info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Science vs. social media: Why climate change denial still thrives online
0 views
Skip to first unread message
useapen
Jan 21, 2024, 1:16:04 AMJan 21
to
Social media is still not doing enough to stop misinformation denying the
existence and causes of climate change.
That’s the finding of a review of climate-related conversations on social
media platforms by the public interest research organization Advance
Democracy.
Despite company pledges to crack down, falsehoods, hoaxes and conspiracy
theories circulated with few warning labels or links to credible
information in 2023, contributing to a dramatic surge in the number of
posts denying climate change last year, according to the report shared
exclusively with USA TODAY.
Nowhere was that surge more evident than on X, formerly Twitter, where the
number of posts containing terms linked to climate change denial more than
tripled for the second year in a row, Advance Democracy found.
Advance Democracy saw a significant increase in posts that dismiss climate
change as an exaggeration or a hoax on Facebook.
Of the 10 Facebook posts with the most interactions, eight either denied
climate change or promoted conspiracy theories. None included a link to
Facebook’s Climate Science Information Center or a fact check.
TikTok also failed to rein in falsehoods. Even after the short-form video
platform adopted a policy prohibiting climate misinformation last year,
videos that deny or downplay climate change were viewed millions of times
on the app.
Advance Democracy says that in its review only YouTube has improved. Eight
of nine specific climate change denial phrases identified in Advance
Democracy’s 2022 report are now accompanied by scientific information on
climate change on the platform.
“When it comes to misinformation about climate change, YouTube’s systems
work to raise up content from high-quality sources in search results and
recommendations," YouTube said in a statement to USA TODAY, adding that it
strives to "connect viewers to additional context from third parties like
the United Nations."
The other companies - X, Facebook and TikTok - did not comment directly on
the Advance Democracy report.
The stakes have never been higher, according to Michael Mann, a climate
scientist and professor at the University of Pennsylvania.
Climate change is one of the most contentious debates raging on social
media platforms which have emerged as a critical battleground to control
the narrative about climate change – especially for the TikTok generation,
Mann said.
"Social media is a primary means by which young people - those most likely
to see the worst consequences of climate change - get their information
today," he said. "This trend suggests that bad actors have made a
concerted effort to weaponize social media in a way that is especially
targeted toward young people."
For years, climate scientists have pushed social media companies to
identify and remove posts and videos denying climate change, disputing its
causes, or underplaying its effects.
Social media companies say their policies prohibit climate change
misinformation that undermines scientific consensus - such as denying the
existence of climate change or the factors that contribute to it - while
allowing discussions about climate change policies or personal views about
extreme weather events.
John Cook, a senior research fellow at the University of Melbourne in
Australia, says the rising wave of climate misinformation shows that
companies are still not taking the threat of climate misinformation
seriously enough.
“What the platforms are doing is inadequate,” Cook said.
After years of building robust content moderation systems, social media
companies facing political pressure and economic headwinds have pulled
back on gatekeeping, part of an industry trend that some fear could roll
back safeguards that clamp down on misinformation.
X has not changed its official policy on climate change misinformation
under the new ownership of Elon Musk, who took over the platform in
October 2022. But Musk has gutted the platform’s content moderation
operations and slashed staff responsible for monitoring misinformation.
“The rollback of moderation policies and the apparent reduction of content
moderation staff appears to have had a substantial impact on the
prevalence of climate change misinformation on social media platforms,”
Daniel Jones, president of Advance Democracy, told USA TODAY.
Social media posts reviewed by Advance Democracy are routinely peppered
with references to “climate scam” and “climate cult” or claims that global
warming is a hoax or that climate scientists are con artists.
When smoke from Canadian wildfires blanketed much of the U.S. last year,
for example, conspiracy theorists falsely claimed that the fires were
intentionally set to promote a fake climate emergency.
Though the public perception of climate change is shifting, it remains a
politically divisive issue, with Democrats and Republicans growing further
apart in the last decade in how they gauge the threat, according to the
Pew Research Center.
Nearly 8 in 10 Democrats (78%) say climate change is a major threat to the
country, up from about 6 in 10 a decade ago. About 1 in 4 Republicans
describe climate change as a major threat, about the same as 10 years ago.
Few in the GOP deny that burning oil, gas and coal has produced gasses
that are heating the planet but many climate skeptics see the proposed
solutions – weaning off fossil fuels in favor of solar, wind and other
energy sources – as a threat to the economy and Americans’ livelihoods and
freedoms.
“Social media is a primary means by which young people – those most likely
to see the worst consequences of climate change – get their information
today,” Mann said.
Scientists say the warming of the planet is chiefly caused by human
activities that emit heat-trapping greenhouse gasses. The effects include
higher sea levels, drought, wildfires, increased precipitation and wetter
hurricanes.
Climate skeptics use social media to undercut evidence of human
involvement in climate change. Their tactics are often effective,
misleading people and chilling debate, said Cook of the University of
Melbourne.
The unchecked wave of climate misinformation is further eroding public
understanding of climate change and public trust in science and
scientists, researchers warn.
The Center for Countering Digital Hate which recently reviewed videos on
YouTube found that climate change skeptics are switching tactics to
discredit the climate solutions proposed by scientists and the scientists
themselves.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2024/01/19/climate-change-denial-
spreading-social-media/72257689007/
existence and causes of climate change.
That’s the finding of a review of climate-related conversations on social
media platforms by the public interest research organization Advance
Democracy.
Despite company pledges to crack down, falsehoods, hoaxes and conspiracy
theories circulated with few warning labels or links to credible
information in 2023, contributing to a dramatic surge in the number of
posts denying climate change last year, according to the report shared
exclusively with USA TODAY.
Nowhere was that surge more evident than on X, formerly Twitter, where the
number of posts containing terms linked to climate change denial more than
tripled for the second year in a row, Advance Democracy found.
Advance Democracy saw a significant increase in posts that dismiss climate
change as an exaggeration or a hoax on Facebook.
Of the 10 Facebook posts with the most interactions, eight either denied
climate change or promoted conspiracy theories. None included a link to
Facebook’s Climate Science Information Center or a fact check.
TikTok also failed to rein in falsehoods. Even after the short-form video
platform adopted a policy prohibiting climate misinformation last year,
videos that deny or downplay climate change were viewed millions of times
on the app.
Advance Democracy says that in its review only YouTube has improved. Eight
of nine specific climate change denial phrases identified in Advance
Democracy’s 2022 report are now accompanied by scientific information on
climate change on the platform.
“When it comes to misinformation about climate change, YouTube’s systems
work to raise up content from high-quality sources in search results and
recommendations," YouTube said in a statement to USA TODAY, adding that it
strives to "connect viewers to additional context from third parties like
the United Nations."
The other companies - X, Facebook and TikTok - did not comment directly on
the Advance Democracy report.
The stakes have never been higher, according to Michael Mann, a climate
scientist and professor at the University of Pennsylvania.
Climate change is one of the most contentious debates raging on social
media platforms which have emerged as a critical battleground to control
the narrative about climate change – especially for the TikTok generation,
Mann said.
