[andyt]

WTF? Precip has nothing to do with it, it's all just water use? Where's that facepalm pic when you need it?

Yes some places are depleting their aquifers. But that doesn't related to the subject of this story, for instance, or why we're on stage 3 water restrictions in Vancouver, or why we're having so many forest fires this year, and so on.

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Well aren't I blessed. Expect me to bring your punch in the teeth post up each and everytime you and Fiddle go on about the left trying to shut you up.

I'm not trying to censor anyone. Not at all. I'd only be facilitating the eating of their meals through a straw.

[bootlegga]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Well aren't I blessed. Expect me to bring your punch in the teeth post up each and everytime you and Fiddle go on about the left trying to shut you up.

I'm not trying to censor anyone. Not at all. I'd only be facilitating the eating of their meals through a straw.

Using violence and intimidation is a form of censorship...just like so many totalitarian states have used throughout history.

Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union didn't get people to shut up by using hugs and kisses, it was the fear of torture, imprisonment and death that did it for them - and here you are employing the very same tactics. So much for your belief of free speech...

It's also somewhat ironic how you often bitch about being bullied as a child yet have zero qualms about bullying others.

And don't bother bringing up what some AGW lunatic said somewhere - unless he said it to your face directly.

That would be the only time you should consider making such a threat, otherwise you're no better than that AGW lunatic.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

bootlegga bootlegga:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Well aren't I blessed. Expect me to bring your punch in the teeth post up each and everytime you and Fiddle go on about the left trying to shut you up.

I'm not trying to censor anyone. Not at all. I'd only be facilitating the eating of their meals through a straw.

Using violence and intimidation is a form of censorship...just like so many totalitarian states have used throughout history.

Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union didn't get people to shut up by using hugs and kisses, it was the fear of torture, imprisonment and death that did it for them - and here you are employing the very same tactics. So much for your belief of free speech...

It's also somewhat ironic how you often bitch about being bullied as a child yet have zero qualms about bullying others.

And don't bother bringing up what some AGW lunatic said somewhere - unless he said it to your face directly.

That would be the only time you should consider making such a threat, otherwise you're no better than that AGW lunatic.

Soooo responding with the same kind of tactic against those who would employ said tactic is totalitarian? How quickly people forget all the dumbasses suggesting the global warming deniers be jailed or executed?
NASA’s James Hansen has called for trials of climate skeptics in 2008 for “high crimes against humanity.” Environmentalist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. lashed out at skeptics in 2007, declaring “This is treason. And we need to start treating them as traitors” In 2009, RFK, Jr. also called coal companies “criminal enterprises” and declared CEO’s ‘should be in jail… for all of eternity.”

In June 2009, former Clinton Administration official Joe Romm defended a comment on his Climate Progress website warning skeptics would be strangled in their beds. “An entire generation will soon be ready to strangle you and your kind while you sleep in your beds,” stated the remarks, which Romm defended by calling them “not a threat, but a prediction.”

In 2006, the eco-magazine Grist called for Nuremberg-Style trials for skeptics. In 2008, Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki called for government leaders skeptical of global warming to be thrown “into jail.” In 2007, The Weather Channel’s climate expert called for withholding certification of skeptical meteorologists.

In 2007, then EPA Chief Vowed to Probe E-mail Threatening to ‘Destroy’ Career of Climate Skeptic and dissenters of warming fears have been called ‘Climate Criminals’ who are committing ‘Terracide’ (killing of Planet Earth) (July 25, 2007) In addition, in May 2009, Climate Depot Was Banned in Louisiana! See: State official sought to ‘shut down’ climate skeptic’s testimony at hearing.

I could go on but the point being, it's wasn't just one nut that Bart mentioned. These kinds of comments have been coming from the pro-AGW side for almost a decade. Which makes your statement,

$1:

Using violence and intimidation is a form of censorship...just like so many totalitarian states have used throughout history

incredibly amusing.
Violence and intimidation for one side: Justifiable. Violence and intimidation from the other side: Well that there is a violation of fundamental freedoms and is downright totalitarian.

[2Cdo]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

I could go on but the point being, it's wasn't just one nut that Bart mentioned. These kinds of comments have been coming from the pro-AGW side for almost a decade. Which makes your statement,

$1:

Using violence and intimidation is a form of censorship...just like so many totalitarian states have used throughout history

incredibly amusing.
Violence and intimidation for one side: Justifiable. Violence and intimidation from the other side: Well that there is a violation of fundamental freedoms and is downright totalitarian.

The political left, as well as the Global Warming/Climate Change crowd, hate when you use their tactics against them.

[Zipperfish]

Well, all that won't chnage the properties of a carbon dioxide molecule.

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Well, all that won't chnage the properties of a carbon dioxide molecule.

You mean CO2 or do you mean that magical molecule that defies the laws of physics by generating more energy than it receives?

[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Well, all that won't chnage the properties of a carbon dioxide molecule.

You mean CO2 or do you mean that magical molecule that defies the laws of physics by generating more energy than it receives?

You have no idea what you are talking about.

[andyt]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Well, all that won't chnage the properties of a carbon dioxide molecule.

You mean CO2 or do you mean that magical molecule that defies the laws of physics by generating more energy than it receives?

You have no idea what you are talking about.

I was just going to jump in and ask Bart to explain this statement he comes up with every so often. How is CO2 generating energy?

Thank God for the greenhouse effect. Without it our planet would have an average temp of -1C. So we seem to have lots of "magical" molecules to thank for earth being livable. The point is that too much of a good thing can also be a bad thing, being the Goldilocks that we are.

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Yes, I do and you've been asked about this before. You've argued with myself and with NF that CO2 can radiate more energy than it takes in from the sun thus my taunt to you has been about the "magickal mystickal molecule".

Do keep in mind I am not talking about any actual science here. I'm talking about the nonsensical fairy tale assertion that CO2 creates energy.

It doesn't.

[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Yes, I do and you've been asked about this before. You've argued with myself and with NF that CO2 can radiate more energy than it takes in from the sun thus my taunt to you has been about the "magickal mystickal molecule".

Do keep in mind I am not talking about any actual science here. I'm talking about the nonsensical fairy tale assertion that CO2 creates energy.

It doesn't.

No I have never said that CO2 can radiate more energy than it takes in from the sun. That would be a violation of conservation of mass-energy. My guess is the physics was over your head and you misunderstood.

[andyt]

It is radiating energy that it takes in from the earth as well (although that energy originally came from the sun), so maybe when you tried to explain that to him he didn't get it.

[Zipperfish]

andyt andyt:

It is radiating energy that it takes in from the earth as well (although that energy originally came from the sun), so maybe when you tried to explain that to him he didn't get it.

yes it's primarily absorbing longwave radiation emitted by the earth. There are not a lot of atmospheric gases that absorb visible radiation (i.e. incoming shortwave radiation from the sun). Clouds do absorb in the visible spectrum, which is why they are visible(though they are not a "gas" but tiny ice particles).

I imagine our eyes evolved to exploit the fact that there is little abosrption of incoming solar energy in that spectrum we call visible light, although that's just speculation on my part.

[ShepherdsDog]

Our eyes peaked while we lived in the oceans....once life moved onto land it was a downward slide.

[Zipperfish]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Our eyes peaked while we lived in the oceans....once life moved onto land it was a downward slide.

I did not know that.