Australian Politics Forum - Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors.

Dnarever Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 61891 Here Gender:	Re: Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors. Reply #45 - Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:20am bambu wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:18am: Nah, just asking some simple questions. Is carbon dioxide a pollutant? In the correct usage nothing is a pollutant but when in excess almost anything can be considered to be polluting.
Back to top	IP Logged

adelcrow

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20133
everywhere
Gender: male

Re: Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors.
Reply #46 - Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:23am

Dnarever wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:20am:

bambu wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:18am:

Nah, just asking some simple questions.

Is carbon dioxide a pollutant?

In the correct usage nothing is a pollutant but when in excess almost anything can be considered to be polluting.

Like I said..if they haven't grasped the concept by now they never will

Back to top

Go the Bunnies

IP Logged

bambu Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 1084 Gender:	Re: Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors. Reply #47 - Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:29am What's this 'carbonated water' in my Coke Zero drink?
Back to top	IP Logged

progressiveslol Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 17029	Re: Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors. Reply #48 - Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:31am MOTR wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:03am: progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 8:34am: if this thread isnt the biggest waaaaaaambulance thread I have seen........ Just think of it as another opportunity to display your intellectual cowardice, progs. Pretty hard to be matching yours right now.
Back to top	IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors.
Reply #49 - Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:33am

Dnarever wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:20am:

bambu wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:18am:

Nah, just asking some simple questions.

Is carbon dioxide a pollutant?

In the correct usage nothing is a pollutant but when in excess almost anything can be considered to be polluting.

The US EPA's finding doesn't say carbon dioxide, or CO2, is by itself a pollutant. Rather, it is the increasing concentrations of the gas that makes it a hazard to human health.

I don't care what you want to call it, increasing atmospheric CO2 is a hazard to human health. It places our well being at risk and places in jeopardy the well being of our children.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:41am by MOTR »

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors.
Reply #50 - Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:37am

progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:31am:

MOTR wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:03am:

progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 8:34am:

if this thread isnt the biggest waaaaaaambulance thread I have seen........

Just think of it as another opportunity to display your intellectual cowardice, progs.

Pretty hard to be matching yours right now.

How about you start by presenting an argument or at least a proposition, progs. Are you going to deny that humans are responsible for increasing the concentration of atmospheric CO2 by 40% since industrialisation.

Are you going to deny Alan Jones keeps this uncontested fact hidden from his listners.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors.
Reply #51 - Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:44am

MOTR wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:33am:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:20am:

bambu wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:18am:

Nah, just asking some simple questions.

Is carbon dioxide a pollutant?

In the correct usage nothing is a pollutant but when in excess almost anything can be considered to be polluting.

The US EPA's finding doesn't say carbon dioxide, or CO2, is by itself a pollutant. Rather, it is the increasing concentrations of the gas that makes it a hazard to human health.

I don't care what you want to call it, increasing atmospheric CO2 is a hazard to human health. It places our well being at risk and places in jeopardy the well being of our children.

And we know the idiots who are following the epa.

Agenda driven policy, who would have guessed.

Anyway, I thought you were all pseudo sciencecy, now you are following a government agency.

Back to top

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors.
Reply #52 - Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:53am

progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:44am:

MOTR wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:33am:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:20am:

bambu wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:18am:

Nah, just asking some simple questions.

Is carbon dioxide a pollutant?

In the correct usage nothing is a pollutant but when in excess almost anything can be considered to be polluting.

The US EPA's finding doesn't say carbon dioxide, or CO2, is by itself a pollutant. Rather, it is the increasing concentrations of the gas that makes it a hazard to human health.

I don't care what you want to call it, increasing atmospheric CO2 is a hazard to human health. It places our well being at risk and places in jeopardy the well being of our children.

And we know the idiots who are following the epa.

Agenda driven policy, who would have guessed.

Anyway, I thought you were all pseudo sciencecy, now you are following a government agency.

That about sums up progs' argument. The world's not warming, Arctic ice isn't disappearing, it's all a massive conspiracy. You can't trust the scientist, you can't trust government agencies.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

bambu

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1084
Gender: male

Re: Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors.
Reply #53 - Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:54am

MOTR wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:33am:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:20am:

bambu wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:18am:

Nah, just asking some simple questions.

Is carbon dioxide a pollutant?

In the correct usage nothing is a pollutant but when in excess almost anything can be considered to be polluting.

The US EPA's finding doesn't say carbon dioxide, or CO2, is by itself a pollutant. Rather, it is the increasing concentrations of the gas that makes it a hazard to human health.

I don't care what you want to call it, increasing atmospheric CO2 is a hazard to human health. It places our well being at risk and places in jeopardy the well being of our children.

The US EPA also says that sea levels are rising, which they're not.

Back to top

IP Logged

adelcrow

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20133
everywhere
Gender: male

Re: Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors.
Reply #54 - Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:54am

MOTR wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:53am:

progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:44am:

MOTR wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:33am:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:20am:

bambu wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:18am:

Nah, just asking some simple questions.

Is carbon dioxide a pollutant?

In the correct usage nothing is a pollutant but when in excess almost anything can be considered to be polluting.

The US EPA's finding doesn't say carbon dioxide, or CO2, is by itself a pollutant. Rather, it is the increasing concentrations of the gas that makes it a hazard to human health.

