Climate Change, 'Greenhouse' effects: DENIAL


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Climate Change, 'Greenhouse' effects: DENIAL

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 42 · Next
Author Message
Profile dancer42
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 2 Jun 02
Posts: 436
Credit: 1,159,097
RAC: 1,247
United States
Message 1344827 - Posted: 10 Mar 2013, 4:54:29 UTC

it is not a question of can we it is should we.


____________

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12586
Credit: 6,896,750
RAC: 7,110
United States
Message 1344835 - Posted: 10 Mar 2013, 5:49:43 UTC - in response to Message 1344327.

If everyone knows that water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas, why do Al Gore and so many others focus on CO2? Call it the politics of the possible. Water vapor is almost entirely natural. It’s beyond the reach of man’s screwdriver

All these calls to convert mobile sources from oil fuels which produce CO2 and H20 to hydrogen fuel which produces only H2O is going to reduce global warming because H2O magically doesn't count. I just enjoy the hand waving society.


____________

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8452
Credit: 4,154,271
RAC: 1,811
United Kingdom
Message 1344902 - Posted: 10 Mar 2013, 10:46:28 UTC - in response to Message 1344835.
Last modified: 10 Mar 2013, 10:47:07 UTC

... I just enjoy the hand waving society.

We just love your blinkered trolling and denial of the real world around you.

Yet again, again, oncemore:

Care to explain your physics for global warming and H2O?

Then can you include the effect of CO2?

You need to also include the lifetime of those gasses and the effect of that. No squirming now and avoiding reality and physics...


It's all a question of cause and effect if you can see that...

Can you hear?

All on our only world,
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31780
Credit: 13,201,832
RAC: 34,864
United Kingdom
Message 1344922 - Posted: 10 Mar 2013, 11:53:50 UTC

We just love your blinkered trolling and denial of the real world around you.

Could you define we? Is that just your own opinion, or are you suggesting that there are a significant number of others that agree with you?

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12586
Credit: 6,896,750
RAC: 7,110
United States
Message 1344990 - Posted: 10 Mar 2013, 16:28:57 UTC

One plus one equals huge error bars.

____________

NickProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 11
Posts: 3954
Credit: 2,013,120
RAC: 760
United Kingdom
Message 1344996 - Posted: 10 Mar 2013, 16:38:21 UTC - in response to Message 1344922.

We just love your blinkered trolling and denial of the real world around you.

Could you define we? Is that just your own opinion, or are you suggesting that there are a significant number of others that agree with you?


Climate interventionist's...


____________
The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8452
Credit: 4,154,271
RAC: 1,811
United Kingdom
Message 1345057 - Posted: 10 Mar 2013, 19:17:01 UTC - in response to Message 1344990.

One plus one equals huge error bars.

From your very own article:

"Overall these eruptions are not going to counter the greenhouse effect," Toon said in a statement. "Emissions of volcanic gases go up and down, helping to cool or heat the planet, while greenhouse gas emissions from human activity just continue to go up."

Shame you can only troll rather than contribute to any sort of discussion. So, the world be damned for you and everyone else?...


All on our only world,
Martin

____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31780
Credit: 13,201,832
RAC: 34,864
United Kingdom
Message 1345067 - Posted: 10 Mar 2013, 19:37:13 UTC

Gary, Martin. Couldn't you two agree to disagree on your viewpoints?



Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12586
Credit: 6,896,750
RAC: 7,110
United States
Message 1345098 - Posted: 10 Mar 2013, 21:46:17 UTC - in response to Message 1345057.

"Overall these eruptions are not going to counter the greenhouse effect," Toon said in a statement. "Emissions of volcanic gases go up and down, helping to cool or heat the planet, while greenhouse gas emissions from human activity just continue to go up."

If the historic database his data is based upon is proven bad you expect him to continue to make the same statement. Interesting logic there Martin.

