time
on the clocks in them change at those speeds.

> A scientific theory is a VERY robust thing.

That is pig ignorant bullshit too. The laws of physics
had to be refined over time when we realised that it
was more complicated than Newton realised when
we were able to move things much faster.

And we now know that Arrhenius' theory while correct, can
not explain the very minimal warming we have actually seen
at the time of an immense change in atmospheric CO2 levels.

> It means that much experimental/mathematical proof

That never happened with Arrhenius' theory and warming.

> has already been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the scientific
> community.

You don't have a fucking clue about how science actually works.

>> Have fun explaining why we have seen a very dramatic
>> increase in atmospheric CO2 levels, but have seen
>> sweet fuck all change in world temperatures.

> Huh? What planet are you living on?

You never could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag.

>> Arrhenius' theory is a dud.

> Then YOU need to present your peer-reviewed proof that he was wrong.

Don't need any peer reviewed proof that while there
has been an immense change in atmospheric CO2
levels but only a very minimal amount of warming.

>>>>> I will remind you that NOT ONCE in the past 120+ yearshas anyone
>>>>> proven Arrhenius' theory to be incorrect.

>>>> Arrhenius' theory never said anything
>>>> even remotely like what I said was wrong.

>>> You claimed that Arrhenius' theory was a "lie".

>> Everyone can see I did nothing of the sort. I actually said thatthe
>> claim that the vast body of scientific evidence indicates that
>> human activity is the dominant cause of recent climate change,

> Which is precisely what Arrhenius said.

That isnt his THEORY. His theory is that atmospheric CO2
and other gases like methane produce a greenhouse effect.

> You claimed that Arrhenius lied.

Everyone can see I did nothing of the sort. I actually said that
the claim that the vast body of scientific evidence indicates that
human activity is the dominant cause of recent climate change,

>>>>> If you think you can, then do so.Otherwise, shut the fuck up

>>>> Go and fuck yourself, again.

>>> I note your inability to prove Arrhenius wrong.

>> I just proved that his theory is a dud given that the undoubted
>> VAST increase in atmospheric CO2 levels has produced sweet
>> fuck all change in world temperatures, 1-2 degrees at most.

> Those figures align with Arrhenius' theory perfectly.

Even sillier than you usually manage given the
VAST change in atmospheric CO2 levels and
sweet fuck all warming of 1-2 degrees at most.

Nothing even remotely like the extinction of
humanity as that fool hysterically proclaimed.

Even more comprehensively wrong than that other fool Malthus.

>> Some greenhouse effect.

>>>>>>> even if natural forces contribute to climate variability.

>>>>>> There is no if about it. The ice ages
>>>>>> were clearly not caused by humans.

>>>>> Oviously. However, the present warming
>>>>> trend clearly IS being caused by humans.

>>>> Easy to claim. Pity that the greater
>>>> warming seen during the medieval
>>>> warm period can't have been.

>>> Points:

>> Nope, just more of your mindless bullshit.

>>> * The Medieval Warming period was not a planet-wide event.

>> Irrelevant, what minimal climate change we
>> have seen is not a world wide event either.

> Yes, it is.

Prove it.

>> And we do know that great swathes of the planet
>> did have immense forests at one time and no longer
>> did, long before there were ever any humans at all.

> Your point being?

That that wasn't a local event, you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist.

>>> * We don't know precisely what caused the warming.

>> Irrelevant, we do know that it can't have been due to human activity..

Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Ozix <ozix@xizo.am> wrote
>>>>> Petzl wrote

>>>>>> Obama/Biden enforced the fraud "Global Warming" Scam
>>>>>> See part 1 of BBC 2013 "Yes Prime Minster" that was mystically
>>>>>> cancelled (Obama didn't like the actual truth being known)
>>>>>> https://vimeo.com/124391891
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> then look for part 2 for how money is made from it!
>>>>>> https://vimeo.com/231081036
>>>>
>>>>> Nah, just need to look at the average ocean temperature. 2022
>>>>> wasabove
>>>>> the normal band of fluctuations, and 2023 it has really taken off.
>>
>>>> Bullshit.
>>
>>> Sometimes go to Fort Denison (pinchgut), on Sydney Harbour, the tide
>>> has been taken their since settlement 1788, been within, ins and outs
>>> since King George III, not changed, the mad media will lie and say it
>>> has! Computer models will say Polar Bears are vanishing, those that
>>> count them say there are more now than 40 years ago.