"Social media is a primary means by which young people - those most likely
to see the worst consequences of climate change - get their information
today," he said. "This trend suggests that bad actors have made a
concerted effort to weaponize social media in a way that is especially
targeted toward young people."
For years, climate scientists have pushed social media companies to
identify and remove posts and videos denying climate change, disputing its
causes, or underplaying its effects.
Social media companies say their policies prohibit climate change
misinformation that undermines scientific consensus - such as denying the
existence of climate change or the factors that contribute to it - while
allowing discussions about climate change policies or personal views about
extreme weather events.
John Cook, a senior research fellow at the University of Melbourne in
Australia, says the rising wave of climate misinformation shows that
companies are still not taking the threat of climate misinformation
seriously enough.
“What the platforms are doing is inadequate,” Cook said.
After years of building robust content moderation systems, social media
companies facing political pressure and economic headwinds have pulled
back on gatekeeping, part of an industry trend that some fear could roll
back safeguards that clamp down on misinformation.
X has not changed its official policy on climate change misinformation
under the new ownership of Elon Musk, who took over the platform in
October 2022. But Musk has gutted the platform’s content moderation
operations and slashed staff responsible for monitoring misinformation.
“The rollback of moderation policies and the apparent reduction of content
moderation staff appears to have had a substantial impact on the
prevalence of climate change misinformation on social media platforms,”
Daniel Jones, president of Advance Democracy, told USA TODAY.
Social media posts reviewed by Advance Democracy are routinely peppered
with references to “climate scam” and “climate cult” or claims that global
warming is a hoax or that climate scientists are con artists.
When smoke from Canadian wildfires blanketed much of the U.S. last year,
for example, conspiracy theorists falsely claimed that the fires were
intentionally set to promote a fake climate emergency.
Though the public perception of climate change is shifting, it remains a
politically divisive issue, with Democrats and Republicans growing further
apart in the last decade in how they gauge the threat, according to the
Pew Research Center.
Nearly 8 in 10 Democrats (78%) say climate change is a major threat to the
country, up from about 6 in 10 a decade ago. About 1 in 4 Republicans
describe climate change as a major threat, about the same as 10 years ago.
Few in the GOP deny that burning oil, gas and coal has produced gasses
that are heating the planet but many climate skeptics see the proposed
solutions – weaning off fossil fuels in favor of solar, wind and other
energy sources – as a threat to the economy and Americans’ livelihoods and
freedoms.
“Social media is a primary means by which young people – those most likely
to see the worst consequences of climate change – get their information
today,” Mann said.
Scientists say the warming of the planet is chiefly caused by human
activities that emit heat-trapping greenhouse gasses. The effects include
higher sea levels, drought, wildfires, increased precipitation and wetter
hurricanes.
Climate skeptics use social media to undercut evidence of human
involvement in climate change. Their tactics are often effective,
misleading people and chilling debate, said Cook of the University of
Melbourne.
The unchecked wave of climate misinformation is further eroding public
understanding of climate change and public trust in science and
scientists, researchers warn.
The Center for Countering Digital Hate which recently reviewed videos on
YouTube found that climate change skeptics are switching tactics to
discredit the climate solutions proposed by scientists and the scientists
themselves.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2024/01/19/climate-change-denial-
spreading-social-media/72257689007/
Kerr-Mudd, John
Jan 21, 2024, 4:54:54 AMJan 21
to
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:16:02 -0000 (UTC)
useapen <your...@outlook.com> wrote:
> Social media is still not doing enough to stop misinformation denying the
> existence and causes of climate change.
>
But, but, Freedom!
useapen <your...@outlook.com> wrote:
> Social media is still not doing enough to stop misinformation denying the
> existence and causes of climate change.
>
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
D
Jan 21, 2024, 9:31:48 AMJan 21
to
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:16:02 -0000 (UTC)
> useapen <your...@outlook.com> wrote:
>
>> Social media is still not doing enough to stop misinformation denying the
>> existence and causes of climate change.
>>
>
> But, but, Freedom!
>
>
and zealots. Yes, I call them zelots, hysterics and irrationalists as long
as they keep calling anyone who does not agree with them "deniers". I resent
them trying to imply connections with the holocaust and will not take
anyone seriously who uses that term.
There is no proof and the majority of climate change can be explained by
natural causes such as the sun, dust and other factors.
Of course there are no tipping points as well, and the last time the earth
had 10x the CO2 in the atmosphere the entire planet was covered with
plants and life existed happily on this planet.
Anonymous
Jan 21, 2024, 8:37:18 PMJan 21
to
Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:16:02 -0000 (UTC)
> useapen <your...@outlook.com> wrote:
>
>> Social media is still not doing enough to stop misinformation denying the
>> existence and causes of climate change.
>>
>
> But, but, Freedom!
>
I agree, you should have no right to spread the disinformation that
> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:16:02 -0000 (UTC)
> useapen <your...@outlook.com> wrote:
>
>> Social media is still not doing enough to stop misinformation denying the
>> existence and causes of climate change.
>>
>
> But, but, Freedom!
>
is climate "science".
Governor Swill
Jan 21, 2024, 8:51:42 PMJan 21
to
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:31:44 +0100, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>Of course there are no tipping points as well, and the last time the earth
>had 10x the CO2 in the atmosphere the entire planet was covered with
>plants and life existed happily on this planet.
But not human life.
>Of course there are no tipping points as well, and the last time the earth
>had 10x the CO2 in the atmosphere the entire planet was covered with
>plants and life existed happily on this planet.
Swill
--
The moon landing was real, Bigfoot does not
roam the northern forests and the 2020 election was not rigged.
GO TRUMP! Go farther! Farther! I CAN STILL HEAR YOU!
Heroyam slava! Glory to the Heroes!
Sláva Ukrajíni! Glory to Ukraine!
Putin tse prezervatyv! Putin is a condom!
Go here to donate to Ukrainian relief.
<https://www2.deloitte.com/ua/uk/pages/registration-forms/help-cities.html>
D
Jan 22, 2024, 4:44:58 AMJan 22
to
Human life is still life. We would be blessed if the planet was covered in
plants. Imagine if the deserts would be turned into productive areas. That
would me amazing.
However... it is not binary.
As soon as electric cars are cheaper and better than ice cars, people will
naturally move.
EU strangely enough turned around and approved nuclear as green energy,
and as soon as we've replaced all coal power on the planet, we'll have
less co2 (that the common man loves to fret about) _and_ a safer, cleaner
and easier to plan, way to generate electricity.
Both people who think climate change is a imminent threat, the ones who
don't care (like me) and the people in between, can surely agree that
green technology who does something better for less is a good thing.
And that is how I believe that this divisise topic can be dealt with
profitably instead of splitting the population in two groups tearing at
each others throats.
Climate strategies based on sacrifice and going backwards in technological
development will never succeed.
Only science and free markets will solve it once and for all.
plants. Imagine if the deserts would be turned into productive areas. That
would me amazing.
However... it is not binary.
As soon as electric cars are cheaper and better than ice cars, people will
naturally move.
EU strangely enough turned around and approved nuclear as green energy,
and as soon as we've replaced all coal power on the planet, we'll have
less co2 (that the common man loves to fret about) _and_ a safer, cleaner
and easier to plan, way to generate electricity.
