/sci/ - Science & Math

>fk u rocks

>rock cause global warming
better replace them with some plastic chinky trinkets

>>15790472
Greta BTFO

it's fake isn't it?
>inb4 "look at the night sky bro, its right there!"

this is clearly CGI, what you are looking at in the sky is a hologram.

Before WW2 there was a plan to dam the Mackenzie and use part of the otherwise wasted 325,300 cu ft/s fresh water discharge to irrigate arid land in the American west and in Mexico, but then jews took over the government of America and the large infrastructure projects which make common sense use of available natural resources for the benefit of Americans stopped being completed and instead all assets are now used for the benefit of jewish interests.
Just imagine how much CO2 could've been sequestered by growing plants in some of the sunniest places in America and Mexico.
Instead, 3rd world tier nations like Afghanistan have better irrigation projects than America

>>15790472
Sounds like bs but something to add to the /sc/izo repertoire.
You just need to get a figure of how much total oil and coal were dug up by humans.

>>15792803
>imagine how much CO2 could've been sequestered by growing plants
Not a lot actually.

>>15792818
>how much total oil and coal were dug up by humans.
These are surprisingly hard to find

>>15792803
Fuck off America get your own water. Imagine destroying beautiful, untouched wilderness in Canada so you can grow more cornslop in North Dakota.

>>15792827
why did it drop in the 80's?

>>15792832
Arab oil shock i presume. Demand drops off at higher prices. Just basic economics.

>>15792827
> 1 US barrel of oil equals 158.99 kg
but
>Its a little tough to tell how much CO2 is emitted when oil is burned, but one estimate places the number at about 317 kg per barrel.
Can we trust this number?

>>15792818
>plants don't absorb co2, the global warming narrative can only be fixed if you live in the pods, eat the bugs, stop producing white babies and give all of your money to the government

>>15792831
>Imagine destroying beautiful, untouched wilderness in Canada
how come you've never visited that wilderness that you're now claiming that you love so much?

>>15792838
317kg * 80Mb per day (in 2022)
= 25360000 tons of co2 per day *365 days
= 92.56 G tons of co2

however
>In 2022, global energy-related greenhouse gas emissions increased by 1.0% to an all-time high of 41.3 Gt CO2-eq,

Yeah I give up

>>15792840
>stuff i never said
I see you

>>15792849
But

>the total weight of CO2 = 0.0582% x 5.1480 x 10E15 tonnes = 2.996×10E12 tonnes in atmosphere
>2966 Gt of total co2 in atmosphere
>2966 / 2 = 1483 pre existing

1483 / 93Gt = 16
You would double co2 in 16 years according to me

1483 / 41Gt = 36
You would double co2 in 36 years according to them

All of this never accounting for or coal burning or natgas burning. These figures do not add up.

>co2 trapped inside rocks

Please don't tell me they're talking about permafrost and using "science words" to intentionally confuse people.

>>15790472
> as much carbon dioxide as the world's volcanoes
So, virtually nothing compared to human activity.

>>15792840
which kind of plants will you be growing?

>>15792827
crazy to think a shitty football team can cause so much damage.

>>15792842
I have, and I live in another untouched wilderness the next territory over.

>>15790472
>New science just dropped.
why do /pol/chuds always use this phrase in a mocking tone?
do you understand that "new science" has always "just dropped"?
that's literally how science works

sounds a lot like how you chuddies use the "died suddenly" meme, as if humans for the longest time didn't die suddenly but always had plenty of time for a nice quiet death

>>15792965
ChudTARDS BTFO

>>15792965
The point is that its settled now, where it was before but now its settled again.

>>15792965
Chuds think that learning something new or changing your opinion is admitting failure. They’ll never change their opinion and think that this is a good thing.

>>15793559
What was settled exactly? What has changed now? Volcanoes are completely negligible compared to human emissions, so now you have a second negligible effect. Groundbreaking.

>>15792860
much of the emissions get dissolved in the oceans.
however >>15792849 >>15792838
This is weird, I don't get it either. Math checks out. Mass of CO2/barrels seems low if anything.