>>> CO2 if anything has come down,

>> No it has not.

> No?

Nope.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mauna_Loa_CO2_monthly_mean_concentration.svg

> Olsen hypothesized that even with extremely high atmospheric CO2
> levels of 6,000 ppm that were recorded during the Age of Dinosaursand
> the subsequent global heating, humans could potentially survive —
> thanks to technological advancements, rather than evolution.

Irrelevant to your ignorant claim.

>>> Air temperatures are also within, ins and outs or no change.

On 10/12/2023 8:31 am, Ördög wrote:
> Petz is blasting bullshit with gale force GoonCon4 brainfarting
>
> /Autosnip all inputs of mentally deranged home grown and septic trash
> malicious wankers residing in my killfile/
>
>
>> Trevor Wilson
>>>> Trevor Wilson
>>>>> **Shoot the fucking lot of them and let the world move on and away
>>>>> from
>>>>> fossil fuels.
>
> Violence is never a solution.

**You know, I have always held that opinion. However, we now face the
same intractable arseholes that have been spreading misinformation for
decades, are still doing it. Tony fucking Abbott was recently in the UK
sprouting the same bullshit he was sprouting 20 years ago. Gina has
never done otherwise. OPEC wants to water down any reduction in fossil
fuel burning. And so on.

Frankly, I've had a gutful of the lot of them. Violence in the ONLY
answer. They will not listen to common-sense, reason or science. The
barrel of a gun is all they will understand.

> However removing these despicable creeps from any access to media
> outlets/social media and than forcing them to perform compulsory lengthy
> community service as a penalty serves society much better.

**Never happen.

>
>>> **Nope. Fact, you fucking moron.
>
> The lowlife loon you are responding to is a raving mad, waste of space
> and good oxygen, brain dead hard right wanker. You won't be able to talk
> good sense into him.

**Indeed.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 16:30:04 +1100, Trevor Wilson
<trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> On 10/12/2023 8:31 am, Ördög wrote:
>> Petz is blasting bullshit with gale force GoonCon4 brainfarting
>> /Autosnip all inputs of mentally deranged home grown and septic trash
>> malicious wankers residing in my killfile/
>>
>>> Trevor Wilson
>>>>> Trevor Wilson
>>>>>> **Shoot the fucking lot of them and let the world move on and away
>>>>>> from
>>>>>> fossil fuels.

>> Violence is never a solution.

> You know, I have always held that opinion. However, we now face the same
> intractable arseholes that have been spreading misinformation for
> decades, are still doing it.

Violence won't change anything.

> Tony fucking Abbott was recently in the UK sprouting

Its SPOUTING, not SPROUTING, only plants sprout.

> the same bullshit he was sprouting 20 years ago.

You lot in spades.

> Gina has never done otherwise. OPEC wants to water down any reduction in
> fossil fuel burning. And so on.

> Frankly, I've had a gutful of the lot of them.

We've always had a gutful of you lot.

> Violence in the ONLY answer.

Violence is NO answer.

> They will not listen to common-sense, reason or science.

Violence won't change anything.

> The barrel of a gun is all they will understand.

Then it will be off to jail for you and you will be on the receiving end
of violence yourself.

