On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 2:36:24 PM UTC+10, AlleyCat wrote:
> And The Lies Just Keep Onnnn Coming - "First Ever" Tropical Storm Watch For
...
"Lies" is code for Hillbilly Alleycat din unnerstand sommin he read or forgot
to multiply by 10 or read about isotopes sometime.
--
On 3/6/2016 5:24 PM, AlleyCat wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Mar 2016 15:55:21 -0600, Unum says...
>>> Hmmm... why is the ONLY site saying that we're putting 40gts, (39.8gt,
>>> actually), a GOVERNMENT run site?
>>> NO ONE else is saying it's that high... NO ONE. So, again, you are lying,
>>> because THEY are lying.
>> ratboy snipped this one too, which agrees;
>>
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v7/n10/full/ngeo2248.html
>> See chart A on figure 1.
> You mean THIS one:
http://i.imgur.com/HafRCKf.jpg
> The one that has data up to 2013 ONLY, and is ESTIMATING we'll BE at 38gts
> in 2015? LOL Again... THEY'RE ESTIMATES, and WRONG.
> STILL ain't at 40gts. 2016 is FAR from over, and that is a computer model
> of what it MIGHT be, not is.
> BTW... could they have made that graph ANY smaller? LOL
> Why isn't anyone ELSE using the "Global Carbon Project international
> team", to cite the output?... NO ONE.
> Of COURSE they're going to lie... THAT'S THEIR JOB, you fucking moron.
> LOL... eUnuch Unum is using an entity that's PAID (by WHOM, we do not
> know) to monitor carbon output over other entities that DON'T come up with
> 40 gigatonnes.
....
> 2012 9.575GtC
> 2011 9.449GtC
> 2010 9.995Gtc 9.140GtC 0.855 GtC
> 2009 9.567 Gtc 8.700 GtC 0.867 GtC
> 2008 9.666 Gtc 8.740 GtC 0.926 GtC
> 2007 9.472 Gtc 8.532 GtC 0.940 GtC
> 2006 9.355 Gtc 8.363 GtC 0.992 GtC
You didn't see the footnote, dumbass?
*Convert carbon to carbon dioxide (CO2) by multiplying the numbers
above by 3.67.
-- Unum, 09 Mar 2016
["Alleycat" then tries to cover up his confusion of C with CO2 by first claiming that the diff between 38 gt and 40 gt ("39.8gt actually") is huge and therefore indicates "a lie".
When that falls flat his next excuse is that people that don't carefully say
whether they're talking on short tons or long tons are trying to confuse
everyone.
Of course he never heard of gigatonnes because -- you know --
he's a nitwit].