>>15792838
>>15792849
>>15792860
>>15793627
You guys need better reading comprehension. CO2-eq is carbon dioxide equivalent, not just the actual carbon dioxide. It's a figure based off the global warming potential and total mass of each greenhouse gas accounted for on the figure. This allows all greenhouse gasses to be considered as a whole in terms that are familiar. Carbon dioxide has a GWP of 1 because GWP compares the carbon dioxide to itself. Depending on the time horizon many greenhouse gasses have GWP figures in the hundreds and even thousands.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_potential#Carbon_dioxide_equivalent

>>15793708
Not the issue

>>15792838
I found 430kg, so I’d say it’s roughly in that ballpark:

Carbon dioxide emissions per barrel of crude oil are determined by multiplying heat content times the carbon coefficient times the fraction oxidized times the ratio of the molecular weight of carbon dioxide to that of carbon (44/12).

The average heat content of crude oil is 5.80 mmbtu per barrel (EPA 2022). The average carbon coefficient of crude oil is 20.33 kg carbon per mmbtu (EPA 2022). The fraction oxidized is assumed to be 100 percent (IPCC 2006).

Calculation

Note: Due to rounding, performing the calculations given in the equations below may not return the exact results shown.

5.80 mmbtu/barrel × 20.33 kg C/mmbtu × 44 kg CO2/12 kg C × 1 metric ton/1,000 kg = 0.43 metric tons CO2/barrel

>>15793732
That's exactly the issue. CO2 doesn't rise by the CO2-eq of our greenhouse gas emissions because a lot of that is not CO2.

>>15793802
It's about 2/3 CO2, 1/3 methane and then some other shit like SF6. But for the issue here, the other gases don't matter. If I understood the back-of-the-envelope calculation correctly, the numbers don't add up because the oil corresponds to more CO2 than we have CO2 emissions. So methane and the rest don't matter.

>>15793808
They do because the figure you're using is CO2-eq.

How much carbon tax do those rocks pay?

>>15790472
>noooooooooooooooooooooooo it has to be humans!!!111 Twitter told me so!

>>15792803
ask me how I know you're a pol tourist

>>15793812
CO2-eq will always be more than CO2. I‘m not re-reading everything, but if pure CO2 is higher than the total CO2-eq, something is off. Unless there are gasses with a negative CO2 equivalent.

>>15794675
Depends on what is being accounted for. Aerosols that block sunlight would effectively have a negative CO2-eq. If your numbers don't match up then look at how they were generated. Two estimates can be significantly off.

>>15792803
>Afghanistan

is currently draining all of their water basins with diesel-powered motors to sell heroin

https://reliefweb.int/report/afghanistan/when-water-runs-out-rise-and-inevitable-fall-deserts-southwest-afghanistan-and

>>15796180
>currently
That paper is dated a year prior to the Taliban victory, any source on current-current production?

>>15790472
>"Posting twitter screencaps on /sci/ will really take down those jewish elite living in billionaire homes and controlling all other media"

>>15796982
>this thread triggers me emotionally
thanks for letting is all know, we're all going to change our habits to suit your tastes

>>15792803
The Mackenzie river is in northern Canada. How are you getting that water to Mexico?

>>15797558
using power from the peace river dam to pump it to the upper columbia, then using the power added to the columbia by the increased flow to pump it through more canals, tunnels, etc.
every time the water gets pumped uphill the power is recovered in the next dam going downhill. its not hard to figure out an irrigation scheme for all the dry land in western north america

>>15792827
>spot when governments took over the free market.
Nice gentle increasing curve then... completely manufactured economy. Keynesian madness.

>>15792831
9000 cubic metres of fresh water

Per second

Is simply dumped into the arctic ocean, turning to salt water

>>15792803
I wanna park a academik lomomosov on banks island, invite the chinese fishing fleet, and make a bitcoin arcology

We will make an arctic knfrastructure program
We will do somwtjing useful with that water
We will open the nw passage 15 ulyears ahead of schedule

>>15798295
http://wtfhappenedin1971.com

how are rocks spontaneously generating CO2 without an ignition process?

