former astronaut speaks out on global warming

[Harry Dresden]

Whatever, Chris

Please, is this what passes for a response? Does your "Whatever, Chris" contribute anything whatsoever to the discussion? Does it refute any of his facts? Does it quote any data? Provide any link to said data? Does it do anything other than make you look like an ass who is trying to hide his lack of argument behind insults?

Because that is all I am seeing. It doesn't take much, you obviously have access to the internet, just Google "scientific evidence against Global Warming" and quote some of the results at him. Do something, because "Whatever, Chris" is a complete waste of a post.

Whatever, Dude lol

and this guy calls me a smart ass?......

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Whatever, Chris

As a graduate student in physics, I can say that yes, it is a well established scientific fact that CO2 gas is opaque to some frequencies of infra-red radiation. To debate that point would be like debating whether or not the sky is blue.

You know...I really get tired of debating faulty science funded by the damn U.N. The debate isn't over, the concensus isn't in. More, and more scientists are coming over to the fact that it isn't MAN made global warming. You, from a far left liberal academia university..or college, really have nothing to bring to this forum that will convince me.

Louisiana State University is a "far left liberal" university???


ROTFFLMFAO!

 

[Meister]

As a graduate student in physics, I can say that yes, it is a well established scientific fact that CO2 gas is opaque to some frequencies of infra-red radiation. To debate that point would be like debating whether or not the sky is blue.

You know...I really get tired of debating faulty science funded by the damn U.N. The debate isn't over, the concensus isn't in. More, and more scientists are coming over to the fact that it isn't MAN made global warming. You, from a far left liberal academia university..or college, really have nothing to bring to this forum that will convince me.

Louisiana State University is a "far left liberal" university???


ROTFFLMFAO!

Uh, yeah...it did produce your indoctrination.

ROTFFLMFAO !!!

 

[Chris]

To Meister anyone who reads is a far left liberal.

Better to get all your infomation from FoxNews and talk radio.

 

[Old Rocks]

Whatever, Chris

As a graduate student in physics, I can say that yes, it is a well established scientific fact that CO2 gas is opaque to some frequencies of infra-red radiation. To debate that point would be like debating whether or not the sky is blue.

You know...I really get tired of debating faulty science funded by the damn U.N. The debate isn't over, the concensus isn't in. More, and more scientists are coming over to the fact that it isn't MAN made global warming. You, from a far left liberal academia university..or college, really have nothing to bring to this forum that will convince me.

LOL. Meister, you are so damned stupid and ignorant. The UN funded Fourier? Tyndale? Svante Arnnhenius? How about Callender or Suess? I know, the names mean absolutely nothing to you. And you are far to lazy to look them up. Talk about willfull ignorance. Meister, you are the poster boy for 'Stupid, and working hard to stay that way'.

 

[BrianH]

And there are geologists that still don't accept plate tectonics. Schmitt is simply wrong. And the Planetary Society is in line with the overwhelming number of scientists that have viewed the evidence. All the geological societys in the world accept the evidence that AGW is real and a clear and present danger. When an old scientist disagrees with the whole of his peers on a subject, he is almost always mistaken.

With all due respect, it can't be proven....

It doesn't explain why all 8 planets, including Pluto, in our solar system are warming. Sure, humans contribute to green-house gasses, but have we caused the earth to warm?? IMO, NO. AGW can only be recently a probability. After the little Ice Age peak in the 1700s, did the founding fathers blame the warming trends on Indians smoking opium, and cow farts? No. The world has consistently and cyclically warmed and cooled. It's the VERY reason why the Ice Age was an Ice Age, and why the Ice Age ceased to by an Ice Age.

I believe that people should go green and try to do better with regards to emitting green-house gasses, however, water-vapor is WAY more of a green-house gas than CO2.

 

[Chris]

And there are geologists that still don't accept plate tectonics. Schmitt is simply wrong. And the Planetary Society is in line with the overwhelming number of scientists that have viewed the evidence. All the geological societys in the world accept the evidence that AGW is real and a clear and present danger. When an old scientist disagrees with the whole of his peers on a subject, he is almost always mistaken.

With all due respect, it can't be proven....

It doesn't explain why all 8 planets, including Pluto, in our solar system are warming. Sure, humans contribute to green-house gasses, but have we caused the earth to warm?? IMO, NO. AGW can only be recently a probability. After the little Ice Age peak in the 1700s, did the founding fathers blame the warming trends on Indians smoking opium, and cow farts? No. The world has consistently and cyclically warmed and cooled. It's the VERY reason why the Ice Age was an Ice Age, and why the Ice Age ceased to by an Ice Age.

I believe that people should go green and try to do better with regards to emitting green-house gasses, however, water-vapor is WAY more of a green-house gas than CO2.

Wrong.

Water vapor is a short lived GHG. CO2 stays in the atmosphere 100-200 years.

Please do a little reading outside of right wing circles.

 

[BrianH]

And there are geologists that still don't accept plate tectonics. Schmitt is simply wrong. And the Planetary Society is in line with the overwhelming number of scientists that have viewed the evidence. All the geological societys in the world accept the evidence that AGW is real and a clear and present danger. When an old scientist disagrees with the whole of his peers on a subject, he is almost always mistaken.

With all due respect, it can't be proven....

It doesn't explain why all 8 planets, including Pluto, in our solar system are warming. Sure, humans contribute to green-house gasses, but have we caused the earth to warm?? IMO, NO. AGW can only be recently a probability. After the little Ice Age peak in the 1700s, did the founding fathers blame the warming trends on Indians smoking opium, and cow farts? No. The world has consistently and cyclically warmed and cooled. It's the VERY reason why the Ice Age was an Ice Age, and why the Ice Age ceased to by an Ice Age.

I believe that people should go green and try to do better with regards to emitting green-house gasses, however, water-vapor is WAY more of a green-house gas than CO2.

Wrong.

Water vapor is a short lived GHG. CO2 stays in the atmosphere 100-200 years.

Please do a little reading outside of right wing circles.

Alright smartass..try doing a little reading inside the thread. Did I say that water vapor was a long lived green-house gas. Boy your dense.... Bravo.

You also failed to address the reason for the other planets warming, and for the ending and cause of the Ice Age and Little Ice Age---> before humans began burning fossil fuels.

 

[Meister]

As a graduate student in physics, I can say that yes, it is a well established scientific fact that CO2 gas is opaque to some frequencies of infra-red radiation. To debate that point would be like debating whether or not the sky is blue.

You know...I really get tired of debating faulty science funded by the damn U.N. The debate isn't over, the concensus isn't in. More, and more scientists are coming over to the fact that it isn't MAN made global warming. You, from a far left liberal academia university..or college, really have nothing to bring to this forum that will convince me.

LOL. Meister, you are so damned stupid and ignorant. The UN funded Fourier? Tyndale? Svante Arnnhenius? How about Callender or Suess? I know, the names mean absolutely nothing to you. And you are far to lazy to look them up. Talk about willfull ignorance. Meister, you are the poster boy for 'Stupid, and working hard to stay that way'.

Look dumb fuck, I don't know who the hell you are to come off as condescending as you do. You have had other people post valid arguements to you nonsense. You do not read what they say...you just show your ignorance at every level trying to disprove the source. The only thing you do is just show what a dumb fuck you really are. I won't show my sources to you because you are such a dumb fuck. Your sources are so damn biased and paid for by the left environuts, and the U.N. A blind person could identify it. So rock...stick your fucking head up your fucking ass, and roll down the sidewalk...Got it?? For everyone reading this besides rockhead...sorry for the language.

 

[BrianH]

You know...I really get tired of debating faulty science funded by the damn U.N. The debate isn't over, the concensus isn't in. More, and more scientists are coming over to the fact that it isn't MAN made global warming. You, from a far left liberal academia university..or college, really have nothing to bring to this forum that will convince me.