I don't care what you want to call it, increasing atmospheric CO2 is a hazard to human health. It places our well being at risk and places in jeopardy the well being of our children.

And we know the idiots who are following the epa.

Agenda driven policy, who would have guessed.

Anyway, I thought you were all pseudo sciencecy, now you are following a government agency.

That about sums up progs' argument. The world's not warming, Arctic ice isn't disappearing, it's all a massive conspiracy.

Short of writing it on a brick and slapping them around with it they will never grasp whats going on so its really not worth the energy anymore

Back to top

Go the Bunnies

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors.
Reply #55 - Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:54am

MOTR wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:53am:

progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:44am:

MOTR wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:33am:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:20am:

bambu wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:18am:

Nah, just asking some simple questions.

Is carbon dioxide a pollutant?

In the correct usage nothing is a pollutant but when in excess almost anything can be considered to be polluting.

The US EPA's finding doesn't say carbon dioxide, or CO2, is by itself a pollutant. Rather, it is the increasing concentrations of the gas that makes it a hazard to human health.

I don't care what you want to call it, increasing atmospheric CO2 is a hazard to human health. It places our well being at risk and places in jeopardy the well being of our children.

And we know the idiots who are following the epa.

Agenda driven policy, who would have guessed.

Anyway, I thought you were all pseudo sciencecy, now you are following a government agency.

That about sums up progs' argument. The world's not warming, Arctic ice isn't disappearing, it's all a massive conspiracy.

I know the drill. You say it often enough, people will believe it, even against the temperature record that has not warmed for 16years.

What kind of indoctrination program is it that can be so powerful to these AGW'rs that they believe the crap that comes out of their minds.

Back to top

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors.
Reply #56 - Oct 20^th, 2012 at 10:02am

bambu wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:54am:

MOTR wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:33am:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:20am:

bambu wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:18am:

Nah, just asking some simple questions.

Is carbon dioxide a pollutant?

In the correct usage nothing is a pollutant but when in excess almost anything can be considered to be polluting.

The US EPA's finding doesn't say carbon dioxide, or CO2, is by itself a pollutant. Rather, it is the increasing concentrations of the gas that makes it a hazard to human health.

I don't care what you want to call it, increasing atmospheric CO2 is a hazard to human health. It places our well being at risk and places in jeopardy the well being of our children.

The US EPA also says that sea levels are rising, which they're not.

You know all the flooding that comes with a La Niña, where would that water usually be, bambu? Again you are a victim of exclusion. Perhaps you need to join the boycott and start getting some real facts.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

bambu

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1084
Gender: male

Re: Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors.
Reply #57 - Oct 20^th, 2012 at 10:04am

MOTR wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:37am:

progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:31am:

MOTR wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:03am:

progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 8:34am:

if this thread isnt the biggest waaaaaaambulance thread I have seen........

Just think of it as another opportunity to display your intellectual cowardice, progs.

Pretty hard to be matching yours right now.

How about you start by presenting an argument or at least a proposition, progs. Are you going to deny that humans are responsible for increasing the concentration of atmospheric CO2 by 40% since industrialisation.

Are you going to deny Alan Jones keeps this uncontested fact hidden from his listners.

I'm no Einstein, but let's see;

97% of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere is produced by nature.
Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased by 40% since industrialisation.

x + y = z

So the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere produced by nature is still 97%.

Back to top

IP Logged

philperth2010

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21097
Perth
Gender: male

Re: Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors.
Reply #58 - Oct 20^th, 2012 at 10:09am

If you don't like his show don't listen to it.....The only time I ever hear about Alan Jones is when he makes a huge blunder or from his fan club on the Internet.....This campaign against him seams more motivated against Jones personality and political views than any offence he has caused.....I am over Alan Jones already!!!

Roll Eyes

Back to top

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Time to boycott 2GB and all its sponsors.
Reply #59 - Oct 20^th, 2012 at 10:15am

progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:54am:

MOTR wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:53am:

progressiveslol wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:44am:

MOTR wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:33am:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:20am:

bambu wrote on Oct 20^th, 2012 at 9:18am:

Nah, just asking some simple questions.

Is carbon dioxide a pollutant?

In the correct usage nothing is a pollutant but when in excess almost anything can be considered to be polluting.

The US EPA's finding doesn't say carbon dioxide, or CO2, is by itself a pollutant. Rather, it is the increasing concentrations of the gas that makes it a hazard to human health.

I don't care what you want to call it, increasing atmospheric CO2 is a hazard to human health. It places our well being at risk and places in jeopardy the well being of our children.

And we know the idiots who are following the epa.

Agenda driven policy, who would have guessed.

Anyway, I thought you were all pseudo sciencecy, now you are following a government agency.

That about sums up progs' argument. The world's not warming, Arctic ice isn't disappearing, it's all a massive conspiracy.

I know the drill. You say it often enough, people will believe it, even against the temperature record that has not warmed for 16years.

What kind of indoctrination program is it that can be so powerful to these AGW'rs that they believe the crap that comes out of their minds.

Basic physics tells us our planet should be warming and our satellites back this up. Our temperature record only tells us a small part of the story, 90% of the warming is occurring in our oceans. However, lets ignore this reality and only look at the temperature record. Only a fool would ignore the upward trend we can clearly see in our temperature record.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged