Message from @Egusi
Discord ID: 639786553442435072
Electronegativity
DescriptionElectronegativity, symbol χ, is a chemical property that describes the tendency of an atom to attract a shared pair of electrons towards itself. An atom's electronegativity is affected by both its atomic number and the distance at which its valence electrons reside from the charged nucleus
@climateshop it is not related
You were exaggerating how bad it was
well you know...
I dont know what you are all studiing but the next time you want to start a useless discution, make sure you know something about it because @chad46 what you just sended is just copy paste from google. Anyone can do that
that was in response to 11:17] The_chickenmaster: -df electronegativity
Ok
Il just give you one tip about climate change
because that is why I came here
lol climate change
how dare you
You dont believe in it?
is it well defined?
is it scientific
-df climate change
**climate change**: A term used instead of global warming because the full impact of human caused CO2 emissions isn't known to scientists, and many are predicting that worldwide heating of the atmosphere may cause changes in ocean currents, and therefore, in some cases, cooling of some areas like the Eastern [seaboard] of North America.
The existence of climate change is virtually undisputed by all the world's leading scientists. The only people who mock it are fools who have been duped by [the echo chamber] created by [junk science] manufactured by oil companies and car manufacturers, in short, those who have a vested instrest in the status quo.
Only a complete retard or a goof would believe that climate change isn't occuring, or that "left wing" envirotards are part of some vast conspiracy to make-believe that we are in the midst of the sixth great extinction. What possible motive would these pinko commies have to pretend that the climate is changing? What benefit would such [chicken little] posturing have to them? The answer is no benefit whatsoever.
If you aren't sure whose motives are suspect, think of the old Roman proverb "look to see who benefits". [Enviromentalists] don't have some secret hidden agenda, they sincerly just want to live on a habitable planet. They don't make money from saving forests. Who makes money, the corporations, or the environmentalists?
Think about it, as a person who probably acts in their own rational self interest, who is more likely to lie and cheat, the party who stands to make or lose money? Or the poor buffoon who just wants to save some owls, and maybe breathe [clean air]?
Does anyone really honestly think their car exhaust dissapears?
*[Hurricane Katrina] was an intense [storm] that was made more intense by the [effects] of climate change.*
*(<http://climate-change.urbanup.com/2095013>)* *9 more results*
Oops
11:22] BOTThe Oracle -: climate change: A term used instead of global warming because the full impact of human caused CO2 emissions isn't known to scientists,
thats all that is needed
okay @chad46 I would like you to just go away because you are really dumb. You have 1 goal and that is giving stupid comments
Nope the 2nd thingy is alsp required
you just stop at the first confirmation of your belief
my belief is that is isnt known
im not interseted in reading waffle
yeah which proves my point, you read that "CO2 emissions isn't known to scientist" while completely disregarding the other parts
@chad46 how old are you?
it was called global warming
"
The existence of climate change is virtually undisputed by all the world's leading scientists. The only people who mock it are fools who have been duped by [the echo chamber] created by [junk science] manufactured by oil companies and car manufacturers, in short, those who have a vested instrest in the status quo."
are you saying that climate change does not exist, or that it is not caused by humans?
how many leading scientist are there?
what kind of a question is that 😂
chad how old are you!!
The existence of climate change is virtually undisputed by all the world's leading scientists.
i would like to know how many there are
what was the vote? 3 to 1?
I am not wasting my time on a 14 years old dumbass because this can be a really interesting discoution but you are destroing it
It wasnt voted its just something most scientist agrea on
The current scientific consensus is that:
Earth's climate has warmed significantly since the late 1800s.
Human activities (primarily greenhouse gas emissions) are the primary cause.
Continuing emissions will increase the likelihood and severity of global effects.
People and nations can act individually and collectively to slow the pace of global warming, while also preparing for unavoidable climate change and its consequences.
Several studies of the consensus have been undertaken. Among the most cited is a 2013 study of nearly 12,000 abstracts of peer-reviewed papers on climate science published since 1990, of which just over 4,000 papers expressed an opinion on the cause of recent global warming. Of these, 97% agree, explicitly or implicitly, that global warming is happening and is human-caused.