Both people who think climate change is a imminent threat, the ones who
don't care (like me) and the people in between, can surely agree that
green technology who does something better for less is a good thing.
And that is how I believe that this divisise topic can be dealt with
profitably instead of splitting the population in two groups tearing at
each others throats.
Climate strategies based on sacrifice and going backwards in technological
development will never succeed.
Only science and free markets will solve it once and for all.
Scout
Jan 22, 2024, 8:38:51 AMJan 22
to
"useapen" <your...@outlook.com> wrote in message
news:XnsB0FFE2...@135.181.20.170...
> Social media is still not doing enough to stop misinformation denying the
> existence and causes of climate change.
Well, the problem is climate change is a constant and depending on where you
> existence and causes of climate change.
chose to measure from we could either be colder or hotter or unchanged.
The causes, is another issue entirely, we have theories of what might change
climate, but we really have no idea.
What caused the Mini Ice Age in the middle ages?
Why was it so much warmer when the Vikings explored Iceland?
Most of the Roman period was warmer than it is today, why?
Now, all that said, reducing pollution and emissions is a worthy goal within
itself, but maybe not with the urgency and short sighted 'solutions' that
could cause more issues than they resolve. I remember when we were told that
paper straws were destroying the planet and if we didn't change to plastic
it would be the end of the world as we know it.
Now we're told paper straws are so much better than using plastic.
See the problem?
Scout
Jan 22, 2024, 8:38:51 AMJan 22
to
"D" <nos...@example.net> wrote in message
news:3e0aa36e-08c1-4b40...@example.net...
exposed to CO2 concentrations up to 5,000ppm without harm
Atmospheric concentrations of CO2 is 421ppm.
I would simply not that for most of the Roman empire is was 2C hotter than
it is today.
I suppose all their heavy industry and oil usage was to blame?
We have no real idea of what governs climate change.
For example. most assume that climate change is driven purely by solar and
atmospheric causes.. but what if there were another reason?
A reason that until recently we hadn't even considered?
Specifically, increased heat transfer from the core to the surface to the
atmosphere.
Nonsense you say?
Except we have some interesting data from instruments produced in just the
last few years with the precision necessary.
The Earth's spin is ACCELERATING.
Now to accelerate an object there are basically two ways to do so.
Apply an external force.. or in a spinning object move mass closer to the
axis of rotation.
Now, given no external force we know of, it would seem to suggest a shift in
the distribution of the mass of the earth.
We know the Earth has a molten iron core, and we further know it is broken
up into at least 2 different regions.
The denser cooler outer core and the hotter less dense inner core.
Let's suppose some of the out core sinks closer to the center.. that would
speed up planetary rotation.
But that material is going to displace some of the hotter inner core towards
the surface, which would over time increase the rate of heat transfer to the
surface.
It would take a very small increase in ground temperature to impact global
temperatures over a long period of time. Possibly even causing Cooler
periods as thermal disruptions occur.
After all, it's often been a mystery why certain climate changes have
occurred without solar or volcanic action.. perhaps we now have a clue.
And it's really nothing we can control in the least.
D
Jan 22, 2024, 10:47:15 AMJan 22
to
And its probably many factors, some known, some unknown who each,
independently of each other influences this.
As you say, there have been many swings, big parts of northern europe
where under 3 km of ice and grapse being grown in southern sweden
without any industry at all, yet, no one talks about this.
Yak
Jan 22, 2024, 10:56:08 AMJan 22
to
Goreham. Fantastic book that deals with this climate hysteria we're all
gonna die the sky is falling nonsense.
Wilson Woods
Jan 22, 2024, 11:17:47 AMJan 22
to
On 1/22/2024 5:20 AM, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "useapen" <your...@outlook.com> wrote in message
> news:XnsB0FFE2...@135.181.20.170...
>> Social media is still not doing enough to stop misinformation denying the
>> existence and causes of climate change.
>
> Well,
Empty scooter wheeze; nothing but worthless padding.
>
>
> "useapen" <your...@outlook.com> wrote in message
> news:XnsB0FFE2...@135.181.20.170...
>> Social media is still not doing enough to stop misinformation denying the
>> existence and causes of climate change.
>
> Well,
"Further..." [empty padding]
"Naturally, ..." [empty padding]
"And just like that..." [scooter going "nyah-nyah" at an opponent immediately
before fleeing]
"On the contrary..." [scooter childishly disputing, *never* refuting]
"And yet..." [empty padding; scooter adding something irrelevant and pointless]
"Heck..." [empty padding]
"Well..." [empty padding]
"After all..." [empty padding]
"In fact..." [empty padding]
"Indeed..." [empty padding}
> the problem is climate change is a constant and
But...but...but...FREEDOM!
Jan 22, 2024, 11:17:47 AMJan 22
to
On 1/22/2024 5:34 AM, scooter lied:
>
>
> "D" <nos...@example.net> wrote in message
> news:3e0aa36e-08c1-4b40...@example.net...
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:16:02 -0000 (UTC)
>>> useapen <your...@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Social media is still not doing enough to stop misinformation denying the
>>>> existence and causes of climate change.
>>>>
>>>
>>> But, but, Freedom!
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I do not believe in the doom and gloom climate hysterics, irrationalists and
>> zealots. Yes, I call them zelots, hysterics and irrationalists as long as they
>> keep calling anyone who does not agree with them "deniers". I resent them
>> trying to imply connections with the holocaust and will not take anyone
>> seriously who uses that term.
>>
>> There is no proof and the majority of climate change can be explained by
>> natural causes such as the sun, dust and other factors.
>>
>> Of course there are no tipping points as well, and the last time the earth had
>> 10x the CO2 in the atmosphere the entire planet was covered with plants and
>> life existed happily on this planet.
>
> Let's put it this way.. at work you can be regularly and consistently exposed to
> CO2 concentrations up to 5,000ppm without harm
No citation, so it's a lie.
>
> "D" <nos...@example.net> wrote in message
> news:3e0aa36e-08c1-4b40...@example.net...
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:16:02 -0000 (UTC)
>>> useapen <your...@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Social media is still not doing enough to stop misinformation denying the
>>>> existence and causes of climate change.
>>>>
>>>
>>> But, but, Freedom!
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I do not believe in the doom and gloom climate hysterics, irrationalists and
>> zealots. Yes, I call them zelots, hysterics and irrationalists as long as they
>> keep calling anyone who does not agree with them "deniers". I resent them
>> trying to imply connections with the holocaust and will not take anyone
>> seriously who uses that term.
>>
>> There is no proof and the majority of climate change can be explained by
>> natural causes such as the sun, dust and other factors.
>>
>> Of course there are no tipping points as well, and the last time the earth had
>> 10x the CO2 in the atmosphere the entire planet was covered with plants and
>> life existed happily on this planet.
