@arteteco I am not "judging" but making a logical "observation", learn to discern between the two, @augustus I can and will provide you with totally independent non NASA/Energy (non George Soros NGO funded) data - there is a lot out there trust me. Augustus casting politics and even this reasonable debate to one side, purely on a *moral basis*, climate change or otherwise, do you not agree and believe that our children do not Deserve the toxic air they breathe, the leaded water they drink which is all destroying our earth and us - does your conscience not believe in using clean responsible sustainable materials and renewable organic (non chemical/GMO products) ? I ask you all this as these are inter-related social movements which will lead to a greener and cleaner planet and people 👍

@ozer @arteteco i agree with you about all those things. i am actually very against industrialism and the catastrophic effects it has on the ecosystem in general, but these things are not limited to potential atmospheric warming. i just think you can make a case for incinerating hydrocarbons en masse being a pretty bad idea without needing to invent stories like global warming 
Follow

@augustus
Augustus I enjoy our informed "discussions" (not even "debates") because your tone is mature and measured and yes incineration is bad because it catalyzes radioactivity. Ok here is non NASA/Energy Dept/non George Soros//NOAA proof of rising temperatures - the graph is based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and contemporary direct measurements, provides ample evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution how can you refute this Arteco and Augustus ? It is a study conducted by the totally Independent Vostok Institute of Ice core Data by the climatologist J.R. Petit et al.,

@ozer thanks. yes, i do think atmospheric CO2 has increased (to a whopping 0.04% of the atmosphere!!!!) whether that a) necessarily translates to an increase in warming or b) whether that warming is as a result of said CO2 and not due to other factors like solar radiation or milankovitch cycles remains to be seen.
i am also not an expert in atmospheric chemistry which is why my argument is mostly based around trying to convince the other person that the government is a dirty liar and not to be trusted, this way i don't need to get stuck into the guts and weeds of greenhouse mechanisms and so on. i will also say that i've basically said my piece here and i appreciate your receptive and respectful attitude towards difference of opinion, but i'm not interested in proselyting for my overly paranoid minority opinion on this topic anymore because i'm really tired of it, but thanks for listening
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.