____________

Profile RottenMutt
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 15 Mar 01
Posts: 992
Credit: 207,654,737
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1359102 - Posted: 20 Apr 2013, 22:56:26 UTC - in response to Message 1340190.

...The basic physics of climate change is irrefutable. Greenhouse gases warm the atmosphere and cause changes to the climate. Human activity is significantly contributing to the warming of our planet.
...
All on our only one planet,
Martin


so what is the physics behind global warming????
____________

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2571
Credit: 1,179,205
RAC: 137
United States
Message 1359130 - Posted: 21 Apr 2013, 0:46:32 UTC - in response to Message 1359102.

Take a careful read of this and refute it if you can.



"The atmosphere is primarily composed of nitrogen (78 percent), oxygen (21 percent), argon (0.93 percent), and CO2 (0.04 percent). Many other gases are present in trace amounts. The lower atmosphere also contains varying amounts of water vapor, up to four percent by volume.

Nitrogen and oxygen are not greenhouse gases and have no warming influence. The greenhouse gases included in the Kyoto Protocol are each rated for warming potency. CO2, the warming gas that has activated Al Gore, has low warming potency, but its relatively high concentration makes it responsible for 72 percent of Kyoto warming. Methane (CH4, a.k.a. natural gas) is 21 times more potent than CO2, but because of its low concentration, it contributes only seven percent of that warming. Nitrous oxide (N2O), mostly of nature’s creation, is 310 times more potent than CO2. Again, low concentration keeps its warming effect down to 19 percent.

Now for an inconvenient truth about CO2 sources nature generates about 30 times as much of it as does man. Yet the warming worriers are unconcerned about nature’s outpouring. They and Al Gore are alarmed only about anthropogenic CO2, that 3.2 percent caused by humans.

They like to point fingers at the U.S., which generated about 23 percent of the world’s anthropogenic CO2 in 2003, the latest figures from the Energy Information Administration. But this finger-pointing ignores yet another inconvenient truth about CO2. In fact, it’s a minor contributor to the greenhouse effect when water vapor is taken into consideration. All the greenhouse gases together, including CO2 and methane, produce less than two percent of the greenhouse effect, according to Richard S. Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Lindzen, by the way, is described by one source as the most renowned climatologist in all the world. 

When water vapor is put in that perspective, then anthropogenic CO2 produces less than 0.1 of one percent of the greenhouse effect.

If everyone knows that water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas, why do Al Gore and so many others focus on CO2? Call it the politics of the possible. Water vapor is almost entirely natural. It’s beyond the reach of man’s screwdriver. But when the delegates of 189 countries met at Kyoto in December 1997 to discuss global climate change, they could hardly vote to do nothing. So instead, they agreed that the developed countries of the world would reduce emissions of six man-made greenhouse gases. At the top of the list is CO2, a trivial influence on global warming compared with water vapor, but unquestionably man’s largest contribution.

In deciding that it couldn’t reduce water vapor, Kyoto really decided that it couldn’t reduce global warning. But that’s an inconvenient truth that wouldn’t make much of a movie."

Glenn savill
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Aug 99
Posts: 2373
Credit: 3,334,275
RAC: 33,464
Australia
Message 1359138 - Posted: 21 Apr 2013, 1:13:30 UTC

The artic water argument crap 90% of all fresh water is in the ANTartic the south pole witch is heating up more than anwyhere else .This water has not been in the oceans of millions of years . The ice cores tell us the co2 level gets to 350ppm then a ice age comes the co2 goes down , fact.
As a person that has had a lot to do with extremes of temp I know less than 1 degree can change the way things behave . If we had not cut down all the forests and jungles of the world we probably would not have the problems we are having now . When the Amason dies because of the drying out of the atmosphere in that part of the world then we will see just how much damage it does and does not do
Please don't whinge when it happens as I will say I told you so piss off iddiot.
We will be very lucky to last till 2050 at the rate the climate models are going as the temp is 2degress above whot was predicted at this present time and now they say as much as 5 degress by 2100 . Funny humans can't live in temps above 50 C at 55 we and most life will .
The time to talk is over we know what is going on and how we can fix or abait it so let's do something all tech will be needed no 1 will save us .