>
> Let's put it this way.. at work you can be regularly and consistently exposed to
> CO2 concentrations up to 5,000ppm without harm
Lou Bricano
Jan 22, 2024, 11:34:27 AMJan 22
to
On 1/22/2024 7:55 AM, Gak, fucked up the ass by priests hundreds of times — and
*admits* it — lied:
A fucking incompetent unqualified climate change denier.
https://www.desmog.com/steve-goreham/
Credentials
M.S. In Electrical Engineering from the University of Illinois.1
MBA from the University of Chicago.
> Fantastic book
Piece of shit political polemic.
Fuck off, you priest-fucked nobody.
*admits* it — lied:
https://www.desmog.com/steve-goreham/
Credentials
M.S. In Electrical Engineering from the University of Illinois.1
MBA from the University of Chicago.
> Fantastic book
Piece of shit political polemic.
Fuck off, you priest-fucked nobody.
Kerr-Mudd, John
Jan 22, 2024, 12:31:56 PMJan 22
to
help.
Science is real.
Lou Bricano
Jan 22, 2024, 12:42:23 PMJan 22
to
are not amenable to reason. In fact, they are entirely incapable of it.
Scout
Jan 22, 2024, 3:56:51 PMJan 22
to
"But...but...but...FREEDOM!" <nos...@example.net> wrote in message
news:IywrN.295213$xHn7....@fx14.iad...
Scout
Jan 22, 2024, 3:56:51 PMJan 22
to
"Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:JywrN.295216$xHn7...@fx14.iad...
> On 1/22/2024 5:20 AM, Scout wrote:
>>
>>
>> "useapen" <your...@outlook.com> wrote in message
>> news:XnsB0FFE2...@135.181.20.170...
>>> Social media is still not doing enough to stop misinformation denying
>>> the
>>> existence and causes of climate change.
>>
>> Well,
>
> Empty scooter wheeze; nothing but worthless padding.
>
> "Further..." [empty padding]
> "Naturally, ..." [empty padding]
> "And just like that..." [scooter going "nyah-nyah" at an opponent
> immediately before fleeing]
> "On the contrary..." [scooter childishly disputing, *never* refuting]
> "And yet..." [empty padding; scooter adding something irrelevant and
> pointless]
> "Heck..." [empty padding]
> "Well..." [empty padding]
> "After all..." [empty padding]
> "In fact..." [empty padding]
> "Indeed..." [empty padding}
Rudy attacks the language I use because he has nothing else he can attack.
>>
>>
>> "useapen" <your...@outlook.com> wrote in message
>> news:XnsB0FFE2...@135.181.20.170...
>>> Social media is still not doing enough to stop misinformation denying
>>> the
>>> existence and causes of climate change.
>>
>> Well,
>
> Empty scooter wheeze; nothing but worthless padding.
>
> "Further..." [empty padding]
> "Naturally, ..." [empty padding]
> "And just like that..." [scooter going "nyah-nyah" at an opponent
> immediately before fleeing]
> "On the contrary..." [scooter childishly disputing, *never* refuting]
> "And yet..." [empty padding; scooter adding something irrelevant and
> pointless]
> "Heck..." [empty padding]
> "Well..." [empty padding]
> "After all..." [empty padding]
> "In fact..." [empty padding]
> "Indeed..." [empty padding}
D
Jan 22, 2024, 4:47:15 PMJan 22
to
Wilson Woods
Jan 22, 2024, 5:34:57 PMJan 22
to
On 1/22/2024 12:54 PM, scooter lied:
because it proves you to be a shitty writer and a stupid fuckwit. That's right.
These are really shitty writing habits you have that indicate lack of thinking,
scooter. I am right about this wheezy padding being worthless, *and* right that
you do it without thinking...because you don't think.
These are really shitty writing habits you have that indicate lack of thinking,
scooter. I am right about this wheezy padding being worthless, *and* right that
you do it without thinking...because you don't think.
But...but...but...FREEDOM!
Jan 22, 2024, 5:35:02 PMJan 22
to
On 1/22/2024 12:53 PM, scooter lied:
You're the one who was required to supply one, scooter, for your lie claim about
"CO2 concentrations up to 5,000ppm without harm." I won't hold my breath waiting
for it, scooter. You never provide citations, scooter. You just blurt bullshit
and run away from it.
"CO2 concentrations up to 5,000ppm without harm." I won't hold my breath waiting
for it, scooter. You never provide citations, scooter. You just blurt bullshit
and run away from it.
Anonymous
Jan 22, 2024, 5:46:51 PMJan 22
to
put together. And he's NOT commenting outside his area of expertise.
You can't fool an engineer.
Lou Bricano
Jan 22, 2024, 6:24:49 PMJan 22
to
like you. Fuck off, pseudo-tough asshole. You're not tough. You're a
squat-to-piss fairy.
Anonymous
Jan 22, 2024, 7:22:16 PMJan 22
to
unlike you and all climate "scientists".
Lou Bricano
Jan 22, 2024, 8:03:37 PMJan 22
to
Fuck off.
Lou Bricano
Jan 22, 2024, 8:03:41 PMJan 22
to
On 1/22/2024 4:22 PM, Anonymous wrote:
Lou Bricano
Jan 22, 2024, 8:03:45 PMJan 22
to
On 1/22/2024 4:22 PM, Anonymous wrote:
Lou Bricano
Jan 22, 2024, 8:03:56 PMJan 22
to
On 1/22/2024 4:22 PM, Anonymous wrote:
Blue Lives Matter
Jan 22, 2024, 10:13:12 PMJan 22
to
On 1/22/2024 5:34 AM, scooter lied:
>
>
>
>
> "D" <nos...@example.net> wrote in message
> news:3e0aa36e-08c1-4b40...@example.net...
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:16:02 -0000 (UTC)
>>> useapen <your...@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Social media is still not doing enough to stop misinformation denying the
>>>> existence and causes of climate change.
>>>>
>>>
>>> But, but, Freedom!
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I do not believe in the doom and gloom climate hysterics, irrationalists and
>> zealots. Yes, I call them zelots, hysterics and irrationalists as long as they
>> keep calling anyone who does not agree with them "deniers". I resent them
>> trying to imply connections with the holocaust and will not take anyone
>> seriously who uses that term.
>>
>> There is no proof and the majority of climate change can be explained by
>> natural causes such as the sun, dust and other factors.
>>
>> Of course there are no tipping points as well, and the last time the earth had
>> 10x the CO2 in the atmosphere the entire planet was covered with plants and
>> life existed happily on this planet.
>
> Let's put it this way.. at work you can be regularly and consistently exposed to
> CO2 concentrations up to 5,000ppm without harm
What the fuck does that have to do with CO2 in the upper atmosphere trapping
> news:3e0aa36e-08c1-4b40...@example.net...
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:16:02 -0000 (UTC)
>>> useapen <your...@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Social media is still not doing enough to stop misinformation denying the
>>>> existence and causes of climate change.
>>>>
>>>
>>> But, but, Freedom!
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I do not believe in the doom and gloom climate hysterics, irrationalists and
>> zealots. Yes, I call them zelots, hysterics and irrationalists as long as they
>> keep calling anyone who does not agree with them "deniers". I resent them
>> trying to imply connections with the holocaust and will not take anyone
>> seriously who uses that term.