On 10/12/2023 9:40 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 10/12/2023 9:09 am, Fran wrote:
>> On 9/12/2023 8:41 pm, Daniel65 wrote:
>>> Trevor Wilson wrote on 9/12/23 2:45 pm:
>>>> On 9/12/2023 2:38 pm, Ozix wrote:
>>>>> Petzl wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Obama/Biden enforced the fraud "Global Warming" Scam
>>>>>> See part 1 of BBC 2013 "Yes Prime Minster" that was mystically
>>>>>> cancelled (Obama didn't like the actual truth being known)
>>>>>> https://vimeo.com/124391891
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> then look for part 2 for how money is made from it!
>>>>>> https://vimeo.com/231081036
>>>>>
>>>>> Nah, just need to look at the average ocean temperature. 2022 was
>>>>> above the normal band of fluctuations, and 2023 it has really taken
>>>>> off. The alt.right nutters blame this on the banning of dirty fuel
>>>>> oil in ships, so less smut in the upper atmosphere. It doesn't
>>>>> matter anymore, we are past the tipping point.
>>>>
>>>> **Sadly, I think you may be correct. We may well be fucked. The
>>>> fossil fuel shits have made lots of money, so they're happy.
>>>>
>>> .... but what good is having 'made lots of money' if you're dead!!
>>
>>
>> Mankind won't be wiped out as a result of climate change.  Our species
>> are adaptive and some/a lot of humanity will survive climate disaster.
>
> **Ironically, or perhaps, deliberately, those who made crap-loads of
> money from flogging fossil fuels are likely to survive better than those
> who have little.

Indeed, I think that is quite right, but I think that same outcome would
apply across board regardless of how the money was obtained.

Fran wrote on 10/12/23 9:01 am:
> On 10/12/2023 5:41 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 9/12/2023 8:29 pm, Daniel65 wrote:
>>> Trevor Wilson wrote on 9/12/23 10:21 am:
>>>> On 9/12/2023 9:51 am, Peter Jason wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 09:43:30 +1100, Trevor Wilson
>>>>> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> **Shoot the fucking lot of them and let the world move on
>>>>>> and away from fossil fuels.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Arrhenius proved AGW theory back in 1899 and those idiots
>>>>>> are still arguing about it. The planet is warming and it is
>>>>>> due to excessive CO2 emissions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FACT.
>>>>>
>>>>> RUBBISH..!
>>>>
>>>> **Nope. Fact, you fucking moron.
>>>>
>>>>> Any warming is due to.....
>>>>>
>>>>> Heat seeping up from the Earth's interior
>>>>
>>>> **That's been happening for BILLIONS of years.
>>>
>>> in cycles
>>>
>>>> You need to explain why the temperature of the planet is rising
>>>> rapidly, since we began burning fossil fuels.
>>>
>>> I heard this theory about 20 years ago .....The Earth cycles
>>> hotter then colder .... been that way for yonks
>>
>>
>> **Cite.
>
>
> FFS Trevor! We've ALL heard about those cycles as would you have
> done!
>
> I assume that a cite from the NAA should be good enough for
> you???????:
> https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/hasnt-earth-warmed-and-cooled-naturally-throughout-history
>
>
> "Yes. Earth has experienced cold periods (informally referred to as
> “ice ages,” or "glacials") and warm periods (“interglacials”) on
> roughly 100,000-year cycles for at least the last 1 million years."
>
> Read the rest of what Daniel wrote before trying to shoot the
> messenger. I also can't see a problem with the rest of Daniel's post
> about human induced climate change.

Thank you for your support, Fran.

One wonders, when what I posted was in support of what Trevor was
posting, why Trevor would want me to provide a Cite for what was
supporting his claim!! Surely he already has his own Cites!!
--
Daniel

