400 ppm CO2

[Old Rocks]

This is the kind of chart that no Denier will ever discuss rationally:

CO2 Now | CO2 Home

I challenge Boedcia, Take a Step Back, Oddball and Frank to tell us what they see in the chart, and to explain why they do not consider this needs to be taken seriously.

I think you are unclear on the concept of this thread. The OP announced that things were so far gone, it's hopeless. So if we are All Going To Die, let's at lease enjoy our remaining time.
But, if you really want a response: global warming has been Very Very Good for human kind. Humans have flourished due to the warming of the earth (which for much of its history has been a giant ball of ice).

"1750 to 1875 ppb of CH4. A forcing equal to 70 to 100 ppm of CH2. So we are looking at the equivalent of 470 to 525 ppm of CO2. Folks, there ain't no turning back now."

Gotta love it when the "Conservatives" post this kind of shit. That is the quote from one of my opening posts. Show me where I have said that we are all going to die.

Up until recently we discussed prevention of the consequences of global warming. Now the discussion is how to deal with the consequences. And you dumb asses are doing your best to prevent even that discussion.

 

[boedicca]

Your lack of historical knowledge is quite sad. Compare living conditions for humans during the Dark Ages Cold Period, the Medieval Warming Period, and the Maunder Minimum.

You realize that northern Europe is not the world, no? Oh wait, you don't. Your historical knowledge sucks too badly.

North Africa was once the bread basket of Rome. It's desert now.

The middle east was once fertile.

Several civilizations in the southwest of north America, vanished when the rains stopped.

Same with some African civilizations.

"Warmer is better" is just totally 'effin ignorant. When parts of India literally get too hot and humid for humans to survive outside, that's not going to be an improvement.

And many of those changes happened prior to industrialization, so blaming CO2 is utter nonsense. If you'd prefer to live through another ice age, you are more likely to get that wish than to see the oceans boil away.

 

[ScienceRocks]

This is the kind of chart that no Denier will ever discuss rationally:

CO2 Now | CO2 Home

I challenge Boedcia, Take a Step Back, Oddball and Frank to tell us what they see in the chart, and to explain why they do not consider this needs to be taken seriously.

I think you are unclear on the concept of this thread. The OP announced that things were so far gone, it's hopeless. So if we are All Going To Die, let's at lease enjoy our remaining time.
But, if you really want a response: global warming has been Very Very Good for human kind. Humans have flourished due to the warming of the earth (which for much of its history has been a giant ball of ice).

"1750 to 1875 ppb of CH4. A forcing equal to 70 to 100 ppm of CH2. So we are looking at the equivalent of 470 to 525 ppm of CO2. Folks, there ain't no turning back now."

Gotta love it when the "Conservatives" post this kind of shit. That is the quote from one of my opening posts. Show me where I have said that we are all going to die.

Up until recently we discussed prevention of the consequences of global warming. Now the discussion is how to deal with the consequences. And you dumb asses are doing your best to prevent even that discussion.

-Build cities on higher ground
-Build higher sea walls
-Make affords to get ready for a climate shift in where to grow things.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And the number of repeatable experiments showing "global warming/climate change" from an increase in CO2 to 400ppm is still precisely zero

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[gslack]

You could look all over the world and find the co2 level within 1-2ppm. That blows your little volcano theory out of the water. LOL.

Really? Prove it.. Prove that claim, Should be easy..

 

[gslack]

You could look all over the world and find the co2 level within 1-2ppm. That blows your little volcano theory out of the water. LOL.

Exactly. It is only one site in a massive network, so if someone doesn't like it, they don't have to use it.

The site was chosen because it is so far from any urban area that it makes for a great site, and because of its altitude it is above most local weather patterns. The volcanic "background" is simply measured and filtered out if and when it occurs.

More info on the network here: CarbonTracker 2011 - ESRL Global Monitoring Division

Gslack -

Yep if it weren't true I'd be laughing right now..

As is so often the case, you would be laughing because you do not understand the issue. By all means check the data from another source and tell us how funny that is.

BS, they tell you expressly "at mauna loa" on the chart. It's taken as a matter of fact and nobody bothers to ask the obvious question until lately. The Mauna Loa facility has become the standard, if it weren't why aren't we getting any variable readings?

The NOAA said;

"The amount of CO2 is higher in the Northern than in the Southern Hemisphere as a result of the combustion of coal, oil, and natural gas."

Now you can call it whatever you wish but don't try and pretend they aren't getting variances in the readings according to location. That's an asinine claim.

A network of measuring stations all using the same methods based on the same theoretical preconception and all using the same "mole fraction" system, all reaching nearly the same results? Yeah, it's called fixing the game...

 

[gslack]

BTW, the actual global is 395 ppm. the 399 was the weekly at Mauna loa. The weekly average is 395 ppm.. LOL, try and remain calm.This panic nonsense is getting old..

 

[Saigon]

IOW lower our living standards so China can raise theirs.

Actually, China is far more committed to climate change technologies than the US is.

The reason the US is losing its living standard because of the luddite, anti-Science anti-technology attitudes we see on this thread, not because of some global socialist conspiracy.