>>
>> There is no proof and the majority of climate change can be explained by
>> natural causes such as the sun, dust and other factors.
>>
>> Of course there are no tipping points as well, and the last time the earth had
>> 10x the CO2 in the atmosphere the entire planet was covered with plants and
>> life existed happily on this planet.
>
> Let's put it this way.. at work you can be regularly and consistently exposed to
> CO2 concentrations up to 5,000ppm without harm
heat, scooter? Nothing. We're not talking about how much CO2 we're breathing at
ground level, scooter, you stupid fuck.
Governor Swill
Jan 23, 2024, 3:40:53 AMJan 23
to
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 10:44:52 +0100, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>Human life is still life. We would be blessed if the planet was covered in
>plants. Imagine if the deserts would be turned into productive areas. That
>would me amazing.
But there weren't any humans then. And it takes more than CO2 to grow plants.
>Human life is still life. We would be blessed if the planet was covered in
>plants. Imagine if the deserts would be turned into productive areas. That
>would me amazing.
Governor Swill
Jan 23, 2024, 3:42:57 AMJan 23
to
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 14:34:41 -0800, "But...but...but...FREEDOM!" <nos...@example.net>
wrote:
>On 1/22/2024 12:53 PM, scooter lied:
>>
>>
>> "But...but...but...FREEDOM!" <nos...@example.net> wrote in message
>> news:IywrN.295213$xHn7....@fx14.iad...
>>> On 1/22/2024 5:34 AM, scooter lied:
wrote:
>On 1/22/2024 12:53 PM, scooter lied:
>>
>>
>> "But...but...but...FREEDOM!" <nos...@example.net> wrote in message
>> news:IywrN.295213$xHn7....@fx14.iad...
>>> On 1/22/2024 5:34 AM, scooter lied:
>>>> Let's put it this way.. at work you can be regularly and consistently exposed
>>>> to CO2 concentrations up to 5,000ppm without harm
>>>
>>> No citation, so it's a lie.
>>
>> Sorry, I didn't see your citation
>
>You're the one who was required to supply one, scooter, for your lie claim about
>"CO2 concentrations up to 5,000ppm without harm." I won't hold my breath waiting
>for it, scooter. You never provide citations, scooter. You just blurt bullshit
>and run away from it.
Well, Scout, he's got you there!
>>>> to CO2 concentrations up to 5,000ppm without harm
>>>
>>> No citation, so it's a lie.
>>
>> Sorry, I didn't see your citation
>
>You're the one who was required to supply one, scooter, for your lie claim about
>"CO2 concentrations up to 5,000ppm without harm." I won't hold my breath waiting
>for it, scooter. You never provide citations, scooter. You just blurt bullshit
>and run away from it.
Yak
Jan 23, 2024, 7:10:46 AMJan 23
to
excellent read. Meanwhile Jon Ball, resident dwarf, puts his full faith
and credit into leading climate experts like Al Gore, Bill Nye and Klaus
Schwab.
D
Jan 23, 2024, 8:16:13 AMJan 23
to
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024, Yak wrote:
>>
>> But he DOES know a thing about energy and the Laws of Thermodynamics,
>> unlike you and all climate "scientists".
>
> The author sources every claim he makes in the book, which is an excellent
> read. Meanwhile Jon Ball, resident dwarf, puts his full faith and credit into
> leading climate experts like Al Gore, Bill Nye and Klaus Schwab.
>
more when it comes to climate science than gender scholars, politicians and other
clowns.
Scout
Jan 23, 2024, 8:34:01 AMJan 23
to
news:n4CrN.221405$Ama9...@fx12.iad...
I regularly supplied citations.. but then you showed you didn't care about
citations, the facts, or even the truth.
It was just your way of evading the topic.. so I stopped bothering.
If you would use and learn from the cites given, it might be worth it to do
it.
But you've shown proof/cites means nothing to you. So why bother?
Further.. you regularly refuse to post cites to support any of your
assertions
So you want it. you can find it.. or you can start demonstrating how it
should be done when you make claims.
citations, the facts, or even the truth.
It was just your way of evading the topic.. so I stopped bothering.
If you would use and learn from the cites given, it might be worth it to do
it.
But you've shown proof/cites means nothing to you. So why bother?
Further.. you regularly refuse to post cites to support any of your
assertions
So you want it. you can find it.. or you can start demonstrating how it
should be done when you make claims.
Scout
Jan 23, 2024, 8:34:02 AMJan 23
to
news:i4CrN.221404$Ama9....@fx12.iad...
And Rudy lashes out like a 2 year old..
Meanwhile I will point to the sample provided by Rudy as how he thinks
people should address each other.
But lets remove your padding...
"because it prove you to be ... right"
Meanwhile I will point to the sample provided by Rudy as how he thinks
people should address each other.
But lets remove your padding...
"because it prove you to be ... right"
Scout
Jan 23, 2024, 8:34:02 AMJan 23
to
"Blue Lives Matter" <Iron_WhiteSupremacist@Systemic_Treason.KMA> wrote in
message news:99GrN.44050$SyNd....@fx33.iad...
I don't see people calling for water vapor to be banned.
> Nothing.
Ok, then we don't need to worry about carbon emissions then.
> We're not talking about how much CO2 we're breathing at ground level,
> scooter, you stupid fuck.
are somehow only an issue at high altitude....
Lou Bricano
Jan 23, 2024, 11:58:47 AMJan 23
to
and valid sources on climate.
> Meanwhile Jon Ball,
No such participant here, as you well know. (I just *love* rubbing your nose in
that.)
Wilson Woods
Jan 23, 2024, 11:59:02 AMJan 23
to
On 1/23/2024 5:31 AM, scooter lied:>
No, scooter. It really does prove you to be a shitty writer, and thus a shitty
thinker.
> Meanwhile
No, scooter.
thinker.
> Meanwhile
No, scooter.
Blue Lives Matter
Jan 23, 2024, 11:59:02 AMJan 23
to
>
>> Nothing.
>
> Ok, then we don't need to worry about carbon emissions then.
But...but...but...FREEDOM!
Jan 23, 2024, 11:59:03 AMJan 23
to
On 1/23/2024 5:18 AM, scooter lied:
No, scooter, you don't. You never do.
> So you want it. you can find it.
So we know your claim is bullshit.
> So you want it. you can find it.
Scout
Jan 23, 2024, 2:21:27 PMJan 23
to
news:pfSrN.44080$SyNd....@fx33.iad...
Without you supplying citations I can't accept anything you have to say.
Come back when you provide citations for every claim you make.
After all.. you should follow your own rules.. right?
Come back when you provide citations for every claim you make.
After all.. you should follow your own rules.. right?
Scout
Jan 23, 2024, 2:21:28 PMJan 23
to
"Blue Lives Matter" <Iron_WhiteSupremacist@Systemic_Treason.KMA> wrote in
And right there you prove that nothing you have to say is relevant as you
don't know what you are talking about.
Oh, and I see no cite from you that CO2 and CH4 aren't naturally occurring.
Scout
Jan 23, 2024, 2:21:28 PMJan 23
to
news:nfSrN.44078$SyNd....@fx33.iad...
Snipped at first worthless padding.
