₦airaland Forum

benalvino3:
Na, it does not work that way. You have to be specific. Almost no one emits cfc today. Cfc are banned but don't expect China to comply

No one in the west of Africa emits Cfc not chelase football club o? So just saying emission without being specific will cause confusion.

No, all reports have always used the term "carbon emissions" as a term to cover everything.


Just like we use air for gas. But in truth, air consists, oxygen, atmospheric nitrogen, carbon dioxide and more.

Imagine we had to say "fresh oxygen and carbon dioxide are coming into the office" every time. Makes for poor articulation and conversations.

Next time you hear or read, carbon emissions, they are referring to all. All fossil fuel combustions including by vehicles and machines produce more than just carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide hence "carbon emissions". There's always more. To make it easier for reporting and to explain, the general term is "carbon emissions".

DissTroy:
No, all reports have always used the term "carbon emissions" as a term to cover everything.


Just like we use air for gas. But in truth, air consists, oxygen, atmospheric nitrogen, carbon dioxide and more.

Imagine we had to say "fresh oxygen and carbon dioxide are coming into the office" every time. Makes for poor articulation and conversations.

Next time you hear or read, carbon emissions, they are referring to all. All fossil fuel combustions including by vehicles and machines produce more than one carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide. There's always more. To make it easier for reporting and to explain, the general term is "carbon emissions".

Correct.

Goodvibes007:
I find it hard to reply you when you can't grasp simple elementary science concepts like the Ozone Layer system.

I have moved on from replying you on this topic.

Tell that to yourself. I have explained everything how it formed so I grasped. That's just you trying to run away from me telling you there are deserts that was ocean.

DissTroy:
No, all reports have always used the term "carbon emissions" as a term to cover everything.


Just like we use air for gas. But in truth, air consists, oxygen, atmospheric nitrogen, carbon dioxide and more.

Imagine we had to say "fresh oxygen and carbon dioxide are coming into the office" every time. Makes for poor articulation and conversations.

Next time you hear or read, carbon emissions, they are referring to all. All fossil fuel combustions including by vehicles and machines produce more than just carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide hence "carbon emissions". There's always more. To make it easier for reporting and to explain, the general term is "carbon emissions".

You can't say we affect ozone layer through emissions of carbon when we don't use the gas or particular carbon that affects ozone layer. This is where you are suppose to distinguish.

Its like saying Mr. Balogun killed a bush rat. Well, when I bring out balogun and his brother who also go by the surname balogun, you will have to distinguish if it's lookman balogun or Bello balogun.

So just saying carbon emissions from humans affects it will be problematic Because we don't emit cfc

China is trying it's best. It's an economy that relies alot of carbon intensive industries, but still they are trying. I think the UK and Canada have similar developments in progress.

benalvino3:
You can't say we affect ozone layer through emissions of carbon when we don't use the gas or particular carbon that affects ozone layer. This is where you are suppose to distinguish.

Its like saying Mr. Balogun killed a bush rat. Well, when I bring out balogun and his brother who also go by the surname balogun, you will have to distinguish if it's lookman balogun or Bello balogun.

So just saying carbon emissions from humans affects it will be problematic Because we don't emit cfc

LOL poking the bear?On this topic you dont need a visa to America.You are just a coon worshipping a vile racist pig.
Nevermind that a pig talks to a pig, it could be the pig in the fruited plans which pities your N200 data.

basilico:
LOL poking the bear?On this topic you dont need a visa to America.You are just a coon worshipping a vile racist pig.
Nevermind that a pig talks to a pig, it could be the pig in the fruited plans which pities your N200 data.

My security guy is called lookman balogun so it's not the bear I am poking

benalvino3:
You can't say we affect ozone layer through emissions of carbon when we don't use the gas or particular carbon that affects ozone layer. This is where you are suppose to distinguish.

Its like saying Mr. Balogun killed a bush rat. Well, when I bring out balogun and his brother who also go by the surname balogun, you will have to distinguish if it's lookman balogun or Bello balogun.

So just saying carbon emissions from humans affects it will be problematic Because we don't emit cfc

That's why I stated it's the term used generally when reporting.

In fact, technically, CFCs shouldn't even be used - you have to be specific about which of the CFCs you are referring to. Or be specific about which hydrocarbon you are referring to like CH4 which is more common is affecting it.

Most people don't. Just like there's no need going into the details about how own system processes the air we breathe in to use O2 and what we breathe in isn't just O2.

In whitepapers, there's specificity. But to educate the general public, you remove all that technical jargon and just call it "carbon emissions". That's what carbon emissions have come to signify for years now.

