Paul

Clearfield, PA

#47803 Mar 4, 2013
Farnsworth wrote:
<quoted text>
Eitherr he morphd into Galt or they finally came and got him.....
Huh?

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#47804 Mar 4, 2013
Quoth the Raven wrote:
Is TaxNoMore nevermore?
LOL! Yep he is.

After a particularly racist posting binge a couple of weeks ago, he and all his posts disappeared. No evidence here that he ever existed.

I'm surprised that Topix actually did that, so good on Topix!

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#47805 Mar 4, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
Humans should stop breathing and exhaling CO2.
Eliminate 500 million or so Chinese and make a huge dent in global warming.
Or turn off the heat and freeze to death.
Seriously - go educate yourself...

----------

How does respiration by humans and animals affect carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere?

Answer:

Humans exhale about 1 kg of carbon dioxide per day. The exact amount depends on age, sex, size, and most importantly activity level. Multiply that by a world population of six billion and you get a very large number.

However, human exhalation of carbon dioxide is part of a closed system. There can be no net addition of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere because the amount of carbon dioxide we exhale canít be greater than the carbon we put into our bodies by eating plants, or eating animals that eat plants. The plants got the carbon from the atmosphere via photosynthesis.

This closed system is true for any animal, not just humans. It is also true for a growing population. You simply canít have more animals than there are plants to support those animals.

The reason why burning fossil fuels is a concern is because it is not a closed loop over human time scales. Extracting coal and oil and burning them puts carbon back into the atmosphere that plants removed millions of years ago.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#47806 Mar 4, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
Assuming that you are correct, a ridiculous assumption, how does man reverse global warming?
At this point, it's not about reversing global warming. It's about mitigation.

mit∑i∑ga∑tion
noun
- the act of lessening the force or intensity of something unpleasant

Again - go educate yourself...

----------

Climate change mitigation is action to decrease the intensity of radiative forcing in order to reduce the effects of global warming. Most often, climate change mitigation scenarios involve reductions in the concentrations of greenhouse gases, either by reducing their sources or by increasing their sinks.

The United Nations (UN) defines mitigation in the context of climate change, as a human intervention to reduce the sources or enhance the sinks of greenhouse gases.

Examples include using fossil fuels more efficiently for industrial processes or electricity generation, switching to renewable energy (solar energy or wind power), improving the insulation of buildings, and expanding forests and other "sinks" to remove greater amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_m...
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#47809 Mar 4, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
At this point, it's not about reversing global warming. It's about mitigation.
mit∑i∑ga∑tion
noun
- the act of lessening the force or intensity of something unpleasant
Again - go educate yourself...
----------
Climate change mitigation is action to decrease the intensity of radiative forcing in order to reduce the effects of global warming. Most often, climate change mitigation scenarios involve reductions in the concentrations of greenhouse gases, either by reducing their sources or by increasing their sinks.
The United Nations (UN) defines mitigation in the context of climate change, as a human intervention to reduce the sources or enhance the sinks of greenhouse gases.
Examples include using fossil fuels more efficiently for industrial processes or electricity generation, switching to renewable energy (solar energy or wind power), improving the insulation of buildings, and expanding forests and other "sinks" to remove greater amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_m...
All at the cost of destroying our economy in reaction to an unproven theory.

Increased or decreased solar activity will dwarf any efforts by man to control global temperatures.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#47810 Mar 4, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
All at the cost of destroying our economy in reaction to an unproven theory.
Increased or decreased solar activity will dwarf any efforts by man to control global temperatures.
How many Superstorm Sandy's will it take to destroy our economy?

How many Hurricane Isaac's will it take to destroy our economy?

How many mid-western droughts will it take to destroy our economy?

How many thousands of square miles destroyed by wildfires will it take to destroy our economy?

How many record tornado seasons will it take to destroy our economy?

When you can only think short-term and cannot comprehend the long-term damage of inaction, you will inevitably reach conclusions like you do. It's a function of narrow self-interest and complete disregard for the interests of others. IOW - typical conservative ideological thinking.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#47811 Mar 4, 2013
John Galt wrote:
Increased or decreased solar activity will dwarf any efforts by man to control global temperatures.
You're really hung up on solar activity, aren't you?

Increased solar activity is not responsible for our current warming trend. That has been conclusively proven.

If you would gain even a basic education of the science behind global warming you wouldn't have to go around saying embarrassing things like this.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#47812 Mar 4, 2013
In 2012, the US had ELEVEN weather events that cost more than $1 billion...

----------

Preliminary Info on 2012 U.S. Billion-Dollar Extreme Weather/Climate Events

Today, NOAA released preliminary information on extreme weather and climate events in the U.S. for 2012 that are known to have reached the $1 billion threshold in losses.

As of December 20, NOAA estimates that the nation experienced 11 such events, to include seven severe weather/tornado events, two tropical storm/hurricane events, and the yearlong drought and associated wildfires.

These eleven events combined are believed to have caused 349 deaths
...
Economic losses for two events, Sandy and the yearlong drought, are the big drivers this year in terms of costs and are still being calculated. It will take months to develop a final, reliable estimate for each. Given how big these events are likely to be, NOAA estimates 2012 will surpass 2011 (exceeding $60 billion, CPI-adjusted to 2012 dollars) in terms of aggregate costs for annual billion-dollar disasters, even with fewer number of billion-dollar disasters.

The greatest annual loss to date was 2005 when Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, Wilma and Dennis struck Florida and the Gulf Coast states (costs exceeded $187 billion, CPI-adjusted to 2012 dollars).
Major Tom

Denver, CO

#47815 Mar 4, 2013
governor?

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#47820 Mar 4, 2013
what an idiot !!!!!

none of things happened b4 the industrial revolution ?

you really need to go educate your dumb azz !!!!

and to think you libheads have all the answers is hillarious !! just blame man LMAO !!!

you keep sucking that libwash up like a good lil drone danny boy ! strap up them boots and get to marching in step with the socialist agenda.

you really do need to go educate your dumb azz !!!
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
How many Superstorm Sandy's will it take to destroy our economy?
How many Hurricane Isaac's will it take to destroy our economy?
How many mid-western droughts will it take to destroy our economy?
How many thousands of square miles destroyed by wildfires will it take to destroy our economy?
How many record tornado seasons will it take to destroy our economy?
When you can only think short-term and cannot comprehend the long-term damage of inaction, you will inevitably reach conclusions like you do. It's a function of narrow self-interest and complete disregard for the interests of others. IOW - typical conservative ideological thinking.
Wheres it at PAT

Charleroi, PA

#47821 Mar 4, 2013
?
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#47828 Mar 4, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
How many Superstorm Sandy's will it take to destroy our economy?
How many Hurricane Isaac's will it take to destroy our economy?
How many mid-western droughts will it take to destroy our economy?
How many thousands of square miles destroyed by wildfires will it take to destroy our economy?
How many record tornado seasons will it take to destroy our economy?
When you can only think short-term and cannot comprehend the long-term damage of inaction, you will inevitably reach conclusions like you do. It's a function of narrow self-interest and complete disregard for the interests of others. IOW - typical conservative ideological thinking.
Rainstorm Sandy (and the other events) are weather and not climate change.

The damage from Rainstorm Sandy would have been minimal if people didn't build their homes on sand bars and filled tidal marshes. Giving these fools federal taxpayer dollars to rebuild on sand bars is insanity.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#47829 Mar 4, 2013
John Galt wrote:
<quoted text>
Rainstorm Sandy (and the other events) are weather and not climate change.
The damage from Rainstorm Sandy would have been minimal if people didn't build their homes on sand bars and filled tidal marshes. Giving these fools federal taxpayer dollars to rebuild on sand bars is insanity.
You think it's normal to have eleven storms where the damage exceeds $1 billion in one year?

Be serious.
jmdammit

Greensburg, PA

#47831 Mar 4, 2013
Wow!!! Windbag Dan the Man is still rambling on...and on...and on... And on a thread about Pa governor 2010.Anyone ever see "My Name is Earl" season 2 episode 8 - "Robbed a Stoner Blind" ? Perhaps Dan the Man Chambersburg should post as Earl Hickey Camden.Why post hundreds of pages of "evidence","pro of","studiies"a nd "education" and not one sentence of "solutions"?By the way,I supported Jack Wagner in 2010.(I may have failed to mention this before.)He doesn't cause global warming.
Frank

Fairview, PA

#47832 Mar 4, 2013
Funny chit as danthetard goes al gore!

LMAO!
skip the pee pee

Erie, PA

#47833 Mar 4, 2013
Frank wrote:
Funny chit as danthetard goes al gore!
LMAO!
Better get a 2nd job is your lazy butt is going to support anyone for anything Fronk. You can't pay your taxes as it is.

Sssssssssssssssssst. Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
jmdammit

Greensburg, PA

#47834 Mar 4, 2013
Frank wrote:
Funny chit as danthetard goes al gore!
LMAO!
...and what does global warming have to do with Pa governor in 2010? I admit I am not a global warming expert.But windbag Dan claims to be one? Why doesn't he get on a REAL global warming forum? Because he would get his ass kicked."If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance,baffle 'em with bullshit !"
jmdammit

Greensburg, PA

#47835 Mar 4, 2013
And I almost forgot, I supported Jack Wagner in 2010.
White Lightning

Mckeesport, PA

#47836 Mar 4, 2013
Global warming didn't work so now it's Climate Change . No shyt - most of the country has four seasons. When the weirdos started this 'Erf Day' crap in 1969 - they said a new Ice Age was coming & that by the 2000, most of Europe would have starved to death from the inability to grow food. Guess what - WRONG . Then it was the Ozone - spotted owls & snail darters ! Hogwash - smoke another bowl or glass pipe & dream up some more BS to suck money out of the taxpayers instead of getting a real job.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#47837 Mar 4, 2013
jmdammit wrote:
Wow!!! Windbag Dan the Man is still rambling on...and on...and on... And on a thread about Pa governor 2010.Anyone ever see "My Name is Earl" season 2 episode 8 - "Robbed a Stoner Blind" ? Perhaps Dan the Man Chambersburg should post as Earl Hickey Camden.Why post hundreds of pages of "evidence","pro of","studiies"a nd "education" and not one sentence of "solutions"?By the way,I supported Jack Wagner in 2010.(I may have failed to mention this before.)He doesn't cause global warming.
Aaaaaaaannnndd there it is!

Every single wingnut. Every single time. Without exception.

When they've been defeated in legitimate argument, they resort to personal attacks.

They come with a veneer of politeness and respect, but start confronting their bullshit with facts and reality and they are all are the same underneath - name-calling personal attackers.

Thank you JM. You've lived up to the stereotype.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Phoenixville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Developer of synthetic cannabinoid therapies ex... Feb 8 Laura 1
rofo wawa (Oct '10) Jan 28 Jo Sheridan 31
Debate: Marijuana - Royersford, PA (Sep '10) Jan 28 Chip Sheridan 10
Collegeville Music Thread (May '12) Jan '15 Musikologist 18
Racially profiled at movie tavern in collegeville Jan '15 realistic 4
Review: 4 Less Furniture & Rugs (Nov '09) Jan '15 Renee ward 51
Senators propose pipeline impact fee Jan '15 Hobo Jim 3

Phoenixville News Video

Phoenixville Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Phoenixville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 12:05 am PST