Rudy you really should obey your own standards of conduct.
Rudy you really should obey your own standards of conduct.
Blue Lives Matter
Jan 23, 2024, 3:29:52 PMJan 23
to
On 1/23/2024 10:09 AM, scooter lied:
The CO2 and CH4 that are produced by burning fossil fuels are not naturally
occurring, scooter.
>
>
> "Blue Lives Matter" <Iron_WhiteSupremacist@Systemic_Treason.KMA> wrote in
> message news:ofSrN.44079$SyNd...@fx33.iad...
>> On 1/23/2024 5:28 AM, scooter lied:
>
> "Blue Lives Matter" <Iron_WhiteSupremacist@Systemic_Treason.KMA> wrote in
> message news:ofSrN.44079$SyNd...@fx33.iad...
occurring, scooter.
Wilson Woods
Jan 23, 2024, 3:29:52 PMJan 23
to
But...but...but...FREEDOM!
Jan 23, 2024, 3:29:53 PMJan 23
to
On 1/23/2024 10:06 AM, scooter lied:
You mean citations of you not supplying citations? Ha ha ha ha ha!
You never supply citations, scooter.
>> No, scooter, you don't. You never do.
>
> Without you supplying citations
>
You mean citations of you not supplying citations? Ha ha ha ha ha!
You never supply citations, scooter.
Scout
Jan 24, 2024, 9:02:44 AMJan 24
to
news:3lVrN.44873$Iswd....@fx05.iad...
..that you can't provide.
Scout
Jan 24, 2024, 9:02:45 AMJan 24
to
news:1lVrN.44871$Iswd...@fx05.iad...
Rudy argues like a 2 year old.
Scout
Jan 24, 2024, 9:02:45 AMJan 24
to
"Blue Lives Matter" <Iron_WhiteSupremacist@Systemic_Treason.KMA> wrote in
Fossil fuels are naturally occurring.
Fire is naturally occurring.
Oil burning is a natural event.
The exhaust from burning oil is natural.
There is nothing mystical, magical, or unnatural about the natural laws.
That is what is so amusing about you Rudy, you see things that don’t exist.
Wilson Woods
Jan 24, 2024, 10:13:20 AMJan 24
to
> Fossil fuels are naturally occurring.
Fuck, you keep walking right into it, scooter.
But...but...but...FREEDOM!
Jan 24, 2024, 10:13:21 AMJan 24
to
On 1/24/2024 5:53 AM, scooter lied:
can't cite something that doesn't exist.
>> You mean citations of you not supplying citations? Ha ha ha ha ha!
>
>
> ..that you can't provide.
Of course not, scooter. Obviously I can't "cite" you not providing citations. I
can't cite something that doesn't exist.
Wilson Woods
Jan 24, 2024, 10:13:52 AMJan 24
to
On 1/24/2024 6:00 AM, scooter lied:
> news:1lVrN.44871$Iswd...@fx05.iad...
>> On 1/23/2024 10:10 AM, scooter lied:
No, scooter.
> news:1lVrN.44871$Iswd...@fx05.iad...
>> On 1/23/2024 10:10 AM, scooter lied:
Scout
Jan 24, 2024, 12:10:57 PMJan 24
to
news:jO9sN.53934$5Hn...@fx03.iad...
I knew it all along.
From now on you will be required to do so.
From now on you will be required to do so.
Scout
Jan 24, 2024, 12:10:58 PMJan 24
to
news:iO9sN.53933$5Hnd....@fx03.iad...
So you're saying humans are not natural?
So what sort of unnatural creatures are you going to assert we are?
So what sort of unnatural creatures are you going to assert we are?
Scout
Jan 24, 2024, 12:10:59 PMJan 24
to
news:OO9sN.53945$5Hnd....@fx03.iad...
You can't even argue?
Wilson Woods
Jan 24, 2024, 3:16:14 PMJan 24
to
On 1/24/2024 9:05 AM, scooter lied:
>> No, scooter.
argue in the manner you stated in your lie, scooter.
>
> You can't even argue?
I can, scooter, and obviously better than you. What I don't do, scooter, is
> You can't even argue?
argue in the manner you stated in your lie, scooter.
Wilson Woods
Jan 24, 2024, 3:16:15 PMJan 24
to
On 1/24/2024 9:04 AM, scooter lied:
>> On 1/24/2024 5:59 AM, scooter lied:
Something naturally occurring, scooter, means something that does *not* occur do
to human activity — by definition, scooter. With very rare exceptions, scooter,
fossil fuels do not spontaneously combust, and when they do, it is virtually
always *after* they have been extracted from underground by humans — which means
it is not a natural occurrence, scooter.
What a stupid, stubborn drunken Virginia camper you are, scooter!
>> On 1/24/2024 5:59 AM, scooter lied:
to human activity — by definition, scooter. With very rare exceptions, scooter,
fossil fuels do not spontaneously combust, and when they do, it is virtually
always *after* they have been extracted from underground by humans — which means
it is not a natural occurrence, scooter.
What a stupid, stubborn drunken Virginia camper you are, scooter!
But...but...but...FREEDOM!
Jan 24, 2024, 3:16:16 PMJan 24
to
On 1/24/2024 9:03 AM, scooter lied:
something that doesn't exist? That's completely illogical, scooter. It's your
usual demanding that someone prove a negative.
Suppose *you* cite yourself providing support for something, scooter? Can you do
it? Obviously not...because you never provide support for your lies/claims.
>> Of course not, scooter. Obviously I can't "cite" you not providing citations. I
>> can't cite something that doesn't exist.
>
>> can't cite something that doesn't exist.
>
> I knew it all along.
Did you, scooter? If so, scooter, then why did you bitchily demand that I "cite"
something that doesn't exist? That's completely illogical, scooter. It's your
usual demanding that someone prove a negative.
Suppose *you* cite yourself providing support for something, scooter? Can you do
it? Obviously not...because you never provide support for your lies/claims.
Scout
Jan 25, 2024, 11:13:52 AMJan 25
to
news:ieesN.68812$GX69....@fx46.iad...
Yep, because when it comes to you, it’s a given you're wrong.
Scout
Jan 25, 2024, 11:13:53 AMJan 25
to
news:heesN.68811$GX69....@fx46.iad...
Yes they are.
Scout
Jan 25, 2024, 11:13:53 AMJan 25
to
news:eeesN.68810$GX69....@fx46.iad...
Stomping your feet and asserting victory isn't a valid argument.
But...but...but...FREEDOM!
Jan 25, 2024, 1:05:45 PMJan 25
to
On 1/25/2024 8:02 AM, scooter lied:
No, scooter, you didn't know anything all along. That's a lie.
It's settled: you never support your claims.
>> Did you, scooter? If so, scooter, then why did you bitchily demand that I "cite"
>> something that doesn't exist? That's completely illogical, scooter. It's your
>> usual demanding that someone prove a negative.
>
> Yep, because
>> something that doesn't exist? That's completely illogical, scooter. It's your
>> usual demanding that someone prove a negative.
>
No, scooter, you didn't know anything all along. That's a lie.
It's settled: you never support your claims.