China & solar:

Solar power in the People's Republic of China is a growing industry. China has over 400 photovoltaic (PV) companies. In 2007 China produced 1.7 GW of solar panel capacity, nearly half of the world production of 3.8 GW, although 99% was exported. As of 2011, about 3.3 GW of photovoltaics contribute towards power generation in China.[1] Solar water heating is extensively implemented as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_China

China & wind

At the end of 2011, wind power in the People's Republic of China accounted for 62 gigawatts (GW) of electricity generating capacity,[1] and China has identified wind power as a key growth component of the country's economy.[2] With its large land mass and long coastline, China has exceptional wind resources[3] It is estimated China has about 2,380 GW of exploitable capacity on land and 200 GW on the sea.[4] China aims to “have 100 gigawatts (GW) of on-grid wind power generating capacity by the end of 2015 and to generate 190 billion kilowatt hours (kWh) of wind power annually”.[5] Researchers from Harvard and Tsinghua University have found that China could meet all of their electricity demands from wind power through 2030.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_China

China & Tidal

The Jiangxia Tidal Power Station, south of Hangzhou in China has been operational since 1985, with current installed capacity of 3.2 MW. More tidal power is planned near the mouth of the Yalu River.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_power

 

[gslack]

IOW lower our living standards so China can raise theirs.

Actually, China is far more committed to climate change technologies than the US is.

The reason is losing its living standard because of the luddite, anti-Science anti-technology attitudes we see on this thread, not because of some global socialist conspiracy.

BS.. Prove it...

Global Warming Facts

China is a worse offender than the US in CO2 emissions. They emit about 40% more CO2 than the US currently. Since China is known for their factories and as a major producer of goods, lowering their amount of emissions has been uneffective so far.

Dude seriously stop pulling these wild claims out of your butt...China is one of the worst on this, it's a fact...

 

[jon_berzerk]

And the number of repeatable experiments showing "global warming/climate change" from an increase in CO2 to 400ppm is still precisely zero

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

well that is not what junk science is about

 

[fyrenza]

Energy-related carbon dioxide emissions declined in 2012 - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Breathe Easy: Natural Gas Is Lowering CO2 Emissions

Gee.

Looks like carbon emissions are FALLING,

and <GASP>

it's because of FRACKING!

 

[Saigon]

Gee.

Looks like carbon emissions are FALLING,

and <GASP>

it's because of FRACKING!

Um....no, not exactly. Gasp.

Emissions are falling for a dozen different reasons - all of which luddite posters have bitterly opposed on this forum. The increasing use of wind, solar and tidal energy, the more efficient car engines and exhaust filters, better factory filitering systems and the use of everything from better insulation to low energy light bulbs to double-glazed windows all help. Your own link mentions mild winters, along with the reduced use of coal that so many posters here insist should be used.

Natural gas is a low-emmissions fuel, but not all of it is fracked, is it?

Fracking does have a role to play in the US, but anyone who thinks it is a fuel without a very high cost is stupid beyond belief. Fracking does create significant emissions as it goes, can leak chemicals into groundwater, and see minor releases of radioactive material. The risk of earthquake is significant. It can also mean bubbles of methane entering drinking water supplies.

I don't oppose it by any means, but I would sure as hell want to see it researched more before going as crazy over it as some folks are here. To my mind it has 'Impending Chernobyl-type accident' written all over it.

 

[gslack]

Gee.

Looks like carbon emissions are FALLING,

and <GASP>

it's because of FRACKING!

Um....no, not exactly. Gasp.

Emissions are falling for a dozen different reasons - all of which luddite posters have bitterly opposed on this forum. The increasing use of wind, solar and tidal energy, the more efficient car engines and exhaust filters, better factory filitering systems and the use of everything from better insulation to low energy light bulbs to double-glazed windows all help. Your own link mentions mild winters, along with the reduced use of coal that so many posters here insist should be used.

Natural gas is a low-emmissions fuel, but not all of it is fracked, is it?

Fracking does have a role to play in the US, but anyone who thinks it is a fuel without a very high cost is stupid beyond belief. Fracking does create significant emissions as it goes, can leak chemicals into groundwater, and see minor releases of radioactive material. The risk of earthquake is significant. It can also mean bubbles of methane entering drinking water supplies.

I don't oppose it by any means, but I would sure as hell want to see it researched more before going as crazy over it as some folks are here. To my mind it has 'Impending Chernobyl-type accident' written all over it.

LOL, that's right no matter what keep on dancing and blaming the other guys.. WOW dude, it lowered 2012 and you still can't grow up.. It lowered you should be happy. You're not though because it doesn't fit in with your Algorian mantra...

ROFL, you freaking doom seekers are ridiculous.. If the globe suddenly turned into a perfect paradise-like eco-system, you people would still need something to cry over. It must be some kind of deep self-loathing issue..

 

[jon_berzerk]

Gee.

Looks like carbon emissions are FALLING,

and <GASP>

it's because of FRACKING!

Um....no, not exactly. Gasp.

