Write Review
1,978,953 Total Reviews 4,376 New Reviews
12,428 Users Online

Politics and Religion

Was it a MUSK Flamethrower?
impposter 49 Reviews 25 reads
posted

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/teslas-musk-sells-10-million-122055720.html
Tesla's Musk sells $10 million in flamethrowers in 4 days [Feb 2018]
.
"A handful of tweets and four days later, Silicon Valley billionaire Elon Musk has closed orders for his latest novelty product, after selling 20,000 flamethrowers at $500 a piece. "Guaranteed to liven up any party!" was Musk's tagline for a sale which raised $10 million for his high-speed tunnel venture The Boring Company."
.
""When the zombie apocalypse happens, you'll be glad you bought a flamethrower," he [Musk] tweeted last Saturday. "Works against hordes of the undead or your money back!" Each flamethrower, he [Musk] said on Thursday, would come with a free fire extinguisher ..."

Posted By: willywonka4u

Looks like climate change is caused by homeless people with flame throwers.

willywonka4u267 reads

Looks like climate change is caused by homeless people with flame throwers.

Related Link: Homeless man with ‘flamethrower’ busted on suspicion of arson near LA’s Kenneth Fire after residents detain him

ReplyQuoteReport
willywonka4u22 reads

Add to that LA county has reportedly lost control of their emergency alert system to tells residents whether they should evacuate. The incompetence is staggering!!!

Related Link: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14271021/los-angeles-mayor-karen-bass-fires-department-budget-cuts.html

ReplyQuoteReport
Boobsman10019 reads

If you think the incompetence is staggering just wait and see over the next four years. You forget 2016 -2020.

ReplyQuoteReport
RespectfulRobert26 reads

This expert agrees with me.

Related Link: http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/politics-and-religion-39/talk-about-sc...

ReplyQuoteReport
willywonka4u22 reads

You can learn new things about a subject if you study it. Who knew? I’d assumed CO2’s ability to absorb IR was linear. But it isn’t. It’s logarithmic. There’s a very large warming effect when CO2 concentration is very very low. As it increases, the warming effect decreases.

Related Link: https://ph.pollub.pl/index.php/iapgos/article/view/826/1294

ReplyQuoteReport
RespectfulRobert21 reads

CO2 has risen since then and so has worldwide temperature. So your "as it increases, the warming effect decreases" is obviously, blatantly and provably false.  Leave it to you to be right a decade ago, have all the evidence back your beliefs since then, and you then go against all the science and new evidence of the last 11 years. Only you, Willy. Only you. smh

ReplyQuoteReport
Boobsman10016 reads

You expected better from dumbed down MAGA hats who think they can Google everything, without having a brain to think. Someone who had never even had to write research papers  in school, and probably  never learned  where to find truthful material, and not quote all and any gibberish written by people with   agendas other than the truth.
Don't waste your time education or enlightening MAGA hats about science. Tell them climate change is about eating dogs and cats in Ohio - they will believe that .The further dumbing down of MAGA America - that's why  the cost of education was never and will never be on the ballot of MAGA. Dumb fucker holding back America,  and stupid enough to think America is about them. Trump,Elon ,and Vivek said they will be bringing in educated  foreign workers  .

ReplyQuoteReport
willywonka4u16 reads

“CO2 has risen since then and so has worldwide temperature.”

 
CO2 has risen since then. But no, world wide temps have NOT risen. We are in fact in one of the coldest periods in earth’s history.  

 
“So your "as it increases, the warming effect decreases" is obviously, blatantly and provably false.”

 
It’s not. And this is a well understood concept.  

 
“and you then go against all the science and new evidence of the last 11 years”

 
I’ve got news for you Robert. Science is not what some bureaucrat tells you because it aligns with a politicians political goals. When you read the science you find out that I’m right.  

 
Just think about how much volcanic activity must have happened over earth’s history. Volcanos release CO2. All the world’s landmasses used to be one, a supercontinent called Pangea. Volcanic activity blew it all apart. This would certainly caused wide swings in atmospheric CO2.  

 
So if you have a hypothesis that a very minor swing of an extra 200ppm of CO2 is going to cause a climate emergency, then you’d have to explain how we have ice core samples showing CO2 was 70,000ppm in the past and everything was just fine.  

 
The climate change argument is like taking a tin can of sand from a beach and then saying this will cause the entire beach to erode. It’s fuck-tarded.

ReplyQuoteReport
RespectfulRobert17 reads

Oops.

Related Link: http://www.noaa.gov/news/2024-was-worlds-warmest-year-on-record

ReplyQuoteReport
willywonka4u15 reads

Since you like looking up what I’ve posted here in the past try searching my handle, “global temperatures” and “The Washington Post”.

ReplyQuoteReport
RespectfulRobert13 reads

That must be troubling. But it was YOU that said worldwide temperatures are NOT rising when even scientists who don't believe in global warming (both of them) have admitted it. You are a loon.

ReplyQuoteReport
willywonka4u19 reads

Last October The Washington Post ran a fascinating, albeit confusing article. It shows the “surprising” reconstruction of nearly 500 million years of earth’s temps. But it came with a stark warning about climate change.  

 
The only problem is the graph itself shows the earth is the coldest it’s been in 500 million years.

 
The article is of course behind a pay wall, but here’s a link to the article.

Related Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/09/19/earth-temperature-global-warming-planet/

ReplyQuoteReport
impposter20 reads

SOURCE? "you’d have to explain how we have ice core samples showing CO2 was 70,000ppm in the past and everything was just fine." - When was CO2 at 70,000 ppm? Perhaps 600 Ma? (And there is not complete agreement on that estimate.) According to WHOM was "everything just fine"?  Cyanobacteria? Early multicellular organisms? Were they posting on X, "This CO2 level is great! Loving it! Evolution: Bring it on!" Did they spell out messages in the fossil record: "Kilroy the Fungus was here and the CO2 level was GREAT!"

Posted By: willywonka4u
Re: Oh Robert.
“CO2 has risen since then and so has worldwide temperature.”  

 CO2 has risen since then. But no, world wide temps have NOT risen. We are in fact in one of the coldest periods in earth’s history.  

 “So your "as it increases, the warming effect decreases" is obviously, blatantly and provably false.”  

 It’s not. And this is a well understood concept.  

 “and you then go against all the science and new evidence of the last 11 years”  

 I’ve got news for you Robert. Science is not what some bureaucrat tells you because it aligns with a politicians political goals. When you read the science you find out that I’m right.  

 Just think about how much volcanic activity must have happened over earth’s history. Volcanos release CO2. All the world’s landmasses used to be one, a supercontinent called Pangea. Volcanic activity blew it all apart. This would certainly caused wide swings in atmospheric CO2.  

 So if you have a hypothesis that a very minor swing of an extra 200ppm of CO2 is going to cause a climate emergency, then you’d have to explain how we have ice core samples showing CO2 was 70,000ppm in the past and everything was just fine.  

 The climate change argument is like taking a tin can of sand from a beach and then saying this will cause the entire beach to erode. It’s fuck-tarded.

Tipping Points:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping_points_in_the_climate_system
.
EDIT: Oops. Put URL in the wrong box.

-- Modified on 1/11/2025 7:27:26 AM

ReplyQuoteReport
willywonka4u16 reads

Try doing a board search of “70,000ppm” and my handle.

ReplyQuoteReport
impposter19 reads

NO SUCH LINKS IN YOUR POSTS!!  
.
JUST POST THE LINK TO YOUR SOURCE here and now!
.
And make it clear to us WHEN "everything was just fine." I'd like to send you back to the time of 70,000ppm CO2 so you can file your scientific report on just how fine everything was.

Posted By: willywonka4u
Re: If you want the source, IMP…
Try doing a board search of “70,000ppm” and my handle.
I repeat: NO LINKS in any your "70,000" or "70,000ppm" posts. Just post the links to "70,000ppm CO2" and WHEN it was the case.

ReplyQuoteReport
LostSon14 reads

Posted By: impposter
Re: Oh Robert.
SOURCE? "you’d have to explain how we have ice core samples showing CO2 was 70,000ppm in the past and everything was just fine." - When was CO2 at 70,000 ppm? Perhaps 600 Ma? (And there is not complete agreement on that estimate.) According to WHOM was "everything just fine"?  Cyanobacteria? Early multicellular organisms? Were they posting on X, "This CO2 level is great! Loving it! Evolution: Bring it on!" Did they spell out messages in the fossil record: "Kilroy the Fungus was here and the CO2 level was GREAT!"
Posted By: willywonka4u
Re: Oh Robert.  
 “CO2 has risen since then and so has worldwide temperature.”  
   
  CO2 has risen since then. But no, world wide temps have NOT risen. We are in fact in one of the coldest periods in earth’s history.    
   
  “So your "as it increases, the warming effect decreases" is obviously, blatantly and provably false.”  
   
  It’s not. And this is a well understood concept.    
   
  “and you then go against all the science and new evidence of the last 11 years”  
   
  I’ve got news for you Robert. Science is not what some bureaucrat tells you because it aligns with a politicians political goals. When you read the science you find out that I’m right.    
   