>>15800105
Shut up and trust the soiyence

>>15800105
Throw marble or limestone in acid and find out.

>>15800105
When your old enough for high school all you have to do is take chemistry and you'll find out.

>>15798379
I don't see what the attraction of the nw passage is.
Who other than an idiot would want to go to either Europe or Asia?

>>15796180
heroin isn't a business anymore, lab produced fentanyl is far, far cheaper to produce.
thats why the decades long war in Afghanistan was ended, because Afghanistan was no longer serving a use for the international crime syndicate as a drug production center.
the Taliban ended poppy production last time the took over Afghanistan, thats why they Afghanistan was invaded to begin with

>>15790472
>ancient rocks release CO2

Yeah it's called coal

>>15802367
We should burn it all to get rid of it, otherwise it will never stops releasing CO2

>>15792838
>1 standard barrel of unrefined crude oil
because unrefined crude oil from different sources is all totally identical

>>15803580
Comrade Xi is burning is doing his best to burn as much as he can, but nobody else is pitching in to help very much. Germany got a lot of their coal infrastructure back on line recently, hopefully the rest of the world follows suit soon

>>15792835
this is correct, this is when the some countries started replacing oil fired power plants with coal and mandating vehicle fuel efficiency to lower demand

>>15806723
Thats when tiny little fuel efficient Jap cars became popular. In the late 70s Jimmy Carter tried to go to war with Iran in order to protect the CIA's installed Iranian puppet government and as a result of that the Iranians started hassling a few Persian gulf oil shipments and the price of gas skyrocketed mainly because the Wall Street futures market for oil exploded. The Iranians didn't really delay oil shipments even slightly, but the Wall Street hysterics were able to use Iran to justify quintupling the price of oil anyway (so they could make a big profit) and once the price of oil went up, the rest of the economy collapsed because people started getting worried that they'd have to save all their money for fuel so they stopped other spending. Then Carter started borrowing money like mad and inflation went through the roof too and Carter ended up as a one term president then Reagan came in and fixed all Carter's stupid mistakes and.
Thats the last time a STEMtard was president, Carter was a nuclear engineer trained at the naval academy and Georgia Tech.

>>15807823
Herbert Hoover was the other STEM president. He caused the Great Depression.

>>15807823
>>15808386
>get STEMtard president
>economy collapses
why does it always happen like that?

What kind of rocks are the CO2 emitting ones? Thinking about using them in my greenhouse as a CO2 source. How much do they emit?

>>15796180
You and all your family deserve to be boiled alive.

>>15792831
Canada belongs to America you moron.

>>15807823
>Thats the last time a STEMtard was president,
never again, hopefully. or at least not in my lifetime.

are there rocks that absorb co2?

>>15812672
coal, diamonds, etc

>>15812672
All the carbonates rocks were once fresh elements that absorbed co2.
It's thought that earth had similar 90% co2 atmosphere like venus and mars but plate tectonics removed all the co2 in earth atmosphere by exposing fresh rock over and over again until there's little left
If you can dig up kilometers of rock on venus and mars you too can absorb all the co2 there

>>15813304
Completely false. There was no carbon in the atmosphere until Humans started putting it there.

>>15813319
You should try to use something closer to a real argument that actual people make when you're making false flag posts. $5 petrodollars have been deducted from your account.

>>15813764
>everyone who disagrees with me is part of a grand conspiracy.
the mindset of someone who believes that the world revolves around themselves

>>15814659
That's closer, but you should also link the wikipedia page for delusions of grandeur or messiah complex. $1 petrodollar has been added to your account. Improved on your work or you will be replaced.

>>15813304
Not sure about Venus. The atmosphere is over 80x denser than Earth's. Even in a protoplanetary form Earth probably didn't have as much CO2 (or gas pressure overall) as Venus does now.