Less than 20 yrs and counting down till it all stops .thank god i'm 50 i', die before it get to bad so enjoy your future SUCKKERS
____________

Message 1359142 - Posted: 21 Apr 2013, 1:22:14 UTC

Take a careful read of this and refute it if you can.



"The atmosphere is primarily composed of nitrogen (78 percent), oxygen (21 percent), argon (0.93 percent), and CO2 (0.04 percent). Many other gases are present in trace amounts. The lower atmosphere also contains varying amounts of water vapor, up to four percent by volume.

Nitrogen and oxygen are not greenhouse gases and have no warming influence. The greenhouse gases included in the Kyoto Protocol are each rated for warming potency. CO2, the warming gas that has activated Al Gore, has low warming potency, but its relatively high concentration makes it responsible for 72 percent of Kyoto warming. Methane (CH4, a.k.a. natural gas) is 21 times more potent than CO2, but because of its low concentration, it contributes only seven percent of that warming. Nitrous oxide (N2O), mostly of nature’s creation, is 310 times more potent than CO2. Again, low concentration keeps its warming effect down to 19 percent.

Now for an inconvenient truth about CO2 sources nature generates about 30 times as much of it as does man. Yet the warming worriers are unconcerned about nature’s outpouring. They and Al Gore are alarmed only about anthropogenic CO2, that 3.2 percent caused by humans.

They like to point fingers at the U.S., which generated about 23 percent of the world’s anthropogenic CO2 in 2003, the latest figures from the Energy Information Administration. But this finger-pointing ignores yet another inconvenient truth about CO2. In fact, it’s a minor contributor to the greenhouse effect when water vapor is taken into consideration. All the greenhouse gases together, including CO2 and methane, produce less than two percent of the greenhouse effect, according to Richard S. Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Lindzen, by the way, is described by one source as the most renowned climatologist in all the world. 

When water vapor is put in that perspective, then anthropogenic CO2 produces less than 0.1 of one percent of the greenhouse effect.

If everyone knows that water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas, why do Al Gore and so many others focus on CO2? Call it the politics of the possible. Water vapor is almost entirely natural. It’s beyond the reach of man’s screwdriver. But when the delegates of 189 countries met at Kyoto in December 1997 to discuss global climate change, they could hardly vote to do nothing. So instead, they agreed that the developed countries of the world would reduce emissions of six man-made greenhouse gases. At the top of the list is CO2, a trivial influence on global warming compared with water vapor, but unquestionably man’s largest contribution.

In deciding that it couldn’t reduce water vapor, Kyoto really decided that it couldn’t reduce global warning. But that’s an inconvenient truth that wouldn’t make much of a movie."


Yep. I'll go wid dat.

Bound For It.
____________


Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31780
Credit: 13,201,832
RAC: 34,864
United Kingdom
Message 1359253 - Posted: 21 Apr 2013, 8:46:37 UTC

+1

Hey Sirius, can I have some of your pills please, that is the second time today .....

NickProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 11
Posts: 3954
Credit: 2,013,120
RAC: 760
United Kingdom
Message 1359340 - Posted: 21 Apr 2013, 12:35:49 UTC
Last modified: 21 Apr 2013, 12:38:19 UTC

