Global Warming Science Experiment

[CrusaderFrank]

How hard is this?

Take two large fish tank, fill about 3 inches with water.

In the first you have earth atmosphere (what you're breathing right now) and seal it.

In the second tank: same atmosphere, same water then seal it, then add a whopping 200/ppm CO2. I know that's an order of magnitude greater than the amount the Warmers are contending is causing devastating changes on earth, but, hey, this is real science.

Observe and monitor difference in the two tanks.

Ideally this would be a double blind experiment where the team monitoring the tanks would not know which was the filled with the planet killing, life ending Sun destroying 200ppm of CO2

How hard is that?

 

[The T]

How hard is this?

Take two large fish tank, fill about 3 inches with water.

In the first you have earth atmosphere (what you're breathing right now) and seal it.

In the second tank: same atmosphere, same water then seal it, then add a whopping 200/ppm CO2. I know that's an order of magnitude greater than the amount the Warmers are contending is causing devastating changes on earth, but, hey, this is real science.

Observe and monitor difference in the two tanks.

Ideally this would be a double blind experiment where the team monitoring the tanks would not know which was the filled with the planet killing, life ending Sun destroying 200ppm of CO2

How hard is that?

Now Frank? Would this require the experimenter to expose BOTH tanks to the same external forces as the Earth is experiencing...(i.e. Sun, UV, etc...)?

 

[Old Rocks]

How hard is this?

Take two large fish tank, fill about 3 inches with water.

In the first you have earth atmosphere (what you're breathing right now) and seal it.

In the second tank: same atmosphere, same water then seal it, then add a whopping 200/ppm CO2. I know that's an order of magnitude greater than the amount the Warmers are contending is causing devastating changes on earth, but, hey, this is real science.

Observe and monitor difference in the two tanks.

Ideally this would be a double blind experiment where the team monitoring the tanks would not know which was the filled with the planet killing, life ending Sun destroying 200ppm of CO2

How hard is that?

Not hard at all. So do it. Why so damned lazy that you are waiting for someone else to do the experiment?

 

[Old Rocks]

Pico Technology Experiment: Global Warming

Results
Even over a small time period such as 20 minutes we are still able to get a difference of 4 degrees in temperature between the two samples. Students may not be impressed with such a small temperature difference in the lab. However, it needs to be stressed that scientists are in general agreement that an average increase of just 2 degrees celsius across the planet could have catastrophic effects on crop production and cause sea levels to increase significantly resulting in major flooding.

 

[Old Rocks]

Glory

The effects of carbon dioxide on the temperature

The bottle with carbon dioxide in it will heat up faster and will stabilize at a higher temperature than the bottle with air. Some people measure a difference of five degrees Celsius or more, or the difference between a warm spring day and a hot summer day.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"Fill one of the bottles with carbon dioxide screw top on and plug any gaps with plasticine"

A 100% CO2 atmosphere? Seriously?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

A 100% CO2 atmosphere generates a 4 degree difference in temperature. The base temp without 100% CO2 was 25 so the 100% CO2 gives us a 20% increases in temperature

Does that mean you need a 25% CO2 atmosphere to get a 1 degree increase?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Glory

The effects of carbon dioxide on the temperature

The bottle with carbon dioxide in it will heat up faster and will stabilize at a higher temperature than the bottle with air. Some people measure a difference of five degrees Celsius or more, or the difference between a warm spring day and a hot summer day.

"Use the seltzer bottle to fill one of the bottles with CO2..."

Again, we're talking about a 100% CO2 atmosphere so NASA Glory experiment has a big hole in it, why, you can call it NASA's Gloryhole Experiment

A far more interesting and appropriate experiment would be to take a 80% N2 and 20% O2 atmosphere, with zero CO2 and test that against 80% N2 and 20% O2 and 200PPM, then 400 then 600 PPM CO2 and see what, if anything, happens

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"Dishonest intellectually we are, yessss" says Master Yoda

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Oh, the reason I can't do my proposed experiment is that I do not own equipment sensitive enough to measure out 300 parts per million, which is the real amount of CO2 that should be used in the proposed experiment

 

[Old Rocks]

The current level is 389 ppm. The equivalent level, adding in the increases from CH4 and industrial GHGs is well over 450 ppm.

Use a little imagination. It is not at all hard to create an atmosphere of 79% Nitrogen and 21% Oxygen. Then measure that against the existing atmosphere with the present levels of GHGs in it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The current level is 389 ppm. The equivalent level, adding in the increases from CH4 and industrial GHGs is well over 450 ppm.

Use a little imagination. It is not at all hard to create an atmosphere of 79% Nitrogen and 21% Oxygen. Then measure that against the existing atmosphere with the present levels of GHGs in it.

So can you show me in a laboratory setting the effect of a 60PPM increase in GHG's?

How would you state your hypothesis is it: "does an increase of 60PPM of CO2 cause a measurable impact on temperature?"

 

[Big Fitz]

It's not real science till Ole Crocks gets the result he wants. Then the rest is semantics.

 

[westwall]

There are so many scientific protocols being broken with this "experiment" that I am amazed a so called thinking person could even begin to think it useful.

Simply amazing....and pathetic at the same time.

 

[Old Rocks]

More yap-yap, not a single citation of source.

Once again, from the American Institute of Physics;

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Now I understand that you believe that ex-TV weathermen without any degrees and Junkie radio jocks are more knowledgable than scientists, but this is a site that goes into the physics of GHGs in the atmosphere in a way that intelligent layman can understand.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

They don't want to do experiments with a difference of 100 parts per million, as that is next door to homeopathy, which they know is bogus.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

They don't want to do experiments with a difference of 100 parts per million, as that is next door to homeopathy, which they know is bogus.

Anthropogenic Homeopathic Warming!

OMG!

Baruch, you nailed it!

It's not AGW, it's AHW!

 

[westwall]

More yap-yap, not a single citation of source.

Once again, from the American Institute of Physics;

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Now I understand that you believe that ex-TV weathermen without any degrees and Junkie radio jocks are more knowledgable than scientists, but this is a site that goes into the physics of GHGs in the atmosphere in a way that intelligent layman can understand.

old fraud I don't need a credentialed meteorologist (and he is isn't he you humongous prevaricator, and you call me a liar you pathetic excuse for a human being) to tell me when an experiment is a joke. In fact there is a whole thread devoted to ripping this particular piece of drivel apart.

You wouldn't understand how to set up a non corruptable experiment if your life depended on it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

They don't want to do experiments with a difference of 100 parts per million, as that is next door to homeopathy, which they know is bogus.

I have peer reviewed this post and find it 200% accurate.

There is a growing consensus that AGW is closer to homeopathy and phrenology than it is to science

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Are Warmers Diluted or Deluded?

"Main article: Homeopathic dilutions

Three potency scales are in regular use in homeopathy. Hahnemann created the centesimal or C scale, diluting a substance by a factor of 100 at each stage. The centesimal scale was favored by Hahnemann for most of his life. A 2C dilution requires a substance to be diluted to one part in one hundred, and then some of that diluted solution diluted by a further factor of one hundred. This works out to one part of the original substance in 10,000 parts of the solution."

Homeopathy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sounds a lot like AGW, no?