Emissions are falling for a dozen different reasons - all of which luddite posters have bitterly opposed on this forum. The increasing use of wind, solar and tidal energy, the more efficient car engines and exhaust filters, better factory filitering systems and the use of everything from better insulation to low energy light bulbs to double-glazed windows all help. Your own link mentions mild winters, along with the reduced use of coal that so many posters here insist should be used.

Natural gas is a low-emmissions fuel, but not all of it is fracked, is it?

Fracking does have a role to play in the US, but anyone who thinks it is a fuel without a very high cost is stupid beyond belief. Fracking does create significant emissions as it goes, can leak chemicals into groundwater, and see minor releases of radioactive material. The risk of earthquake is significant. It can also mean bubbles of methane entering drinking water supplies.

I don't oppose it by any means, but I would sure as hell want to see it researched more before going as crazy over it as some folks are here. To my mind it has 'Impending Chernobyl-type accident' written all over it.

LOL, that's right no matter what keep on dancing and blaming the other guys.. WOW dude, it lowered 2012 and you still can't grow up.. It lowered you should be happy. You're not though because it doesn't fit in with your Algorian mantra...

ROFL, you freaking doom seekers are ridiculous.. If the globe suddenly turned into a perfect paradise-like eco-system, you people would still need something to cry over. It must be some kind of deep self-loathing issue..

sometimes it looks like

they fell so hard hook line and sinker

for the man made global warming

that they just have to keep with it

--LOL

 

[Old Rocks]

Emissions are lowering in the US, however, lowering is not ceasing. We are still adding to the cumalative amount in the atmosphere. And China and India are more than making up for our lowering of our emissions. We are not going to see a lowering of the amount of GHGs in the atmosphere for a very long time, not until the effects are bad enough to cause it to be forced.

 

[KissMy]

If you don't like the weather just wait, it will change. 1911 in the midwest set the record high & low temp on the same day. 1816 was the year without a summer mini ice age. Many people in the northern hemisphere died of starvation. In 1976 it was so cold scientist feared another mini ice age. 1998 was so hot scientist feared global warming.

 

[Old Rocks]

Um....no, not exactly. Gasp.

Emissions are falling for a dozen different reasons - all of which luddite posters have bitterly opposed on this forum. The increasing use of wind, solar and tidal energy, the more efficient car engines and exhaust filters, better factory filitering systems and the use of everything from better insulation to low energy light bulbs to double-glazed windows all help. Your own link mentions mild winters, along with the reduced use of coal that so many posters here insist should be used.

Natural gas is a low-emmissions fuel, but not all of it is fracked, is it?

Fracking does have a role to play in the US, but anyone who thinks it is a fuel without a very high cost is stupid beyond belief. Fracking does create significant emissions as it goes, can leak chemicals into groundwater, and see minor releases of radioactive material. The risk of earthquake is significant. It can also mean bubbles of methane entering drinking water supplies.

I don't oppose it by any means, but I would sure as hell want to see it researched more before going as crazy over it as some folks are here. To my mind it has 'Impending Chernobyl-type accident' written all over it.

LOL, that's right no matter what keep on dancing and blaming the other guys.. WOW dude, it lowered 2012 and you still can't grow up.. It lowered you should be happy. You're not though because it doesn't fit in with your Algorian mantra...

ROFL, you freaking doom seekers are ridiculous.. If the globe suddenly turned into a perfect paradise-like eco-system, you people would still need something to cry over. It must be some kind of deep self-loathing issue..

sometimes it looks like

they fell so hard hook line and sinker

for the man made global warming

that they just have to keep with it

--LOL

OK, dumb ass, state the science behind your denial that the world is warmng, and that the GHGs are the primary cause.

 

[KissMy]

Emissions are lowering in the US, however, lowering is not ceasing. We are still adding to the cumalative amount in the atmosphere. And China and India are more than making up for our lowering of our emissions. We are not going to see a lowering of the amount of GHGs in the atmosphere for a very long time, not until the effects are bad enough to cause it to be forced.

Land management changes can lower CO2 levels.

 

[Old Rocks]

If you don't like the weather just wait, it will change. 1911 in the midwest set the record high & low temp on the same day. 1816 was the year without a summer mini ice age. Many people in the northern hemisphere died of starvation. In 1976 it was so cold scientist feared another mini ice age. 1998 was so hot scientist feared global warming.

If you don't like the weather, just make really dumb statements about it.

'18 hundred and froze to death' had a definate cause. The cold years in the '70's had a similiar cause. And, no, the scientists were not fearing another ice age in 1976. In fact, most of them in that period were predicting global warming.

1998 was a very strong El Nino, on top of the global warming. Just as we have had, recently, a strong La Nina, and still had a year that placed in the top ten in the last 180 years for warmth.

 

[Old Rocks]

Emissions are lowering in the US, however, lowering is not ceasing. We are still adding to the cumalative amount in the atmosphere. And China and India are more than making up for our lowering of our emissions. We are not going to see a lowering of the amount of GHGs in the atmosphere for a very long time, not until the effects are bad enough to cause it to be forced.

Land management changes can lower CO2 levels.

That is correct. Very slowly.