Dr David Evans: Global Warming is Manmade?

[SgtSpiderMan]

Neither.

He does open by saying it has gotten warmer & CO2 acts as a greenhouse gas.

 

[toubab]

A second thing you are wrong about.

Anyone with a good understanding of the English language can tell by my previous answers that I know what the word means. With you, not so much.

 

[toubab]

He does open by saying it has gotten warmer & CO2 acts as a greenhouse gas.

Indisputable facts.

 

[Sean]

I was wrong earlier....

THIS is an emotional response!

I love being called stupid by someone that dumb. Brightens up my whole day.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Ah, so we have a huge misrepresentation of Dr. Evans, just as he said there would be in that additional video. Interesting.

Which misrepresentation would that be?

Everything I posted is reflected in his very own writings and various speaking engagements.

I linked video of him talking about the "banksters" and their plan for world domination.

His accusations that they were also "probably" responsible for the deaths of Lincoln and Garfield? From his paper “Manufacturing money, and global warming”

“The paper aristocracy has overwhelming wealth. They own or influence all the media – if only because every media organization borrows from banks. They influence almost all the institutions that employ professional economists, by supplying the money for PhDs and providing most of the lucrative consulting jobs for economists. They buy politicians by the truckload. The banksters have even killed the occasional thorn in their side—including, probably, two US presidents, Lincoln and Garfield…”

Still more "banksters" and Rothchild conspiracies here.

Or this video, where he espouses such theories as:
The Rothchild family conspiracy theory
States outright that global warming is a "hoax"
States that “agents of the Rothschild” where responsible for the establishment of the League of Nations and the later UN.
Suggests the real agenda of global warming is taxation, a global currency and global government

Nobody has to misrepresent this loon about anything. He discredits himself every time he opens his mouth.

 

[trysail]

I was wrong earlier....

THIS is an emotional response!

Like Mother Nature, I dislike morons (especially when they're professional whingers and habitual second-guessers ).


​

 

[phrodeau]

He does open by saying it has gotten warmer & CO2 acts as a greenhouse gas.

He says that climate change is a good thing, plants like CO2, the planet will be OK and everyone can just move further south. That is, unless we have a world government preventing people from moving to a place with greater freedoms and less taxation.

 

[toubab]

Which misrepresentation would that be?

Everything I posted is reflected in his very own writings and various speaking engagements.

I linked video of him talking about the "banksters" and their plan for world domination.

His accusations that they were also "probably" responsible for the deaths of Lincoln and Garfield? From his paper “Manufacturing money, and global warming”

“The paper aristocracy has overwhelming wealth. They own or influence all the media – if only because every media organization borrows from banks. They influence almost all the institutions that employ professional economists, by supplying the money for PhDs and providing most of the lucrative consulting jobs for economists. They buy politicians by the truckload. The banksters have even killed the occasional thorn in their side—including, probably, two US presidents, Lincoln and Garfield…”

Still more "banksters" and Rothchild conspiracies here.

Or this video, where he espouses such theories as:
The Rothchild family conspiracy theory
States outright that global warming is a "hoax"
States that “agents of the Rothschild” where responsible for the establishment of the League of Nations and the later UN.
Suggests the real agenda of global warming is taxation, a global currency and global government

Nobody has to misrepresent this loon about anything. He discredits himself every time he opens his mouth.

I was referring to the misrepresentation of anti-Semitism put forth by the person you corrected, of course.

 

[Wrong Element]

David Evans can call himself "Dr David Evans" because he has a Ph.D. in electrical engineering.

How this makes him an authority on the global climate is anyone's guess.

Deepak Chopra should be checking in with his opinion any second now.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Seventeen plus (17+) years of no significant warming.
Zero. Nil. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Bupkis.







​

Categorically false. The US had it's warmest year ever 2 years ago.
http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/noaa-warmest-12-months-on-reco/67773

Australia's was also very recent.
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/updates/articles/a005-sep-2013-warmest-on-record.shtml

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Indisputable facts.

Glad you agree. So since we both now agree that energy is being increasingly stored, where is it going?