LOL. Meister, you are so damned stupid and ignorant. The UN funded Fourier? Tyndale? Svante Arnnhenius? How about Callender or Suess? I know, the names mean absolutely nothing to you. And you are far to lazy to look them up. Talk about willfull ignorance. Meister, you are the poster boy for 'Stupid, and working hard to stay that way'.

Look dumb fuck, I don't know who the hell you are to come off as condescending as you do. You have had other people post valid arguements to you nonsense. You do not read what they say...you just show your ignorance at every level trying to disprove the source. The only thing you do is just show what a dumb fuck you really are. I won't show my sources to you because you are such a dumb fuck. Your sources are so damn biased and paid for by the left environuts, and the U.N. A blind person could identify it. So rock...stick your fucking head up your fucking ass, and roll down the sidewalk...Got it?? For everyone reading this besides rockhead...sorry for the language.

Typical AGW THEORY believer. Instead of proving what they claim, they continuously attmept to discredit your sources. Seen it before on these forums, and it hasn't chaned one bit. AGW can't and hasn't been proven or it wouldn't be called a theory. What's really funny, is that they'll constinently call you a liar, or discredit your sources, then cherry-pick what you say and ignore the stuff that really puts their opinion in the crapper.

 

[Chris]

With all due respect, it can't be proven....

It doesn't explain why all 8 planets, including Pluto, in our solar system are warming. Sure, humans contribute to green-house gasses, but have we caused the earth to warm?? IMO, NO. AGW can only be recently a probability. After the little Ice Age peak in the 1700s, did the founding fathers blame the warming trends on Indians smoking opium, and cow farts? No. The world has consistently and cyclically warmed and cooled. It's the VERY reason why the Ice Age was an Ice Age, and why the Ice Age ceased to by an Ice Age.

I believe that people should go green and try to do better with regards to emitting green-house gasses, however, water-vapor is WAY more of a green-house gas than CO2.

Wrong.

Water vapor is a short lived GHG. CO2 stays in the atmosphere 100-200 years.

Please do a little reading outside of right wing circles.

Alright smartass..try doing a little reading inside the thread. Did I say that water vapor was a long lived green-house gas. Boy your dense.... Bravo.

You also failed to address the reason for the other planets warming, and for the ending and cause of the Ice Age and Little Ice Age---> before humans began burning fossil fuels.

Link?

 

[Chris]

Speaking of the planets and the greenhouse effect....

Venus has an extremely dense atmosphere, which consists mainly of carbon dioxide and a small amount of nitrogen. The atmospheric mass is 93 times that of Earth's atmosphere while the pressure at the planet's surface is about 92 times that at Earth's surface—a pressure equivalent to that at a depth of nearly 1 kilometer under Earth's oceans. The density at the surface is 65 kg/m³ (6.5% that of water). The enormously CO2-rich atmosphere, along with thick clouds of sulfur dioxide, generates the strongest greenhouse effect in the solar system, creating surface temperatures of over 460 °C.[21] This makes Venus's surface hotter than Mercury's which has a minimum surface temperature of -220 °C and maximum surface temperature of 420 °C, even though Venus is nearly twice Mercury's distance from the Sun and receives only 25% of Mercury's solar irradiance.

Venus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[BrianH]

Wrong.

Water vapor is a short lived GHG. CO2 stays in the atmosphere 100-200 years.

Please do a little reading outside of right wing circles.

Alright smartass..try doing a little reading inside the thread. Did I say that water vapor was a long lived green-house gas. Boy your dense.... Bravo.

You also failed to address the reason for the other planets warming, and for the ending and cause of the Ice Age and Little Ice Age---> before humans began burning fossil fuels.

Link?