>>15814667

why does everyone presume co2 is bad when it's presence in the atmosphere is what feeds the bottom of the food chain?

>>15812672
yes they're called trees

>>15794218
lol

how can co2 be considered an atmospheric pollutant when it is naturally occurring? is nitrogen an atmospheric pollutant too? a 100% nitrogen atmosphere will kill you. what about oxygen? its the key component of the oxidation process which is a suspected cause of cancer

>>15807823
>tiny little fuel efficient Jap cars became popular
congress made all those cars illegal, thats why the modern Mini gets like 20mph when the original would get more like 50

>>15794625
It still is, volcanos produce fraction of emissions that humans produce per year, now you add another fraction to the equation, wow. 100 plus 1 from volcano, now plus another 1 from rocks, big change, global warming is no longer a problem guys, it turns out humans do only 98 percent of it instead of 99.

>>15819332
>volcanos produce fraction of emissions that humans produce per year
no they don't volcanoes produce way more

>>15820060
Prove it.

>>15820060
Volcanoes don't produce any greenhouse gases.

>>15820352
This.

>>15820352
>Volcanoes don't produce any greenhouse gases.
all the little greta wannabes on /sci/ will lie about anything

>>15792850
Go to hell.

>>15820060
just think about it logically: volcanoes doesn't explode out of oil resevoirs every time they erupt, meanwhile humans pinpoint and extract the best quality oil they can get, as much as they can
there's also minor (?) stuff like basalt coming out of volcanoes and trapping co2, something that obviously doesn't happen with oil extraction

>>15821199
Volcanoes are a known cause of climate change

>>15821199
What has oil got to do with the greenhouse effect?

>>15822548
Wrong. Climate boiling (nobody uses "climate change") is caused exclusively by humans.

>>15822548
>>15822694
>heat waves
That's weather, not climate. Now report to the local recruiter so that you can die in the Ukraine.

>>15791081
>>15791801
heating CaCO3 and other carbonates releases CO2?
WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT?
Which means by the way that the more we heat the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels the more we will have a feedback loop releasing CO2 from carbonates too!
honestly, learn some chemistry retards.

having an IQ above 80 and knowing how to use wikipedia should be enough to understand how it works:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calcium_carbonate

>>15822698
>so that you can die in the Ukraine.
israel

>>15802350
english motherfucker, do you speak it?

>>15824036
His comment was written very clearly. Do you speak English?

>>15824050
No, I don't, sorry

>>15823126
>dude if the temperature of earth goes up it will cause a chain reaction
>why didn't it already happen in the last 4 billion years? uh uh uh FUCK YOU RACIST CLIMATE DENIER

>>15823131
>wikipedia

>>15825998
What specific problem do you have with that page?

If rocks are the source of atmospheric CO2 that means cars are innocent. cars dindu nuffin

>>15820347
prove they don't

>>15798280
>its not hard to figure out an irrigation scheme for all the dry land in western north america
but it is hard to figure out how the right people will get paid for the privilege of this happening

>>15828791
I looked up a lot of references hoping to find something that would prove my case, but it turns out you were right, volcanoes on average produce way more co2 than people do.

>>15829709
the global warming hype always falls apart upon closer inspection

>>15790472
Well to bad that volcanic CO2 emission is tiny compared to what humans pump out all the time

>>15792803
I've actually never heard the green the deserts to sequester carbon argument, but it's extremely obvious in hindset, and it indicates how little attempts to stop global warming are about stopping global warming per se. It was always a humanist appeal to environmentalism to begin with, which in practice is anti-humanity.

>>15798379
We live in an era where interventions in the environment that rise to the scale of terraforming have been engaged in enough that we effectively live in a semi-terraformed world. The environmentalist attempt to create environmental stasis (itself bizarre and unprecedented in natural history) is a dreadfully unimaginative paradigm to get stuck in. The mere admission by environmentalists that sea level is in some sense a choice means that the debate should be, for example, over what the sea level becomes. Should it be 10 metres higher, or 200 metres lower (my preference).