 

[trysail]

Categorically false. The US had it's warmest year ever 2 years ago.
h teather.com/en/weather-news/noaa-warmest-12-months-on-reco/67773

Australia's was also very recent.
ht tp://www.bom.gov.au/climates/articles/a005-sep-2013-warmest-on-record.shtml

Word:

"Global"​

​

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Is it any surprise there are people who think we're dealing with the equivalent of a cult?



​

It's the very definition of a cult. No matter how much science you're presented with, you won't believe it because you're blindly following your cult.

I asked you a very simple & direct question, which you refused to answer. You even went so far as to say that the law of conservation of energy doesn't exist. Instead of dealing with the facts, you've avoided dealing with them.

 

[RobDownSouth]

This would be raging anti semite David Evans who says that global warming is a plot by the Jews to take over the world? That David Evans?

Oh hell, that's right. I knew that name sounded familiar.

Good catch, Sean.

 

[trysail]

It's the very definition of a cult. No matter how much science you're presented with, you won't believe it because you're blindly following your cult.

I asked you a very simple & direct question, which you refused to answer. You even went so far as to say that the law of conservation of energy doesn't exist. Instead of dealing with the facts, you've avoided dealing with them.

Bullshit. Now you're making stuff up.


​

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Seventeen plus (17+) years of no significant warming.
Zero. Nil. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Bupkis.






​

Word:

"Global"​

​

Your words said there was no warming. Your words were proven categorically false. There has in fact been warming.

 

[toubab]

Glad you agree. So since we both now agree that energy is being increasingly stored, where is it going?

I don't necessarily agree energy is being increasingly stored, overall, but even if it is I don't know where it is being stored. Nobody knows the answers to these questions, as far as I can tell.

 

[trysail]

Your words said there was no warming. Your words were proven categorically false. There has in fact been warming.

You have a reading comprehension problem. It says no such thing.

Go back and reread the statement.

​

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I don't necessarily agree energy is being increasingly stored, overall, but even if it is I don't know where it is being stored. Nobody knows the answers to these questions, as far as I can tell.

Huh???? It's a video you posted! CO2 prevents energy from leaving Earth. Evans says this in the video. That energy must go somewhere, it can't be destroyed. Evans say the CO2 will make the Earth warmer. You're now disagreeing with him.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Bullshit. Now you're making stuff up.


​

Sorry, I wish I was. It's a fact that you've avoided a very simple & direct question.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

You have a reading comprehension problem. It says no such thing.

Go back and reread the statement.

​

You're using the term "reading comprehension", so you obviously don't know what reading is, but that's a different topic.

Glad you brought that up. You put in a conditional word, "significant". Would you care to define what "significant" warming is?

 

[toubab]

Huh???? It's a video you posted! CO2 prevents energy from leaving Earth. Evans says this in the video. That energy must go somewhere, it can't be destroyed. Evans say the CO2 will make the Earth warmer. You're now disagreeing with him.

Everyone knows CO2 is a greenhouse gas. I'm not disagreeing with that. Where are you getting these ideas?

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Everyone knows CO2 is a greenhouse gas. I'm not disagreeing with that. Where are you getting these ideas?

From your posts.

So if we're in agreement that C02 is a greenhouse gas, do you agree that the more C02 there is in the air, the more heat will get trapped on Earth?

 

[trysail]

Sorry, I wish I was. It's a fact that you've avoided a very simple & direct question.

When you don't know the answer to something, just say so. The fact of the matter is that the heat/energy is missing and that there has been no recent significant warming.


Whether you like it or not, those happen to be facts.



​

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

When you don't know the answer to something, just say so. The fact of the matter is that the heat/energy is missing and that there has been no recent significant warming.


Whether you like it or not, those happen to be facts.



​

Ok, so the problem here is you don't know what a fact is. Just because you personally believe something, doesn't make it a fact.

YOU don't know where the energy is. You used the word heat, and that is a more accurate description so let's go with that. YOU don't know where the heat is.

So in response to my question of, where is the heat going? Your response is that you don't know. I submit to you that since YOU don't know where the heat is, you can't deny that it isn't going into the water and atmosphere.

Would you care to define "significant" warming? Or should I just expect another "I don't know" from you?