Global warming and global cooling is intrinsic to the life of this planet. It's
a rejovenation process that has been about ever since this planet was formed.
The ice age stage permits the planet to scalp itself clean leading to a healthy
outer surface layer. When the warming phase comes along - along with it comes
a vibrant new life cycle of animal and plant growth all feeding off this vibrant
new surface. You see similarities to this with the four season cycles per year
evident today. There is nothing humans can do to stop these global warming and
global cooling phases occurring. Some profess that humans are seriously
contributing to this current global warming cycle. If humans are then their
contributing in a way favourable to the growth phase of man on this planet.
Just look at the growth in population since this last warming phase started.
Perhaps man, through his contributions to it, is prolonging this warming phase for
when the next ice age eventually arrives this planet will see 95% of human
life disappear. If man made global warming is a fact then don't knock it for
it could be doing us good....keeping us here all a lot longer than would
otherwise be the case.
____________
The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8452
Credit: 4,154,271
RAC: 1,811
United Kingdom
Message 1359517 - Posted: 21 Apr 2013, 21:08:34 UTC - in response to Message 1359102.

so what is the physics behind global warming????

Copying my answer from the "positive" "solutions" thread:



1:
Our sun radiates light/heat energy at approximately 5000 K (5273 deg C).

2:
At that temperature wavelength (Sun), CO2 (carbon dioxide) is 'transparent' and so a large proportion of that energy reaches the earth's surface to heat the ground/water.

3:
The earth's surface of ground/water radiates heat energy at about 287 K (14 deg C).

4:
At that temperature wavelength (Earth), CO2 (carbon dioxide) is 'opaque' and so a proportion of that energy is absorbed to heat our atmosphere.

5:
Simplistically: To maintain a steady temperature on Earth, heat energy received from the sun must equal the heat energy re-radiated back out to space.

6:
We RELY on a certain level of CO2 to capture a proportion of re-radiated Earth surface heat to keep us comfortably warm. Otherwise, we would suffer something like the cold of Mars.

7:
Varying the concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere is one mechanism to directly change the proportion of re-radiated heat that is lost to space and so controls the temperature maintained.


That CO2 absorbs Earthly heat radiation has been known for about two centuries now. Iain Stewart gives a nicely visual demonstration:

Iain Stewart demonstrates infrared radiation absorption by CO2



And our continued Industrial Revolution continues to pollute our atmosphere with vast tonnes of CO2 that is directly, measurably, rapidly increasing the concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere. There has been an ever more widespread awareness of the changes wrought by that for our planet since WWII...

Hope that is a brief enough summary.


All on our only one planet,
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8452
Credit: 4,154,271
RAC: 1,811
United Kingdom
Message 1359523 - Posted: 21 Apr 2013, 21:24:18 UTC - in response to Message 1359130.
Last modified: 21 Apr 2013, 21:34:36 UTC

... Now for an inconvenient truth about CO2 sources nature generates about 30 times as much of it as does man. Yet the warming worriers are unconcerned about nature’s outpouring. ...

When water vapor is put in that perspective, then anthropogenic CO2 produces less than 0.1 of one percent of the greenhouse effect.

If everyone knows that water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas, why do Al Gore and so many others focus on CO2? ...

Before our Industrial Revolution, the various natural "outpourings" of CO2 had balanced with the rest of the natural environment on Earth such that the concentration of CO2 had become stable. That is, the atmospheric concentration had stayed pretty much steady for 'a very long time'.

During that period, the Human species arose and flourished.

Our Industrial Revolution has created a vast new outpouring of CO2 never before seen by present day nature on our planet. The increase in CO2 that we directly measure, directly follows almost exactly the economic 'progress' for the industrial nations for our planet.

Even volcanic eruptions cannot compare in volume to the vast volcanoes of our industrial enterprise and the present unchecked pollution.


For your second point:

Water vapour is indeed more effective for trapping Earth's re-radiated heat than the CO2 in our atmosphere. However, there is a very significant difference...

Water vapour is constantly "quickly" recycled. Simplistically: Water evapourates from our oceans and then within a few days it rains out again to go back into the ocean. The rate at which that happens depends on temperature.

CO2 in contrast, once pumped into the atmosphere, stays there for a 'long' time of many years. So, regardless of what water vapour does, the CO2 ADDS EXTRA warming effect, constantly.