>>15831873
Try doing the math on the area of deserts you'd need to green to sequester human emissions. Nevermind the insane cost of doing that, just calculate how much area it would take. Compare that figure to the area of the deserts on Earth. This should give you an idea as to why nobody ever suggests doing this. They're simply smarter than you.

>>15828791
>>15829709
Nonsense.

https://www.usgs.gov/programs/VHP/volcanoes-can-affect-climate
>In 2010, human activities were responsible for a projected 35 billion metric tons (gigatons) of CO2 emissions. All studies to date of global volcanic carbon dioxide emissions indicate that present-day subaerial and submarine volcanoes release less than a percent of the carbon dioxide released currently by human activities.

>https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/which-emits-more-carbon-dioxide-volcanoes-or-human-activities
>Human activities emit 60 or more times the amount of carbon dioxide released by volcanoes each year. Large, violent eruptions may match the rate of human emissions for the few hours that they last, but they are too rare and fleeting to rival humanity’s annual emissions.

https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/42/what-do-volcanoes-have-to-do-with-climate-change/
>Volcanic eruptions are often discussed in the context of climate change because they release CO2 and other gases into our atmosphere. However, the impact of human activities on the carbon cycle far exceeds that of all the world's volcanoes combined, by more than 100 times.
>To put it in perspective, while volcanic eruptions do contribute to an increase in atmospheric CO2, human activities release an amount of CO2 equivalent to what a Mount St. Helens-sized eruption produces every 2.5 hours and a Mount Pinatubo-sized eruption twice daily.

https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-volcanoes-co2-emissions-383647479337
>Human activity produces far more CO2 than volcanoes, experts told The Associated Press, and overwhelming scientific evidence shows that climate change is caused by human behavior.

>>15832132
>two .gov propaganda outlets and a rothschild owned MSM propaganda outlet
if you're absurdly going to come to 4chan in order to defend the government and the MSM from criticism at least try to do a reasonable job of it
>i prefer to spend my time on 4chan because i love mainstream media and because i trust the government wholeheartedly about everything
really?

>>15832994
Do you have any source whatsoever that states otherwise? Right now you're 0/4 on sources.

inb4 heritage foundation (or equivalent) study using fake data

>>15832122
>Don't increase food productivity, it'd be be expensive
What living in a financialised economy divorced from the financial effects of real production do to a nigga
If you think that it'd make an insignificant difference, post reasoning. All I've seen so far is claims that trees sequester carbon and are a way to make enterprises carbon neutral. It's possible that that's all a lie. Either way, poast data.

>>15833670
>He doesn't know how to do high school math
Why don't you try Khan Academy? The math is simple algebra and the data is easily available with any search engine. You want to understand why nobody suggests greening deserts, so you should engage in critical thinking and analyze the suggestion. You need to get used to doing this because only NPCs fail to analyze every new piece of information.

>>15792831
>beautiful, untouched wilderness
It's a frosted-over shithole where nobody wants to live

>>15832122
>t. I can't do math

>>15833691
>The data refutes your conclusions
>May I see it
>...
>no.

>>15833889
>>15833907
So you failed high school math and you're embarrassed about it? I guess that brings us back to
>They're simply smarter than you.

>>15833932
So you really have strong opinions and zero facts to support them? Sad.

>>15833939
The irony. How about I meet you halfway? I'll look up all the facts you need to perform the incredibly simple algebra, then the next time you need to think critically you'll understand the process.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/276629/global-co2-emissions/
>Global carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels and industry were 37.12 billion metric tons (GtCO2) in 2021.

https://climate.selectra.com/en/news/co2-tree
>it is generally considered that a tree can store about 167 kg of CO2 per year

https://www.oregonmetro.gov/news/power-trees
>Forests typically have 100 to 200 trees per acre

https://www.universetoday.com/65639/what-percentage-of-the-earths-land-surface-is-desert/
>Seen from space, the majority of the Earth’s surface is covered by oceans – that makes up 71% of the surface of the Earth, with the remaining 29% for land. But what percentage of the Earth’s land surface is desert? Deserts actually make up 33%, or 1/3rd of the land’s surface area.

https://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/earth.htm
>Total Surface Area: about 509 600 000 square km (197 000 000 square miles). Area of land: 148 326 000 km2 (57 268 900 square miles), this are 29% of the total surface of Planet Earth.