Goodvibes007:
China is trying it's best. It's an economy that relies alot of carbon intensive industries, but still they are trying. I think Canada has a similar development in progress.

Why do you keep making excuses for China all day? These people don't care about earth or value life. Human rights or other things does not matter to them.

Russia is aware of the issues of Climate change as well and are trying their best.

All these countries are not foolish despite the issues they have the West. They haven't lost their senses.

Goodvibes007:
China is trying it's best. It's an economy that relies alot of carbon intensive industries, but still they are trying. I think the UK and Canada have similar developments in progress.

China is not doing shit. The only thing China is doing is planting more trees, creating more vegetated parks and campaigning for specific kind of air-purifying plants for landscaping and in apartment blocks.

China is more concerned about air purity than global warming. It just signs global warming pacts to get the western hounds of its backs but does nothing about this. Russia too.

Even the U.S. if you research this enough.

DissTroy:
China is not doing shit. The only thing China is doing is planting more trees, creating more vegetated parks and campaigning for specific kind of air-purifying plants for landscaping and in apartment blocks.

China is more concerned about air purity than global warming. It just signs global warming pacts to get the western hounds of its backs but does nothing about this. Russia too.

Even the U.S. if you research this enough.

You mean the carbon capture project is solely all about air purity?

DissTroy:
That's why I stated it's the term used generally when reporting.

In fact, technically, CFCs shouldn't even be used - you have to be specific about which of the CFCs you are referring to. Or be specific about which hydrocarbon you are referring to like CH4 which is more common is affecting it.

Most people don't. Just like there's no need going into the details about how own system processes the air we breathe in to use O2 and what we breathe in isn't just O2.

In whitepapers, there's specificity. But to educate the general public, you remove all that technical jargon and just call it "carbon emissions". That's what carbon emissions have come to signify for years now.

Well, I am just trying to make you use specifics when it is necessary to make people understand more. That compound is chlorine florine and carbon

When the breakage of the ozone occur, it is the chlorine out of the three compound that cause the problem. This is another reason why I said you should be specific. It's not only carbon that is in play here and the compound that does the damage is the chlorine

[quote author=Goodvibes007 post=104614638][/quote]Lmao is like the war against poverty. You want to fight poverty but you spend trillions on weapons instead of the poor

Signing something is one thing. Just like vision 2020

Goodvibes007:
Russia is aware of the issues of Climate change as well and are trying their best.

All these countries are not foolish despite the issues they have the West. They haven't lost their senses.

Are you for real or just a troll?
Russia is doing Nordstream pipeline to Germany via Baltic sea in order to bypass Ukraine transit charges. Project was 90% till Trump placed sanctions on the contractors, the work stopped.
Joe Biden desire to undo whatever Trump did lifted the sanctions And now the pipeline construction will go on and on.And Putin's ❤️ will also go on and on.

[quote author=Goodvibes007 post=104614908][/quote]If the global warming is true Should Russia not be happy because it will make Siberia more conducive and habitable?

Goodvibes007:
You mean the carbon capture project is solely all about air purity?

China would do anything for money and economic development.

It hasn't cut down on its carbon emissions even with all the pacts it has signed. The only times it has opted for less carbon emission is in places or situations where renewable energy was the cheaper option.

Of course, it makes solar panels and the likes for sale. That's for money. Where nuclear power or hydroelectric energy are the only options, it would go for it.

As cities are enlarging so is China's carbon footprint spreading.


The U.S. and the U.K. hasn't really done much. In their countries, for air purity, yes renewable energy and to cut ckst where necessary. Tree planting and reforestation drives too.

Both still have interest in several countries drilling for crude oil and new oil wells (Nigeria is just one small example). Both have outsourced manufacturing to places like China and Taiwan where all that global warming issue isn't controlling them.

The U.S. and the U.K. are the ones reprimanding and committing the ""crime too".

Want to find out about new crude oil deals between U.S. and Russia and the Middle East?

DissTroy:
China would do anything for money and economic development.

It hasn't cut down on its carbon emissions even with all the pacts it has signed. The only times it has opted for less carbon emission is in places or situations where renewable energy was the cheaper option.

Of course, it makes solar panels and the likes for sale. That's for money. Where nuclear power or hydroelectric energy are the only options, it would go for it.

As cities are enlarging so is China's carbon footprint spreading.


The U.S. and the U.K. hasn't really done much. In their countries, for air purity, yes renewable energy and to cut ckst where necessary. Tree planting and reforestation drives too.

Both still have interest in several countries drilling for crude oil and new oil wells (Nigeria is just one small example). Both have outsourced manufacturing to places like China and Taiwan where all that global warming issue isn't controlling them.