Wilson Woods
Jan 25, 2024, 1:25:56 PMJan 25
to
On 1/25/2024 8:03 AM, scooter lied:
No, scooter. I can argue, scooter, and obviously better than you.
>> I can, scooter, and obviously better than you. What I don't do, scooter, is
>> argue in the manner you stated in your lie, scooter.
>
> Stomping your feet and
>> argue in the manner you stated in your lie, scooter.
>
No, scooter. I can argue, scooter, and obviously better than you.
Wilson Woods
Jan 25, 2024, 1:25:58 PMJan 25
to
On 1/25/2024 8:03 AM, scooter lied:
That's yes, *you* are, scooter.
It's settled: the emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels
is not naturally occurring.
Time for you to concede defeat on this and move along to your next exercise in
futility, scooter.
>> Something naturally occurring, scooter, means something that does *not* occur do
>> to human activity — by definition, scooter. With very rare exceptions, scooter,
>> fossil fuels do not spontaneously combust, and when they do, it is virtually
>> always *after* they have been extracted from underground by humans — which means
>> it is not a natural occurrence, scooter.
>>
>> What a stupid, stubborn drunken Virginia camper you are, scooter!
>
> Yes they are.
>> to human activity — by definition, scooter. With very rare exceptions, scooter,
>> fossil fuels do not spontaneously combust, and when they do, it is virtually
>> always *after* they have been extracted from underground by humans — which means
>> it is not a natural occurrence, scooter.
>>
>> What a stupid, stubborn drunken Virginia camper you are, scooter!
>
That's yes, *you* are, scooter.
It's settled: the emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels
is not naturally occurring.
Time for you to concede defeat on this and move along to your next exercise in
futility, scooter.
Scout
Jan 25, 2024, 2:06:45 PMJan 25
to
news:TIxsN.255944$Wp_8....@fx17.iad...
> It's settled:
The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels is
natural.
The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels is
natural.
Scout
Jan 25, 2024, 2:06:46 PMJan 25
to
news:XpxsN.83234$STLe...@fx34.iad...
Rudy loop
Scout
Jan 25, 2024, 2:06:46 PMJan 25
to
news:SIxsN.255943$Wp_8....@fx17.iad...
Rudy's loop
But...but...but...FREEDOM!
Jan 25, 2024, 3:16:46 PMJan 25
to
On 1/25/2024 11:01 AM, scooter lied:
slaps you down again. That's right, scooter.
>> No, scooter, you didn't know anything all along. That's a lie.
>>
>> It's settled: you never support your claims.
>
> Rudy
>>
>> It's settled: you never support your claims.
>
slaps you down again. That's right, scooter.
Wilson Woods
Jan 25, 2024, 3:16:47 PMJan 25
to
On 1/25/2024 11:00 AM, scooter lied:
> No, scooter. I can argue, scooter, and obviously better than you.
>
> Rudy's
still kicking your ass, as always.
>
> Rudy's
still kicking your ass, as always.
Wilson Woods
Jan 25, 2024, 3:16:49 PMJan 25
to
Wilson Woods
Jan 25, 2024, 3:16:50 PMJan 25
to
On 1/25/2024 11:00 AM, scooter lied:
>> That's yes, *you* are, scooter.
>>
>> It's settled: the emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels
>> is not naturally occurring.
>>
>> Time for you to concede defeat on this and move along to your next exercise in
>> futility, scooter.
>
>>
>> It's settled: the emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels
>> is not naturally occurring.
>>
>> Time for you to concede defeat on this and move along to your next exercise in
>> futility, scooter.
>
> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels is
unnatural — it's human-caused, thus unnatural.
Wilson Woods
Jan 26, 2024, 11:01:52 AMJan 26
to
On 1/25/2024 11:00 AM, scooter lied:
>> That's yes, *you* are, scooter.
>>
>> It's settled: the emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels
>> is not naturally occurring.
>>
>> Time for you to concede defeat on this and move along to your next exercise in
>> futility, scooter.
>
>>
>> It's settled: the emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels
>> is not naturally occurring.
>>
>> Time for you to concede defeat on this and move along to your next exercise in
>> futility, scooter.
>
> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels is
Wilson Woods
Jan 26, 2024, 11:01:53 AMJan 26
to
On 1/25/2024 10:25 AM, Wilson Woods wrote:
Wilson Woods
Jan 26, 2024, 11:01:54 AMJan 26
to
On 1/25/2024 11:00 AM, scooter lied:
But...but...but...FREEDOM!
Jan 26, 2024, 11:01:55 AMJan 26
to
On 1/25/2024 11:01 AM, scooter lied:
>> No, scooter, you didn't know anything all along. That's a lie.
>>
>> It's settled: you never support your claims.
>
>>
>> It's settled: you never support your claims.
>
Just Wondering
Jan 26, 2024, 2:32:09 PMJan 26
to
On 1/26/2024 9:01 AM, Wilson Woods wrote:
> On 1/25/2024 11:00 AM, scooter lied:
> On 1/25/2024 11:00 AM, scooter lied:
>> "Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning
>>> fossil fuels is not naturally occurring.
>>>
>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning
>>
>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels is
>
> unnatural — it's human-caused, thus unnatural.
>
The last I checked, humans are part of nature. Therefore,
>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels is
>
> unnatural — it's human-caused, thus unnatural.
>
things humans do are natural. You just want to redefine
terms to exclude people from nature. That is unnatural.
Governor Swill
Jan 27, 2024, 6:12:22 AMJan 27
to
On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 12:32:07 -0700, Just Wondering <J...@jw.com> wrote:
>On 1/26/2024 9:01 AM, Wilson Woods wrote:
>> On 1/25/2024 11:00 AM, scooter lied:
>>> "Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning
>>>> fossil fuels is not naturally occurring.
>>>
>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels is
>>
>> unnatural — it's human-caused, thus unnatural.
>>
>The last I checked, humans are part of nature. Therefore,
>things humans do are natural.
Yeah, air conditioning, automobiles and polyester are all *extremely* natural.
>On 1/26/2024 9:01 AM, Wilson Woods wrote:
>> On 1/25/2024 11:00 AM, scooter lied:
>>> "Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning
>>>> fossil fuels is not naturally occurring.
>>>
>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels is
>>
>> unnatural — it's human-caused, thus unnatural.
>>
>The last I checked, humans are part of nature. Therefore,
>things humans do are natural.
> You just want to redefine
>terms to exclude people from nature. That is unnatural.
Swill
--
A Republican making sense:
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2023/10/15/sotu-crenshaw-full.cnn
It's really hard to screw up America.
A lot of people have been trying for well over 250 years
but we're still on top. - Dan Crenshaw (R) Texas
GO TRUMP! Go farther . . . FARTHER . . . I CAN STILL HEAR YOU!
Heroyam slava! Glory to the Heroes!
Sláva Ukrajíni! Glory to Ukraine!
Putin tse prezervatyv! Putin is a condom!
Go here to donate to Ukrainian relief.
<https://www2.deloitte.com/ua/uk/pages/registration-forms/help-cities.html>
Just Wondering
Jan 27, 2024, 12:50:37 PMJan 27
to
On 1/27/2024 4:12 AM, Governor Swill wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 12:32:07 -0700, Just Wondering <J...@jw.com> wrote:
>> On 1/26/2024 9:01 AM, Wilson Woods wrote:
>>> On 1/25/2024 11:00 AM, scooter lied:
>>>> "Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning
>>>>> fossil fuels is not naturally occurring.
>>>>
>>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels is
>>>
>>> unnatural — it's human-caused, thus unnatural.
>>>
>> The last I checked, humans are part of nature. Therefore,
>> things humans do are natural.
>
> Yeah, air conditioning, automobiles and polyester are all *extremely* natural.
>
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 12:32:07 -0700, Just Wondering <J...@jw.com> wrote:
>> On 1/26/2024 9:01 AM, Wilson Woods wrote:
>>> On 1/25/2024 11:00 AM, scooter lied:
>>>> "Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning
>>>>> fossil fuels is not naturally occurring.
>>>>
>>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels is
>>>
>>> unnatural — it's human-caused, thus unnatural.
>>>
>> The last I checked, humans are part of nature. Therefore,
>> things humans do are natural.
>
> Yeah, air conditioning, automobiles and polyester are all *extremely* natural.
>
you think it means." - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride.
>> You just want to redefine
>> terms to exclude people from nature. That is unnatural.
>
> You want to exclude humans from a planet that cannot support human life.
>
multi-cellular species that ever existed. Taken as a whole,
a small CO2-driven temperature rise is actually good for the
ecosphere.
Governor Swill
Jan 27, 2024, 3:14:11 PMJan 27
to
Just Wondering
Jan 27, 2024, 4:18:03 PMJan 27
to
On 1/27/2024 1:14 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 10:50:34 -0700, Just Wondering <J...@jw.com> wrote:
>> On 1/27/2024 4:12 AM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>> On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 12:32:07 -0700, Just Wondering <J...@jw.com> wrote:
>>>> On 1/26/2024 9:01 AM, Wilson Woods wrote:
>>>>> On 1/25/2024 11:00 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning
>>>>>>> fossil fuels is not naturally occurring.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels is
>>>>>
>>>>> unnatural — it's human-caused, thus unnatural.
>>>>>
>>>> The last I checked, humans are part of nature. Therefore,
>>>> things humans do are natural.
>>>
>>> Yeah, air conditioning, automobiles and polyester are all *extremely* natural.
>>>
>> "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what
>> you think it means." - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride.
>>
>>>> You just want to redefine
>>>> terms to exclude people from nature. That is unnatural.
>>>
>>> You want to exclude humans from a planet that cannot support human life.
>>>
>> Now you're just being silly. Humans are the most adaptable
>> multi-cellular species that ever existed. Taken as a whole,
>> a small CO2-driven temperature rise is actually good for the
>> ecosphere.
>
> Small? Like, how many parts per million?
>
Temperatures are not measured in parts per million.
> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 10:50:34 -0700, Just Wondering <J...@jw.com> wrote:
>> On 1/27/2024 4:12 AM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>> On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 12:32:07 -0700, Just Wondering <J...@jw.com> wrote:
>>>> On 1/26/2024 9:01 AM, Wilson Woods wrote:
>>>>> On 1/25/2024 11:00 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning
>>>>>>> fossil fuels is not naturally occurring.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels is
>>>>>
>>>>> unnatural — it's human-caused, thus unnatural.
>>>>>
>>>> The last I checked, humans are part of nature. Therefore,
>>>> things humans do are natural.
>>>
>>> Yeah, air conditioning, automobiles and polyester are all *extremely* natural.
>>>
>> "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what
>> you think it means." - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride.
>>
>>>> You just want to redefine
>>>> terms to exclude people from nature. That is unnatural.
>>>
>>> You want to exclude humans from a planet that cannot support human life.
>>>
>> Now you're just being silly. Humans are the most adaptable
>> multi-cellular species that ever existed. Taken as a whole,
>> a small CO2-driven temperature rise is actually good for the
>> ecosphere.
>
> Small? Like, how many parts per million?
>
Max Boot
Jan 27, 2024, 4:30:55 PMJan 27
to
On 1/27/2024 9:50 AM, Francis Mark Hansen <fmh...@comcast.net>, sleazy rent-skip
chaser, possible polygamist and irrational gun nut, lied:
> On 1/27/2024 4:12 AM, Governor Swill wrote:
>> On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 12:32:07 -0700, Francis Mark Hansen <fmh...@comcast.net>, sleazy rent-skip chaser, possible polygamist and irrational gun nut, lied:
>>> On 1/26/2024 9:01 AM, Wilson Woods wrote:
>>>> On 1/25/2024 11:00 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning
>>>>>> fossil fuels is not naturally occurring.
>>>>>
>>>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels is
>>>>
>>>> unnatural — it's human-caused, thus unnatural.
>>>>
>>> The last I checked, humans are part of nature. Therefore,
>>> things humans do are natural.
Humans originally did not naturally burn anything, Francis. It's a learned behavior.
>>
>> Yeah, air conditioning, automobiles and polyester are all *extremely* natural.
>
> "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what
> you think it means."
You keep using "naturally occurring" in a wrong way, Francis. "Naturally
occurring," Francis, *means* "not caused or created by humans." That's what it
means, Francis.
>
>>> You just want to redefine
>>> terms to exclude people from nature. That is unnatural.
>>
>> You want to exclude humans from a planet that cannot support human life.
>>
> Now you're just being silly. Humans are the most adaptable
> multi-cellular species that ever existed. Taken as a whole,
> a small CO2-driven temperature rise is actually good for the
> ecosphere.
The rise in atmospheric CO2 is *already* far beyond "small," Francis, and it is
horrific for the "ecosphere" [sic].
chaser, possible polygamist and irrational gun nut, lied:
> On 1/27/2024 4:12 AM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>> On 1/26/2024 9:01 AM, Wilson Woods wrote:
>>>> On 1/25/2024 11:00 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning
>>>>>> fossil fuels is not naturally occurring.
>>>>>
>>>>> The emission of carbon dioxide and methane by burning fossil fuels is
>>>>
>>>> unnatural — it's human-caused, thus unnatural.
>>>>
>>> The last I checked, humans are part of nature. Therefore,
>>> things humans do are natural.
>>
>> Yeah, air conditioning, automobiles and polyester are all *extremely* natural.
>
> "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what
> you think it means."
occurring," Francis, *means* "not caused or created by humans." That's what it
means, Francis.
>
>>> You just want to redefine
>>> terms to exclude people from nature. That is unnatural.
>>
>> You want to exclude humans from a planet that cannot support human life.
>>
> Now you're just being silly. Humans are the most adaptable
> multi-cellular species that ever existed. Taken as a whole,
> a small CO2-driven temperature rise is actually good for the
> ecosphere.
horrific for the "ecosphere" [sic].
Governor Swill
Jan 28, 2024, 10:07:34 PMJan 28
to
claim that it's good for ecosphere.
A better retort might have been to refer to Venus, extremely high in CO2 and temperature
yet barren.
0 new messages