On 10/12/2023 7:24 pm, Daniel65 wrote:
> Fran wrote on 10/12/23 9:01 am:
>> On 10/12/2023 5:41 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 9/12/2023 8:29 pm, Daniel65 wrote:
>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote on 9/12/23 10:21 am:
>>>>> On 9/12/2023 9:51 am, Peter Jason wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 09:43:30 +1100, Trevor Wilson
>>>>>> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> **Shoot the fucking lot of them and let the world move on
>>>>>>> and away from fossil fuels.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Arrhenius proved AGW theory back in 1899 and those idiots
>>>>>>> are still arguing about it. The planet is warming and it is
>>>>>>> due to excessive CO2 emissions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> FACT.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> RUBBISH..!
>>>>>
>>>>> **Nope. Fact, you fucking moron.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Any warming is due to.....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Heat seeping up from the Earth's interior
>>>>>
>>>>> **That's been happening for BILLIONS of years.
>>>>
>>>> in cycles
>>>>
>>>>> You need to explain why the temperature of the planet is rising
>>>>> rapidly, since we began burning fossil fuels.
>>>>
>>>> I heard this theory about 20 years ago .....The Earth cycles
>>>> hotter then colder .... been that way for yonks
>>>
>>>
>>> **Cite.
>>
>>
>> FFS Trevor! We've ALL heard about those cycles as would you have
>> done!
>>
>> I assume that a cite from the NAA should be good enough for
>> you???????:
>> https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/hasnt-earth-warmed-and-cooled-naturally-throughout-history
>>
>>
>> "Yes. Earth has experienced cold periods (informally referred to as
>> “ice ages,” or "glacials") and warm periods (“interglacials”) on
>> roughly 100,000-year cycles for at least the last 1 million years."
>>
>> Read the rest of what Daniel wrote before trying to shoot the
>> messenger. I also can't see a problem with the rest of Daniel's post
>> about human induced climate change.
>
> Thank you for your support, Fran.
>
> One wonders, when what I posted was in support of what Trevor was
> posting, why Trevor would want me to provide a Cite for what was
> supporting his claim!! Surely he already has his own Cites!!

**My apologies. I assumed you were referring to Peter Jason's claim
about heat seeping up from the Earth's interior.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 10:21:30 +1100, Trevor Wilson
<trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

>On 9/12/2023 9:51 am, Peter Jason wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 09:43:30 +1100, Trevor Wilson
>> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> **Shoot the fucking lot of them and let the world move on and away from
>>> fossil fuels.
>>>
>>> Arrhenius proved AGW theory back in 1899 and those idiots are still
>>> arguing about it. The planet is warming and it is due to excessive CO2
>>> emissions.
>>>
>>> FACT.
>>
>> RUBBISH..!
>
>**Nope. Fact, you fucking moron.
>
>>
>> Any warming is due to.....
>>
>> Heat seeping up from the Earth's interior
>
>**That's been happening for BILLIONS of years. You need to explain why
>the temperature of the planet is rising rapidly, since we began burning
>fossil fuels.
>
>>
>> Perturbutations in the Earths orbit around the sun.
>
>**Same as above. You left out the variations in Solar flux. Solar flux
>has varied many times over the centuries. The catch is this:
>
>Solar flux is quite low and has been for a couple of decades, yet the
>planet is still warming.
>
>>
>> Hot air expended by the Green, Hippy, Left-wingers, and other
>> lay-abouts, such as the swarms of university graduates seeking
>> employment.
>>
>
>**If you think you have an alternate theory to the one posed by
>Arrhenius in 1899, then present it.
>
>Otherwise, shut the fuck up.
>
>I really want to punch out a climate change denier today. It seems that
>all the denying morons can understand is violence. They certainly ignore
>the science.
>

I just suspect you're one of those hairy hippies always bitching about
something.
If hominids are warming the planet, then we should have fewer of them.
What about a world-wide sterilization program, with you leading the
way?
On the news last night a manic woman was venting away over melting
Antarctic icebergs, and how the seas were gonna drown us all! All
those pretty Pacific islands are gonna disappear, (not a bad thing
because taxpayers and tourists are propping them up), and how the
wicked CO2 is gonna dissolve in the ocean turning it acidic and how
the shells and corals are gonna fizzzz away, so we're gonna have salty
soda water with iceberg ice cubes, and we're all going to hell.
Gee!
I feel really guilty opening all those beer cans over the weekend
releasing that devil-gas CO2. (I gave 'em a good shake!!!)

