Global warming hoax is Eugenics 2.0

[Dick Fein]

The earth does not need to balance co2 levels.
They rise and fall as the earth warms and cools.
They are not the cause, they are the result of climate change.
Placing a value on carbon is as nonsensical as basing your economy on tulips.
But we have been there and done that and that is not even the stupidest thing we have done.

[Prawn Connery]

Climate Denialist Logic 101

Case 1: CO2 does not affect climate - climate affects CO2

Case 2: Puddles are the planet's forgotten intelligence - they can find ditches and holes in the ground exactly the same shape as them

[Prawn Connery]

...and it has the added benefit of being toxic to animal life, making it more effective at balancing CO2 levels.

Unfortunately, it's not toxic to the anaerobic bacteria that break algae down when they die, releasing huge amounts of CO2 into the water.

[Roots]

Do you have any links on these puddles...?

[Dick Fein]

...and it has the added benefit of being toxic to animal life, making it more effective at balancing CO2 levels.

Unfortunately, it's not toxic to the anaerobic bacteria that break algae down when they die, releasing huge amounts of CO2 into the water.

The water temperature dictates how much co2 the oceans can absorb, okay? They have warm periods and cool periods. El Nino and La Nina, Capiche?

[Prawn Connery]

The water temperature dictates how much co2 the oceans can absorb, okay? They have warm periods and cool periods. El Nino and La Nina, Capiche?

Ah. So liquid absorption of gases has nothing to do with the amount of gases they come in contact with, correct? Nor are those same liquids affected by temperature changes caused by atmospheric warming conditions produced by the same gases which provide a feedback loop, correct?

I guess, using Climate Denialist Potato Logic, that means we can continue to pump as much CO2 into the atmosphere as we like, as the oceans will absorb ever-increasing amounts of CO2 as they continue to cool (cooler liquids being able to absorb more gasses than warmer liquids) . . .

. . . Except oceans temperatures are rising. And so are atmospheric CO2 levels. So your Climate Denialist Potato Logic doesn't seem to be all that logical after all. It would be the opposite of what is currently happening.

Because if Climate Denialist Potato Logic was indeed "logical", temperatures would not continue to rise over time, and no would CO2 build-up in the atmosphere.

The Climate Denialist Potato Logic Trump Card is, of course, that none of these things are really happening. Ocean temperatures are not rising, and neither are CO2 levels.

It's all a conspiracy to steal our potatoes!

[Prawn Connery]

Do you have any links on these puddles...?

No. NASA bribed the internet to remove all the links so it could make even more money out of weather forecasting.

Fortunately, one video escaped.

[Roots]

Most of the ocean water has a pretty consistent temperature, more true the deeper you go and the deeper you go the colder the water and the more DO it holds....Have no idea what point I’m trying to make.

[Prawn Connery]

Most of the ocean water has a pretty consistent temperature, more true the deeper you go and the deeper you go the colder the water and the more DO it holds....Have no idea what point I’m trying to make.

You are making a very good point. That point is, El Nino and La Nina are cycles, but they are also localised - they do not raise and lower the temperature of the entire ocean, only parts of it.

And each part is compensated for. So during El Nino events, some parts of the planet experience higher temperatures and more rain than others - which experience lower rainfall and temperatures - which is the opposite for La Nina events.

All of which has NOTHING to do with the mean temperature of the world's oceans - which continue to rise despite the above cycles. (OK, there is a correlation betwen rising ocean temperatures and more extreme La Nina and El Nino events, but one science topic at a time . . .)

And here's the kicker: If what the Climate Denialist Potatoes say is true, how could the ocean possibly be increasing in temperature with an associated rise in CO2 absorption???

Didn't Dick just tell us that CO2 absorption is entirely reliant on water temperatures? And, if so, shouldn't there be LESS CO2 in the oceans as temperatures rise and cannot absorb as much gas?

The problem with the Climate Denialist Pototoes is they don't have a very good understanding of the science because, deep down, they don't trust or believe in science. Instead, they come up with childish analogies that suit their thought processes and find it hard to understand anything beyond their limited capabilities.

I mean, you either understand it or you don't. If you understand something, you are more likely to believe it - including the reasons behind it. If you don't understand something, you are more likely to ridicule it and try to invent alternative hypothoses more suited to your simplistic view of the world.

[Prawn Connery]

The water temperature dictates how much co2 the oceans can absorb, okay? They have warm periods and cool periods. El Nino and La Nina, Capiche?

Hey Dick, I'm confused.

Are El Nino and La Nina real, or are they also part of your conspiracy theory? If the sky is blue - and El Nino and El Nina are real - does that make us all "group thinkers" to believe it?

You do know that both these climate events are documented and recorded by the same climate scientists who are documenting the current global warming event and CO2 rise, right?

So how do you justify using climate science when it agrees with your argument and not when it doesn't?

Isn't that just a little bit - I don't know - hypocritical?