Comments by "snuffeldjuret" (@snuffeldjuret) on "When will the next ice age happen? - Lorraine Lisiecki" video.

  1.  @gusmc2220  I have no problem with you, I had no idea I had responded to three (or more? I have no idea) of your posts. From the looks of it, it seems I had "a problem" with two things you said. I was wondering about the chemtrails thing as Lifecomesfromwithin has bought into it. I did address what you said. Funnily enough, the burden of proof lies on the one making the positive claim. Positive claim as in "variation in solar activity is what matters" or something like that. If you want to argue you should correctly argue against my claim, not your modified version of the claim. I never said that "solar activity doesn't have an affect".
    3
  2.  @Lifecomesfromwithin  zharkova says that the reduced solar activity has less effect than the co2, so it won't get cooler. It won't get warmer as fast as it would with regular solar activity though.
    2
  3.  @gusmc2220  does Tony Heller also believe in the Chemtrails conspiracy?
    2
  4.  @gusmc2220  I never claimed he does that. You really have to look at what I actually write if you want to argue against me. In case you forgot, I'll quote myself: "does Tony Heller also believe in the Chemtrails conspiracy?" That is not a claim. That is a question. I'll quote myself again: "I was wondering about the chemtrails thing as Lifecomesfromwithin has bought into it." And here is a quote from Lifecomesfromwithin: "Oppenheimer report carbon dioxide doesn't do anything but we do have to get rid of pollution some of the worst of which being from the chemtrails they spray coal ash and all the ionospheric heaters to create high pressure and drought has to get turned off too." Questions?
    2
  5.  @gusmc2220  In no way did I demand that you should speak for someone else. You don't have to answer the question again, because I didn't asked the question again. I just explained how I did not demand you to speak for someone else. Why are you trying so hard to be unreasonable? I read everything you wrote, the question is if you read what I wrote but more importantly did you even try to understand what I mean?
    2
  6. how is it "Dangerously oversimplified science"?
    1
  7. depends on what you mean with "nothing to do with glacial cycles".
    1
  8. sure, no one is denying that.
    1
  9. in the grand scheme of things, the minor changes in solar activity has little to no impact.
    1
  10.  @gusmc2220  reading "... leading some scientists to speculate ..." should make your alarm bells go off. "... guess the Sun and cosmic radiation DO play a part here too, no matter what you say" What do I say in regards to that?
    1
  11. isn't that what they do when they analyze the isotope "distribution" of atmospheric carbon?
    1
  12. how do you define "ice age"?
    1
  13. or we somehow manages to keep things as they are.
    1
  14. that was explained in the video.
    1
  15.  @gusmc2220  the answer to your question is specifically what they talk about at 2:09
    1
  16.  @jamisojo  free speech is great. That way you know who's really nuts :P.
    1