On 11/12/2023 7:14 am, Peter Jason wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 10:21:30 +1100, Trevor Wilson
> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 9/12/2023 9:51 am, Peter Jason wrote:
>>> On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 09:43:30 +1100, Trevor Wilson
>>> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>> **Shoot the fucking lot of them and let the world move on and away from
>>>> fossil fuels.
>>>>
>>>> Arrhenius proved AGW theory back in 1899 and those idiots are still
>>>> arguing about it. The planet is warming and it is due to excessive CO2
>>>> emissions.
>>>>
>>>> FACT.
>>>
>>> RUBBISH..!
>>
>> **Nope. Fact, you fucking moron.
>>
>>>
>>> Any warming is due to.....
>>>
>>> Heat seeping up from the Earth's interior
>>
>> **That's been happening for BILLIONS of years. You need to explain why
>> the temperature of the planet is rising rapidly, since we began burning
>> fossil fuels.
>>
>>>
>>> Perturbutations in the Earths orbit around the sun.
>>
>> **Same as above. You left out the variations in Solar flux. Solar flux
>> has varied many times over the centuries. The catch is this:
>>
>> Solar flux is quite low and has been for a couple of decades, yet the
>> planet is still warming.
>>
>>>
>>> Hot air expended by the Green, Hippy, Left-wingers, and other
>>> lay-abouts, such as the swarms of university graduates seeking
>>> employment.
>>>
>>
>> **If you think you have an alternate theory to the one posed by
>> Arrhenius in 1899, then present it.
>>
>> Otherwise, shut the fuck up.
>>
>> I really want to punch out a climate change denier today. It seems that
>> all the denying morons can understand is violence. They certainly ignore
>> the science.
>>
>
> I just suspect you're one of those hairy hippies always bitching about
> something.

**Suspect what you wish. You have still failed to produce your
hypothesis that might challenge Arrhenius' theory.

Over to you: Present your hypothesis for peer-review.

> If hominids are warming the planet, then we should have fewer of them.

**OR we could just kill all the deniers. Problem solved.

> What about a world-wide sterilization program, with you leading the
> way?

**No need. I took that step back in the 1970s. There were far too many
humans on the planet way back then.

> On the news last night a manic woman was venting away over melting
> Antarctic icebergs, and how the seas were gonna drown us all!

**Well, that won't necessarily happen, however, VERY large chunks of
VERY expensive real estate are likely to be destroyed. Eventually. When
the Greenland ice melts, we will witness a 6 Metre sea level rise.
That's London, NYC, parts of Sydney a goodly chunk of Florida,
California and a bunch of other places that will be fucked. When
Antarctica melts, that will add another 70 (SEVENTY) Metres of sea level
rise. That will seriously fuck up a lot of places. Of course, such an
event will take place over centuries, but, nonetheless, the damage will
be very expensive. People will need to re-locate and the value of that
affected real estate will plummet long before it is submerged.

All
> those pretty Pacific islands are gonna disappear, (not a bad thing
> because taxpayers and tourists are propping them up),

**You opinion is duly noted. I take it that you don't care about the
people who will be displaced or die in the process? You think boat
people are a problem now? What happens when hundreds of millions start
to arrive?

and how the
> wicked CO2 is gonna dissolve in the ocean turning it acidic and how
> the shells and corals are gonna fizzzz away, so we're gonna have salty
> soda water with iceberg ice cubes, and we're all going to hell.

**Points:

* There is no Hell.
* The food chain in the oceans is already starting to break down.
Millions will starve.

> Gee!
> I feel really guilty opening all those beer cans over the weekend
> releasing that devil-gas CO2. (I gave 'em a good shake!!!)

**Beer is not the major problem.

Once more: You claim that Arrhenius was wrong. Present your
peer-reviewed hypothesis to validate your claim.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com