(01-25-2010, 06:56 AM)billy Wrote:  al gore being sued by 30 000 scientists. why hasn't it happened then?

and the other prick who says co2 is basically just water vapour....are we supposed to believe these guys. whater vapour is h2o theres no co2 in fucking water vapour. they say co2 isn't poisonous.

well go in a room and flood it with co2. you'll fuckin die. people dies in rooms that have oxygen. co2 is a heavier gas so it's found lower down. they die in their sleep from wonky heaters that aren't properly vented lmao. shove the exhaust of your car in your window na dtell me it isn't fucking poisonous. once it reaches a certain level it's fucking deadly.


it's what i'd expect off fox though.

Sorry bout that,lol, but your talking about another form of carbon bill but yes if you could fill a room with co2 you could not breath. 380 parts per million...talk about lmfao.
[youtube]oRSOkHU2ZcQ[/youtube]
[youtube]Io-Tb7vTamY[/youtube]
[youtube]kb9aA8JL0VI[/youtube]
[youtube]Rvr6z8neCFk[/youtube]

so...has gore been sued? if not why not?

Actually the process is a long one, the court process I mean. I would suspect that if it makes it to court it will be long after we have moved on from the topic at hand. Just an educated guess mind you.

(01-25-2010, 11:25 AM)Benny2guns Wrote:  Actually the process is a long one, the court process I mean. I would suspect that if it makes it to court it will be long after we have moved on from the topic at hand. Just an educated guess mind you.

i'll take that as a no then
pretty sure if papers to sue had been filed they'd have been plastered all over the news.

another fucking weatherman with delusions of grandeur.
he's not even qualified to make that kind of statement about climate change. he studies weather patterns 5 days old and even then he's not the one who studies the weather. just more fakery from fox trying to get viewers.

the last time i heard of that clip doing th eounds was in july 09
and since then 30, 000 scientists can't file one lwa suite. now thats fucking funny

(01-25-2010, 11:38 AM)billy Wrote:  

(01-25-2010, 11:25 AM)Benny2guns Wrote:  Actually the process is a long one, the court process I mean. I would suspect that if it makes it to court it will be long after we have moved on from the topic at hand. Just an educated guess mind you.

i'll take that as a no the
pretty sure if papers to sue had been filed they'd have been plastered all over the news.

another fucking weatherman with delusions of grandeur.
he's not even qualified to make that kind of statement about climate change. he studies weather patterns 5 days old and even then he's the one who studies the weather. just more fakery from fox trying to get viewers.

the last time i heard of that clip doing th eounds was in july 09
and since then 30, 000 scientists can't file one lwa suite. now thats fucking funny

Well i have not tried as yet to find out bill but maybe you might post a link to support you claims? In the mean time i'll have a look when i get the chance, can't be hard to find.

(01-25-2010, 11:41 AM)Benny2guns Wrote:  

(01-25-2010, 11:38 AM)billy Wrote:  

(01-25-2010, 11:25 AM)Benny2guns Wrote:  Actually the process is a long one, the court process I mean. I would suspect that if it makes it to court it will be long after we have moved on from the topic at hand. Just an educated guess mind you.

i'll take that as a no the
pretty sure if papers to sue had been filed they'd have been plastered all over the news.

another fucking weatherman with delusions of grandeur.
he's not even qualified to make that kind of statement about climate change. he studies weather patterns 5 days old and even then he's the one who studies the weather. just more fakery from fox trying to get viewers.

the last time i heard of that clip doing th eounds was in july 09
and since then 30, 000 scientists can't file one lwa suite. now thats fucking funny

Well i have not tried as yet to find out bill but maybe you might post a link to support you claims? In the mean time i'll have a look when i get the chance, can't be hard to find.

what claims. that hes a weatherman. lmao.

have a read of this;

The American Meteorological Society (http://ametsoc.org) has a great editorial about how it’s members only have basic training in weather
analysis and forecasting. The quote is taken from http://www.ametsoc.org/stationscientist/...torial.pdf

“The expertise of scientists actively researching climate
change is well beyond that of most professional meteorologists,
some of whom may only have basic training in weather
analysis and forecasting. Nonetheless, the public sees media meteorologists as experts. If we “experts” communicate
conflicting information, conveying personal opinions
with no scientific basis, the public can become confused.”

(01-25-2010, 11:49 AM)billy Wrote:  

(01-25-2010, 11:41 AM)Benny2guns Wrote:  

(01-25-2010, 11:38 AM)billy Wrote:  

(01-25-2010, 11:25 AM)Benny2guns Wrote:  Actually the process is a long one, the court process I mean. I would suspect that if it makes it to court it will be long after we have moved on from the topic at hand. Just an educated guess mind you.

i'll take that as a no the
pretty sure if papers to sue had been filed they'd have been plastered all over the news.

another fucking weatherman with delusions of grandeur.
he's not even qualified to make that kind of statement about climate change. he studies weather patterns 5 days old and even then he's the one who studies the weather. just more fakery from fox trying to get viewers.

the last time i heard of that clip doing th eounds was in july 09
and since then 30, 000 scientists can't file one lwa suite. now thats fucking funny

Well i have not tried as yet to find out bill but maybe you might post a link to support you claims? In the mean time i'll have a look when i get the chance, can't be hard to find.

what claims. that hes a weatherman. lmao.

have a read of this;

The American Meteorological Society (http://ametsoc.org) has a great editorial about how it’s members only have basic training in weather
analysis and forecasting. The quote is taken from http://www.ametsoc.org/stationscientist/...torial.pdf

“The expertise of scientists actively researching climate
change is well beyond that of most professional meteorologists,
some of whom may only have basic training in weather
analysis and forecasting. Nonetheless, the public sees media meteorologists as experts. If we “experts” communicate
conflicting information, conveying personal opinions
with no scientific basis, the public can become confused.”

Oh come on bill, he's useing other data , not his own. You are really going a stretch even for me man. Your comments are inline with something fox would do for cring out loud. CO2, we as individuals produce more of it just by exhaling. Thats a fact. Global warming is a farce in the sense that co2 is the cause. You don't need to be a rocket scientest to figure that out. Although the government says that you or I are too stupid to do so and I am guessing that we must be for the most part. I think we all miss the bigger picture, are prevented from connecting the dots for fear of being called nutters. Personally I would rather be a nutter than a sucker.

sorry benny. i can't accomodate you.

i see us affecting climate change. that you don't is your opinion.
post as many links as you want. i see the shit we pump out.
and the difference in climate change over the last 10 or 15 years.
all i see are people trying to make names for themselves. not one of those 30, 000 sued gore or even filed papers. why...because they're all mouth and no substance.

i've said all i need to re climate change. i think we make a difference. i can't convince you of the fact so my part in the discussion ends

good luck following the weather men

[youtube]iLcvCp4DHJw[/youtube]

(01-25-2010, 12:06 PM)billy Wrote:  sorry benny. i can't accomodate you.

i see us affecting climate change. that you don't is your opinion.
post as many links as you want. i see the shit we pump out.
and the difference in climate change over the last 10 or 15 years.
all i see are people trying to make names for themselves. not one of those 30, 000 sued gore or even filed papers. why...because they're all mouth and no substance.

i've said all i need to re climate change. i think we make a difference. i can't convince you of the fact so my part in the discussion ends

good luck following the weather men

Indeed. Humanity pumps TONS and TONS of crap into the air and water everyday..

I have a vague recollection of history.. was there not a river that actually caught fire somewhere in the states about 100 years back because of the toxic pollutants that was being dumped into it?
It was New York or Pittsburgh or Chicago some place. I cant remember.

Sorry fellas but it's a sham to fleece more bucks. Thats my story and it will not change. The Poles will reverse and kill us all long before the global warming scam will.

(01-29-2010, 10:45 AM)Benny2guns Wrote:  Sorry fellas but it's a sham to fleece more bucks. Thats my story and it will not change. The Poles will reverse and kill us all long before the global warming scam will.

Ignorance is bliss...

That works both ways Scrufuss. Sorry for your shortfall, your safe in knowing that I and many others will continue to fight for you against the ternary of the global elite who have trapped your mind into beleiving their media spun nonsense over the co2 issue to further their ultimate goals of total domination over you. Tunnel vission is their ultimate weapon and has worked for hundreds of years. This issue is a means to an end and has nothing what so ever to do with saveing the environment. Yes I am likly to be seen in your minds eye as a crack pot and someone that knows little about what they talk about. It's not your fault. You run in the safty of knowing that you are in the company of the majority and what the elite tells you to be true, You have to beleive it, you have no choice, after all the debate is over, they said so.

OK. U R right. We do not spew any more chemicals into the air that wasnt being spewed by nature herself before we came along.
There is no such thing as toxic waste.
There is no such thing as chemical contamination.
The air is as pure now as it ever was 50,000 years ago.
The water is as pure now as it was from the original Garden of Eden.
The gas exhaust from all factory's and cars just magically goes away.
LA has no need to declare Spare The Air day and that eye-burning hazey cloud that hangs over it is just stubborn fog..
And that river I mentioned was just pure propaganda
It must have been a freak of nature for water to burn, silly me.

Scrufuss...I am not debateing the fact that we pollute, that would be an insane statement and to clarify, I beleive myself sain. I am saying that co2 as the cause is a complete and utter lie. I am saying that the co2 issue is the last hold on the issue and without it as the cause the evedence for impending doom melts as an ice cube in my oven, and with it a very large cash cow created by the very people that created the faulse co2 crysis.