I trust that you can look up any conversions you need yourself. Hopefully this exercise benefits you when you finally become an adult.

>>15832122
>NOOOOO YOU CAN'T JUST SEQUESTER CO2 USING PLANTS!!!!!
>THE ONLY WAY TO SOLVE THE FAKE GLOBAL WARMING PROBLEM IS TO KILL PEOPLE AND MAKE EVERYONE ELSE EAT THE BUGS AND LIVE IN THE POD!!!!
thats how you know the global warming idea is shilled as a means to forward a political agenda. if al gore and really cared about global warming he'd have given up his fleet of private planes ages ago and stopped living in a 20,000 square foot mansion.

>>15834930
You clearly haven't done the math. Would you like to try again? Here's all the data you need >>15834013

>>15834963
>plants don't absorb co2

>>15835960
Are you embarrassed that you can't do high school algebra? Try again >>15834013

>>15819332
>noo it doesn't count because it's only fractions
okay, so the global climate temperature rising by fractions doesn't count either.

>>15836318
The emission of volcanoes is offset by carbon sink. The "global climate temperature rising" (motherfucking ESL faggots) is offset by.... nothing?

>>15836417
>carbon sink
About that sink..

>>15836318
>the global climate temperature rising
it isn't, the weather is the same as it was in the 1980s when the global warming rumors started

>>15836193
>plants don't absorb co2

>>15838429
Not only do plants absorb CO2, but they higher the atmospheric concentration of CO2 is, the faster the plants absorb it. And as the plants are absorbing CO2 at an ever increasing speed, they are also absorbing solar radiation and sequestering it at an ever increasing speed proportional to the atmospheric CO2 concentration.

>>15838429
>>15838847
Two high school dropouts over here. Try again, kids.
>>15834013

>>15838847
>And as the plants are absorbing CO2 at an ever increasing speed, they are also absorbing solar radiation and sequestering it at an ever increasing speed proportional to the atmospheric CO2 concentration.
This is why plants are so important. They have an effective albedo greater than 1 because they transform solar electromagnetic energy into chemical bonds, taking heat out of the system.

>>15838887
Mental illness

>>15839013
>attacking the source because you can't attack the central point of the argument
its like admitting you're wrong

>>15840414
What source?

>>15838887
>They have an effective albedo greater than 1
When you start using language like that you're going way over the Greta crowd's head. They can't even do basic math, thermodynamics is way out of their league

>>15841726
>Projection

>>15841726
Very true. It's like casting pearls before swine.

>>15841726
I am a greta fanboy of the first hour.
I know what albedo is.
Forest albedo is listed as .15-.18 on wikipedia.
The chemical energy absorbed will be reemitted eventually to a high degree due to rotting etc.

>>15841726
>>15841888
Thermodynamically, the energy stored will also be released as sugars are used for growth and anything that's left is released as it's decomposed.

>>15792842
the entire point was to leave it alone and untouched by modern man.

>>15841888
>The chemical energy absorbed will be reemitted eventually to a high degree due to rotting etc.
I bet you believe that, but you also believe that fossil fuels are really billion year old organic matter.
how do you dovetail the two beliefs?

>>15790472
quick, call Greta!

>>15842449
Cognitive dissonance is the most common psychological disorder afflicting modern people.

>>15842449
No one believes that fossil fuels are a billion years old. Most source rocks are 100-400 million years old.