There is an important feedback effect that as the CO2 concentration increases to add additional constant warming, that extra warming adds a little extra water vapour to the atmosphere due to increased evapouration which in turn boosts the warming effect a little more. Hence, increased CO2 increases the water vapour to give further increased warming. However, increasing the water vapour doesn't lead to increased CO2... Hence, the level of water vapour in our atmosphere depends in part upon the concentration of CO2 and so is controlled by that CO2 concentration.

Hence, the CO2 concentration controls the warming effect that is then amplified by the effect of water vapour in response to that concentration of CO2.


And Mankind is directly changing the concentration of CO2...


All on our only one planet,
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Glenn savill
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Aug 99
Posts: 2373
Credit: 3,334,275
RAC: 33,464
Australia
Message 1359589 - Posted: 22 Apr 2013, 0:33:29 UTC

Well said Martin
____________

NickProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 11
Posts: 3954
Credit: 2,013,120
RAC: 760
United Kingdom
Message 1359601 - Posted: 22 Apr 2013, 0:59:16 UTC - in response to Message 1359523.

... Now for an inconvenient truth about CO2 sources nature generates about 30 times as much of it as does man. Yet the warming worriers are unconcerned about nature’s outpouring. ...

When water vapor is put in that perspective, then anthropogenic CO2 produces less than 0.1 of one percent of the greenhouse effect.

If everyone knows that water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas, why do Al Gore and so many others focus on CO2? ...

Before our Industrial Revolution, the various natural "outpourings" of CO2 had balanced with the rest of the natural environment on Earth such that the concentration of CO2 had become stable. That is, the atmospheric concentration had stayed pretty much steady for 'a very long time'.

During that period, the Human species arose and flourished.

Our Industrial Revolution has created a vast new outpouring of CO2 never before seen by present day nature on our planet. The increase in CO2 that we directly measure, directly follows almost exactly the economic 'progress' for the industrial nations for our planet.

Even volcanic eruptions cannot compare in volume to the vast volcanoes of our industrial enterprise and the present unchecked pollution.


For your second point:

Water vapour is indeed more effective for trapping Earth's re-radiated heat than the CO2 in our atmosphere. However, there is a very significant difference...

Water vapour is constantly "quickly" recycled. Simplistically: Water evapourates from our oceans and then within a few days it rains out again to go back into the ocean. The rate at which that happens depends on temperature.

CO2 in contrast, once pumped into the atmosphere, stays there for a 'long' time of many years. So, regardless of what water vapour does, the CO2 ADDS EXTRA warming effect, constantly.

There is an important feedback effect that as the CO2 concentration increases to add additional constant warming, that extra warming adds a little extra water vapour to the atmosphere due to increased evapouration which in turn boosts the warming effect a little more. Hence, increased CO2 increases the water vapour to give further increased warming. However, increasing the water vapour doesn't lead to increased CO2... Hence, the level of water vapour in our atmosphere depends in part upon the concentration of CO2 and so is controlled by that CO2 concentration.

Hence, the CO2 concentration controls the warming effect that is then amplified by the effect of water vapour in response to that concentration of CO2.


And Mankind is directly changing the concentration of CO2...


All on our only one planet,
Martin

-1!!

____________
The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8452
Credit: 4,154,271
RAC: 1,811
United Kingdom
Message 1359744 - Posted: 22 Apr 2013, 10:29:46 UTC - in response to Message 1359601.

... Hence, the CO2 concentration controls the warming effect that is then amplified by the effect of water vapour in response to that concentration of CO2.


And Mankind is directly changing the concentration of CO2...


All on our only one planet,
Martin

-1!!

Care to explain?


Or is your "-1!!" just an indication that you don't want all that to be happening?

All on our only one planet,
Martin

____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 42 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Climate Change, 'Greenhouse' effects: DENIAL

Copyright © 2014 University of California