Silly Me

Carbon dioxide
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"CO2" redirects here. For the UK postal district, see CO postcode area.
Carbon dioxide

IUPAC name[hide]Carbon dioxide
other names[hide]Carbonic acid gas; carbonic anhydride; dry ice (solid)
Identifiers
CAS number 124-38-9 Y
PubChem 280
ChemSpider 274
EC number 204-696-9
UN number 1013
Solid (dry ice): 1845
Mixtures with Ethylene oxide: 1952,3300
RTECS number FF6400000
SMILES [show]
O=C=O
InChI [show]
1/CO2/c2-1-3
InChI key CURLTUGMZLYLDI-UHFFFAOYAO
Properties
Molecular formula CO2
Molar mass 44.010 g/mol
Appearance colorless, odorless gas
Density 1.562 g/mL (solid at 1 atm and −78.5 °C)
0.770 g/mL (liquid at 56 atm and 20 °C)
1.977 g/L (gas at 1 atm and 0 °C)
849.6 g/L (supercritical fluid at 150 atm and 30 °C
Melting point -78 °C, 194.7 K, -109 °F (subl.)

Boiling point -57 °C, 216.6 K, -70 °F (at 5.185 bar)

Solubility in water 1.45 g/L at 25 °C, 100 kPa
Acidity (pKa) 6.35, 10.33
Refractive index (nD) 1.1120
Viscosity 0.07 cP at −78 °C
Dipole moment zero
Structure
Molecular shape linear
Related compounds
Other anions Carbon disulfide
Other cations Silicon dioxide
Germanium dioxide
Tin dioxide
Lead dioxide
Related carbon oxides Carbon monoxide
Carbon suboxide
Dicarbon monoxide
Carbon trioxide
Related compounds Carbonic acid
Carbonyl sulfide
Supplementary data page
Structure and
properties n, εr, etc.
Thermodynamic
data Phase behaviour
Solid, liquid, gas
Spectral data UV, IR, NMR, MS
Y (what is this?) (verify)
Except where noted otherwise, data are given for materials in their standard state (at 25 °C, 100 kPa)
Infobox references
Carbon dioxide (chemical formula CO2) is a chemical compound composed of two oxygen atoms covalently bonded to a single carbon atom. It is a gas at standard temperature and pressure and exists in Earth's atmosphere in this state. CO2 is a trace gas being only 0.038% of the atmosphere.

Carbon dioxide is used by plants during photosynthesis to make sugars, which may either be consumed in respiration or used as the raw material to produce other organic compounds needed for plant growth and development. It is produced during respiration by plants, and by all animals, fungi and microorganisms that depend either directly or indirectly on plants for food. It is thus a major component of the carbon cycle. Carbon dioxide is generated as a by-product of the combustion of fossil fuels or the burning of vegetable matter, among other chemical processes. Small amounts of carbon dioxide are emitted from volcanoes and other geothermal processes such as hot springs and geysers and by the dissolution of carbonates in crustal rocks.

As of March 2009[update], carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere is at a concentration of 387 ppm by volume.[1] Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide fluctuate slightly with the change of the seasons, driven primarily by seasonal plant growth in the Northern Hemisphere. Concentrations of carbon dioxide fall during the northern spring and summer as plants consume the gas, and rise during the northern autumn and winter as plants go dormant, die and decay. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas as it transmits visible light but absorbs strongly in the infrared and near-infrared.

Carbon dioxide has no liquid state at pressures below 5.1 atmospheres. At 1 atmosphere (near mean sea level pressure), the gas deposits directly to a solid at temperatures below −78 °C (−108.4 °F; 195.1 K) and the solid sublimes directly to a gas above −78 °C. In its solid state, carbon dioxide is commonly called dry ice.

CO2 is an acidic oxide: an aqueous solution turns litmus from blue to pink. It is the anhydride of carbonic acid, an acid which is unstable and is known to exist only in aqueous solution. In organisms carbonic acid production is catalysed by the enzyme, carbonic anhydrase.

CO2 + H2O ⇌ H2CO3
CO2 is toxic in higher concentrations: 1% (10,000 ppm) will make some people feel drowsy.[2] Concentrations of 7% to 10% cause dizziness, headache, visual and hearing dysfunction, and unconsciousness within a few minutes to an hour.[3]

here ya go, my contribution outside the sewer.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=U44FST89

leaked rcu documents, read them, you will be surprised how fake global warming is.

(02-01-2010, 09:44 PM)Warlord Wrote:  here ya go, my contribution outside the sewer.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=U44FST89

leaked rcu documents, read them, you will be surprised how fake global warming is.

Listen, thanks for the doc's Warlord there are a pile of them. I'll read them later.

You are welcome.