The U.S. and the U.K. are the ones reprimanding and committing the ""crime too".

Want to find out about new crude oil deals between U.S. and Russia and the Middle East?

He keeps singing China praise after I showed him this

DissTroy:
China would do anything for money and economic development.

It hasn't cut down on its carbon emissions even with all the pacts it has signed. The only times it has opted for less carbon emission is in places or situations where renewable energy was the cheaper option.

Of course, it makes solar panels and the likes for sale. That's for money. Where nuclear power or hydroelectric energy are the only options, it would go for it.

As cities are enlarging so is China's carbon footprint spreading.


The U.S. and the U.K. hasn't really done much. In their countries, for air purity, yes renewable energy and to cut ckst where necessary. Tree planting and reforestation drives too.

Both still have interest in several countries drilling for crude oil and new oil wells (Nigeria is just one small example). Both have outsourced manufacturing to places like China and Taiwan where all that global warming issue isn't controlling them.

The U.S. and the U.K. are the ones reprimanding and committing the ""crime too".

Want to find out about new crude oil deals between U.S. and Russia and the Middle East?

China needs to develop its economy and that is heavily reliable on carbon. That has always been their issue.
That's why I said it's trying its best. The country is trying to balance both despite pressure from other Western nations.

Carbon capture technology in itself is cutting down on emission. No matter how little the cutting is. It's still cutting.

As usual, Western nation would push for countries like China to do more.

I am more concerned that China, Russia and many other countries believe in Climate change and that it's real unlike some posters here that do not believe in the existence of the ozone layer let alone the science of climate change.

benalvino3:
Well, I am just trying to make you use specifics when it is necessary to make people understand more. That compound is chlorine florine and carbon

When the breakage of the ozone occur, it is the chlorine out of the three compound that cause the problem. This is another reason why I said you should be specific. It's not only carbon that is in play here and the compound that does the damage is the chlorine

In reality, none of these compounds or elements are in their purest form in nature. The CFCs have other elements attached in varying ways.
CH4 (Methane) depletes the Ozone layer too but to a smaller extent. CO isn't necessarily free-occuring too and reacts sign others.

CFCs, CH4 and the likes have effect on the eventual depletion. To save us from all that, the term is "carbon emissions". After all, carbon is the central element these compounds are built on, right? Fitting term.

Goodvibes007:
China needs to develop its economy and that is heavily reliable on carbon. That has always been their issue.
That's why I said it's trying its best. The country is trying to balance both despite pressure from other Western nations.

Carbon capture technology in itself is cutting down on emission. No matter how little the cutting is. It's still cutting.

As usual, Western nation would push for countries like China to do more.

The bolded brings us back to the premise of this back-and-forth:

Would all that human-induced carbon emissions stop global warming from happening?

You and Budaa had posited it would which why I really joined this debate, proving that it wouldn't, global warming and cooking/freezing are really out of the control of humans. And the earth has been warming and cooling for millions of years.

In fact, this is the only thing about global warming scientist agree on. The effect of carbon-emmission-cutting has never been agree on.

DissTroy:
The bolded brings us back to the premise of this back-and-forth:

Would all that human-induced carbon emissions stop global warming from happening?

You and Budaa had posited it would which why I really joined this debate, proving that it wouldn't, global warming and cooking/freezing are really out of the control of humans. And the earth has been warming and cooling for millions of years.

In fact, this is the only thing about global warming scientist agree on. The effect of carbon-emmission-cutting has never been agree on.

I wasn't part of your back and forth.

My claim all along has been that climate change/global warming is real. I said it could be slowed down. We can't just fold our arms or increase/accelerates it's activities which I agree with Budaatum.

basilico:
If the global warming is true Should Russia not be happy because it will make Siberia more conducive and habitable?

There is something called reserves, preservation, conservation e.t.c even Nigeria despite being a careless and wasteful nation has some reserves and conservation.

Story !!
Resettle this military aged man in Chicago, the security capital of the world.

https://www.breitbart.com/border/2021/08/09/exclusive-video-unaccompanied-migrant-teen-claims-gang-violence-forced-him-to-u-s/

Goodvibes007:
There is something called reserves, preservation, conservation e.t.c even Nigeria despite being a careless and wasteful nation has some reserves and conservation.

Troll.

sanpipita:
I just went on Twitter to have a good laugh.

Talking about Church.

[quote author=Goodvibes007 post=104619209][/quote]Where is my data request on the vaccinated numbers of employees that work for
Pfizer
CDC
FDA

I suspect the percentage vaxxed in the three leading vax enforcement entities could be less than 10% . I offer no proof Just a gut instinct.

This was sent to Georgr Conway. The grifting continues: