Obama's Socialist Agenda Exposed
- Thread starter beenthere
- Start date
Dude, you're acting like butt hurt little woman, if ya got something to say, spit it the hell out, why all the fucking drama?
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
canndo
Well-Known Member
By my count I have said it at the very least - 7 times within that thread. the request is contained within that thread, how about going there and completing things.
Just sayin.
What's the matter, can't find it dipshit?
canndo
Well-Known Member
Will it make a difference if I present it to you? I notice that you are reduced to calling me names. It seems as though my contentions are correct.
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
Obama did this same stunt last election.
After winning the election.
After winning the election.
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
I've always heard that if your debate opponent is reduced to name calling you've won. If that's true UB loses a lot of debates here.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Don't know, I never debated him.
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
apologies, I shouldn't have called out names there but there are a handful of people I've noticed that resort to name calling. UB is not always guilty of this, he's just the most recognizable name I know. I still have much respect.
I usually have to leave a thread to keep myself from replying in kind. It's reflexive I think and human nature to defend yourself in kind. Calling out UB was hypocritical and poor example of personal growth on my part. I try to emulate a few of the posters here (a lot begin with the letter C I've noticed) that stay out of the mud.
I usually have to leave a thread to keep myself from replying in kind. It's reflexive I think and human nature to defend yourself in kind. Calling out UB was hypocritical and poor example of personal growth on my part. I try to emulate a few of the posters here (a lot begin with the letter C I've noticed) that stay out of the mud.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
canndo
Well-Known Member
So long as we actually understand that our political ideology is not us, that if it is attacked WE are not attacked then we can discuss rationaly. I am not my beliefs.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
vulcanism, the philosophy and teachings of Surak of Vulcan? or do you mean perhaps the heating of rubber and latex to create a harder more durable finished product?
Volcanism which is to say the geologic processes which vent heat, magma and gasses from the mantle to the crust and surface releases vast amounts of carbon dioxide with every eruption, but also through geysers fissures fumaroles etc...
heres some links for your perusal.
http://www.emsei.psu.edu/~brantley/publications/CO2 emissions from Yellowstone.pdf
put on your math hat...
global co2 estimates from surface volcanoes is estimated by these eggheads to be between 6 and 7 x 10 to the 12th power mols per year. i cant do that kind of math! my brain stopped counting at "thats a fucking shitload"
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0009254100003879
http://geology.gsapubs.org/content/23/10/933.abstract
these seeps and gyesers and volcanic vents release millions of tons of co2 and so2 every year, and there are thousands of these things all over the earth including many we dont even know about and cant even measure at the sea floor.
the usgs offers some interesting "insights" but their sources and motivations are dubious, and they dont even bother to show you their math.
http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/archive/2007/07_02_15.html
the usgs holds your view that human activity has eclipsed volcanoes (but they only mention volcanoes, not seeps fumaroles geysers etc...) as a source of co2, but they offer no sources for their claims and i find their support for global warming theology suspect at best.
heres the numbers they deign to offer with no sourcing or explanation of how they were determined :
"Our studies show that globally, volcanoes on land and under the sea release a total of about 200 million tonnes of CO[SUB]2[/SUB] annually." 200 million metric tons. sounds a little light to me when they also declare: "Our studies here at Kilauea show that the eruption discharges between 8,000 and 30,000 metric tonnes of CO[SUB]2[/SUB] into the atmosphere each day." thats just killauea, not aetna, jellystone, mud mountain, mount fuji etc, and thats just each day....
and they further claim that human use of fossil fuels releases 26.8 billion metric tons. and thats extremeley unlikely.
anybody who leans back and opens their mouth like a hungry baby bird waiting for the un climate clowns to regurgitate some sweet vectar for them ought to have their lab coats taken away.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
"Vulcanism" is actually the correct term. Vulcanologists study volcanic processes.
Why do you consider the 26.8Gt of CO2 emissions a year to be unlikely? You get that from burning less than 10Gt of coal alone ... cn
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From Wikipedia:
Coal is mined commercially in over 50 countries. Over 7,036 Mt/yr of hard coal is currently produced, a substantial increase over the past 25 years.[SUP][11][/SUP] In 2006, the world production of brown coal and lignite was slightly over 1,000 Mt, with Germany the world’s largest brown coal producer at 194.4 Mt, and China second at 100.6 Mt.[SUP][12][/SUP]
Coal production has grown fastest in Asia, while Europe has declined. The top coal mining nations (figures in brackets are 2009 estimate of total coal production in millions of tons)[SUP][13][/SUP] are:
- China (3,050 Mt)
- US (973 Mt)
- India (557 Mt)
- Australia (409 Mt)
- South Africa (250 Mt)
- Russia (298 Mt)
- Indonesia (252 Mt)
- Poland (135 Mt)
- Kazakhstan (101 Mt)
- Colombia (72 Mt)
Global coal production is expected to reach 7,000 Mt/yr in 2030 (Update required, world coal production is already past 7,000 Mt/yr and by 2030 will probably be closer to 13,000 Mt/yr), with China accounting for most of this increase. Steam coal production is projected to reach around 5,200 Mt/yr; coking coal 620 Mt/yr; and brown coal 1,200 Mt/yr.[SUP][14][/SUP]
bedspirit
Active Member
Factories pay taxes? I thought they just created a subsidiary, moved that subsidiary to the Caymans, and then have said subsidiary buy out the parent company.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
10 billion tonnes of coal can burn to release 28.6 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide? when burned, coal nearly triples it's weight? even if we assume the addition of oxygen to the coal's carbon on a 2:1 ration, oxygen is so much lighter than carbon it would be impossible to nearly triple the weight, and that presumes that coal is 100% carbon, and the burning process binds 100% of the carbon to exactly 2 oxygen atoms every single time, and any of those assertions would be insupportable.
i really gotta see some scientific data on coal nearly tripling it's weight when burned.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
the UN global warming clowns have been making up numbers for so long i dont think even they know what's real and what's faked. shits gettin crazy.
here in california we get stories all the time from the press claiming we are in the biggest nastiest drought ever seen by humanity, despite record rainfall and record snowpack for 3 years running.
every dam in northern california had to release shitloads of water this spring, and still have to dump a lot, cuz they are at capacity, and the real snowmelt has barely begun.
just last week i heard a scary report about how we got record low rainfail this june.... in a region that almost never gets rainfall in june... ????????
last june we had a hailstorm, and that was global warming too. only it wasnt. back in the early 80's it snowed in los angeles, and they said that was proof of the coming ice age caused by burning fossil fuels. seriously, 30 years ago we were causing an ice age, 10 years ago we were causing a worldwide pressure cooker, and now.... we are causing hurricanes and typhoons and earthquakes. if the story keeps changing i have to doubt the story.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Atomic weight of carbon: 12 (precisely 12.0107) grams per gram-atom
Molecular weight of oxygen: 32 (precisely 31.9988 grams per mole)
They combine to yield carbon dioxide, m.w. 44, precisely 44.01. So 44/12 is three and two/thirds. Yes; an eleven-thirds proportion factor (precisely 3.6642) needs to be applied.
Not too long ago, i had a pleasant debate with you about internal combustion. I would have been shocked to know that this fact wasn't readily at hand to you. cn