Sun Blamed for Warming of Earth and Other Worlds | LiveScience


Mars Is Warming, NASA Scientists Report - by James M. Taylor - Environment & Climate News

NASA GISS: Science Briefs: Do Variations in the Solar Cycle Affect Our Climate System?

http://www.longrangeweather.com/1000ad.htm

--Look at 1000 AD to 1050 AD; 900 AD to 950 AD--to name a couple. There are several eras that have above normal temperatures...and that's just in recent history.

 

[Chris]

That's a good start.

Now here's a good link about global warming and the sun's activity...

Global Warming -- Research Issues

 

[Chris]

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/600px-Temp-sunspot-co2.svg.png

 

[BrianH]

That's a good start.

Now here's a good link about global warming and the sun's activity...

Global Warming -- Research Issues

I'll tell you what, when I see that you've proven, without a doubt, that CO2 and Humans are causing global warming, I'll chime in. Good luck, cause it'll never happen. Keep ignoring the fact that it's called AGW THEORY.

 

[Old Rocks]

DAILY TOTAL SOLAR IRRADIANCE

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total solar irradiance describes the radiant energy emitted by the sun over all wavelengths that falls each second on 1 square meter outside the earth's atmosphere--a quantity proportional to the "solar constant" observed earlier in this century. It measures the solar energy flux in Watts/square meter. The data contains six sets of satellite observations: values from NIMBUS-7, from the Solar Maximum Mission (SMM) spacecraft, from the Earth Radiation Budget Satellite (ERBS), from the NOAA-9 and 10 platforms, and from the Upper Atmospheric Research Satellite (UARS). Measurements span the periods:

NIMBUS-7 16 Nov 78-13 Dec 93; SMM 16 Feb 80-01 Jun 89;
ERBS 25 Oct 84-21 Dec 94; NOAA-9 23 Jan 85-20 Dec 89;
NOAA-10 22 Oct 86-01 Apr 87; UARS 5 Oct 91-30 Sep 94.https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/SOLAR/IRRADIANCE/irrad.html

OK, Brian, show me where you see an increase in the total solar irradiance.

 

[Old Rocks]

Sun Blamed for Warming of Earth and Other Worlds | LiveScience


Sun Blamed for Warming of Earth and Other WorldsBy Ker Than, LiveScience Staff Writer

posted: 12 March 2007 07:27 am ET
Buzz up! del.icio.us
Digg It!
Newsvine
reddit9 Comments | 14 Recommend
Earth is heating up lately, but so are Mars, Pluto and other worlds in our solar system, leading some scientists to speculate that a change in the sun’s activity is the common thread linking all these baking events.

Others argue that such claims are misleading and create the false impression that rapid global warming, as Earth is experiencing, is a natural phenomenon.

While evidence suggests fluctuations in solar activity can affect climate on Earth, and that it has done so in the past, the majority of climate scientists and astrophysicists agree that the sun is not to blame for the current and historically sudden uptick in global temperatures on Earth, which seems to be mostly a mess created by our own species.

 

[Old Rocks]

NASA GISS: Science Briefs: Do Variations in the Solar Cycle Affect Our Climate System?


Total solar irradiance changes, though of small magnitude, do appear to affect sea surface temperatures (SSTs), most obviously at latitudes where cloud cover is small and irradiance is abundant, such as the Northern Hemisphere subtropics during summer. The increased SSTs then help intensify circulations spiraling away from the subtropics, again favoring reduced rainfall near the equator and to the south, as well as northern mid-latitudes. Hence, both the UV and TSI forcings produce similar effects, with the latter helping to sharpen the response.

SSTs however have been influenced by other forcings, such as greenhouse gases, over the last few decades, and these transient changes will obviously affect the solar cycle influence. Similarly, increased carbon dioxide in the stratosphere has led to gradual cooling conditions, which affects the UV influence on the stratospheric circulation. So while the solar influence may have produced a broadly similar hydrologic response for many centuries, it now competes with potentially stronger perturbations. Its effect may well decrease with time.

 

[Old Rocks]

We are far warmer now than we have been in the last 1100 years
http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/Surface_Temps_final.pdf