  Just think about how much volcanic activity must have happened over earth’s history. Volcanos release CO2. All the world’s landmasses used to be one, a supercontinent called Pangea. Volcanic activity blew it all apart. This would certainly caused wide swings in atmospheric CO2.    
   
  So if you have a hypothesis that a very minor swing of an extra 200ppm of CO2 is going to cause a climate emergency, then you’d have to explain how we have ice core samples showing CO2 was 70,000ppm in the past and everything was just fine.    
   
  The climate change argument is like taking a tin can of sand from a beach and then saying this will cause the entire beach to erode. It’s fuck-tarded.
Tipping Points:  
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping_points_in_the_climate_system  
 .  
 EDIT: Oops. Put URL in the wrong box.  

-- Modified on 1/11/2025 7:27:26 AM

They used the word "MAY" in that page 45 times meaning THEY Don't know!  

T H E N there's this. Scientists Adjust their numbers...

Related Link: Why scientists adjust temperature records, and how you can too

ReplyQuoteReport
impposter19 reads

"They used the word "MAY" in that page 45 times." - WHICH PAGE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???? Are you talking about 20+ citations of "May 2018", "May 2019", or an author named "Hasmay", etc..? BE CLEAR AND SPECIFIC!

Posted By: LostSon
Re: Oh Robert.
Posted By: impposter
Re: Oh Robert.  
 SOURCE? "you’d have to explain how we have ice core samples showing CO2 was 70,000ppm in the past and everything was just fine." - When was CO2 at 70,000 ppm? Perhaps 600 Ma? (And there is not complete agreement on that estimate.) According to WHOM was "everything just fine"?  Cyanobacteria? Early multicellular organisms? Were they posting on X, "This CO2 level is great! Loving it! Evolution: Bring it on!" Did they spell out messages in the fossil record: "Kilroy the Fungus was here and the CO2 level was GREAT!"
Posted By: willywonka4u
Re: Oh Robert.  
  “CO2 has risen since then and so has worldwide temperature.”    
     
   CO2 has risen since then. But no, world wide temps have NOT risen. We are in fact in one of the coldest periods in earth’s history.    
     
   “So your "as it increases, the warming effect decreases" is obviously, blatantly and provably false.”    
     
   It’s not. And this is a well understood concept.    
     
   “and you then go against all the science and new evidence of the last 11 years”    
     
   I’ve got news for you Robert. Science is not what some bureaucrat tells you because it aligns with a politicians political goals. When you read the science you find out that I’m right.    
     
   Just think about how much volcanic activity must have happened over earth’s history. Volcanos release CO2. All the world’s landmasses used to be one, a supercontinent called Pangea. Volcanic activity blew it all apart. This would certainly caused wide swings in atmospheric CO2.    
     
   So if you have a hypothesis that a very minor swing of an extra 200ppm of CO2 is going to cause a climate emergency, then you’d have to explain how we have ice core samples showing CO2 was 70,000ppm in the past and everything was just fine.    
     
   The climate change argument is like taking a tin can of sand from a beach and then saying this will cause the entire beach to erode. It’s fuck-tarded.
Tipping Points:  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping_points_in_the_climate_system  
  .  
  EDIT: Oops. Put URL in the wrong box.
 
   
 They used the word "MAY" in that page 45 times meaning THEY Don't know!  
   
 T H E N there's this. Scientists Adjust their numbers...

GOOD raw data doesn't change but is always subject to reinterpretation in the light of new and better evidence. There are hundreds or thousands of examples, e.g.,  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsar#Discovery  
.
Help willy explain WHEN and HOW "everything was just fine" when CO2 was 70,000 ppm.

ReplyQuoteReport
LostSon22 reads

Hair triggered was screaming this was all a natural disaster! So a mentally ill homeless guy was out with a propane tank lighting fires…  

Wow… just W O W 😳😳😳

ReplyQuoteReport
impposter26 reads

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/teslas-musk-sells-10-million-122055720.html
Tesla's Musk sells $10 million in flamethrowers in 4 days [Feb 2018]
.
"A handful of tweets and four days later, Silicon Valley billionaire Elon Musk has closed orders for his latest novelty product, after selling 20,000 flamethrowers at $500 a piece. "Guaranteed to liven up any party!" was Musk's tagline for a sale which raised $10 million for his high-speed tunnel venture The Boring Company."
.
""When the zombie apocalypse happens, you'll be glad you bought a flamethrower," he [Musk] tweeted last Saturday. "Works against hordes of the undead or your money back!" Each flamethrower, he [Musk] said on Thursday, would come with a free fire extinguisher ..."

Posted By: willywonka4u

Looks like climate change is caused by homeless people with flame throwers.

ReplyQuoteReport
Post Reply Back To Forum
Register Now!