>>15790472
it's only a matter of time before some critter evolves to consume all of our precious oxygen

>>15842449
>>15842499
t. Useful idiots

Google is free you know.
https://www.gsi.ie/en-ie/education/earth-resources/Pages/Fossil-fuels.aspx
>Coal
>Hundreds of millions of years ago, even before the dinosaurs, there were huge plants and ferns that lived in swamp forests. When these plants and ferns died they decayed and formed layers at the bottom of the swamps. Water and soil built up on top of these layers and over thousands of years pressure and high temperatures would cause the decayed plants and ferns to undergo chemical and physical changes which pushed out the oxygen from the decaying layers. As the plants and ferns continued to decay in the absence of oxygen they formed coal.

>Oil and Gas
>The oil and gas we use today was formed by the decay of microscopic plants and animals that lived in the ocean millions of years ago. As these plants and animals died they fell to the bottom of the ocean and formed layer after layer of sediment covered by sand and mud. In some areas where there is little tidal movement such as lakes or seas the plants and animals begin to decay in the absence of oxygen. As the layers build up the weight increases and the sediment is pushed further down, this increases both the temperature and pressure. With all of these factors combined the decayed plants and animals form oil and gas deposits.

>>15838887
You have been repeatedly proven wrong and yet keep repeating the same bullshit

>>15842594
Those are called internal combustion engines.

>>15842753
Proselytism belongs on >>>/x/

>>15843396
I accept your concession.

>>15842753
so you're saying that the plants absorbed solar energy and then never reemitted that energy for millions of years rather than immediately rotting and rereleasing it

>>15844114
Only a very small amount of the energy from the plants was trapped underground. Most of it was lost during the initial decomposition before it was deep enough to be stopped by the mud.

>>15792965
absolutely seething

>>15842496
She was arrested recently

>>15845373
Thats her latest attention seeking behavior, people stopped paying attention to her so she had an arrest staged to get media attention. Its a common practice amongst attention hungry celebrity wannabes

>>15845982
You mean like Andrew Tate?

>>15846032
>Andrew Tate lives in my head rent free

>>15846032
>Andrew Tate triggers me
why?

>>15847836
Because he reminds me of how lazy and unmasculine I am.

>>15790472
So breaking open rocks releases huge amounts of CO2.
This is a dunk against industrial climate change how exactly? You know how much material we pull out of the ground and pulverize to get at trace minerals?

>>15796185
Afghanistan opium cultivation in 2023 declined 95 per cent and that's a BAD THING.
https://www.usip.org/publications/2023/06/talibans-successful-opium-ban-bad-afghans-and-world

>>15849114
So we need to halt all EV and solar panel production right?

>>15849114
Why don't we like make a big metal straw that goes all the way to space and the vacuum of space will suck it out you know? I call it the Space Straw™

The CO2 from those rocks aren't tabulated when people are calculating Canadians' carbon footprint. But the Canadians just let those rocks sit there and release tons of CO2 in the atmosphere with out doing anything to stop it, so they're pretty much responsible for that CO2.

>>15850501
Imagine Iceland's per capita carbon footprint if Icelanders were ever to take responsibility for the volcanic activity in their country

>>15847836
because i'm a lazy wimpy sissy and i don't want to work or try hard at anything

>>15852659
also because he's retarded, talks with a gay lisp, hits on men and got caught

>>15851403
it would be huge, volcanoes emit far more CO2 than people do

>>15827293
This

>>15793587
>>15792965
double digit IQs, you are proving their point idiots not refuting it. you are the scientism cultists who always claim the "science is settled." you people are fucking idiots

>>15850501
Canada also has massive forest fires every summer that they don't do anything to prevent, the ones last summer were all set intentionally. How come the CO2 from those doesn't count against Canadians' CO2 footprints?

>>15856392
Those fires are the result of global boiling.

>>15856397
six million globes were incinerated in the boilocaust

>>15827293
good luck getting a volcano to pony up carbon tax in exchange for the privilege of spilling out it's magma

>>15858845
I don't care who pays, Canada owe big money CO2 tax because the rocks its responsible for are producing massive amounts of CO2. Letting rocks emit CO2 is no different than burning them and releasing the CO2 intentionally. CO2 gets into the atmosphere either way