Grand Solar Minimum, not a problem

mamooth

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Messages
22,176
Reaction score
4,339
Points
290
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
But you posted no experiment. Why is that?
Because I've listed hundreds of such experiments before, the reference list of the HITRAN database.

When you claim the IR properties of CO2 haven't been precisely quantified by experiment, you sound like a lunatic. But you're not, not really. You're just lying.
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
113,498
Reaction score
25,059
Points
2,220
Location
Location, location
But you posted no experiment. Why is that?
Because I've listed hundreds of such experiments before, the reference list of the HITRAN database.

When you claim the IR properties of CO2 haven't been precisely quantified by experiment, you sound like a lunatic. But you're not, not really. You're just lying.
And by "Hundreds" you mean none. Must be Common core.

Please post one experiment showing what a 280 to 400 PPM CO2 does to temperature
 

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
42,246
Reaction score
4,283
Points
1,870
If your "theory" is correc
Its not "my theory", ya weirdo...


increase from 280 to 400ppm "traps heat", enough heat to radically alter the climate of an entire planet, its a simple experiment that should yield a non-imaginary number
Haha...im enjoypng your desperate conman act. "An entire planet!!!!"....uh, hey genius...the atmosphere covers the entire planet.

How much heat would need to be trapped? Please phrase your answer in the proper units. Thanks.
 

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
42,246
Reaction score
4,283
Points
1,870
If CO2 is such a powerful "greenhouse gas" why dont you have a single repeatable lab experiment showing the "temperature increase" from increasing CO2 from 280 to 400ppm?
We do. The greenhouse effect of co2 is well studied.
That's not an experiment either
"It's well studied" means that experiments have been done confirming the greenhouse effect. Many times over. Why not look some of them up?

I know why. You love being ignorant. It's true. You do. You would rather be wrong and not know you are wrong than learn something and have to stray from your odd little paradigm.

Like, a cultist.
Let me help. Here's an experiment that demonstrates the greenhouse effect.
Thanks!
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
113,498
Reaction score
25,059
Points
2,220
Location
Location, location
If your "theory" is correc
Its not "my theory", ya weirdo...


increase from 280 to 400ppm "traps heat", enough heat to radically alter the climate of an entire planet, its a simple experiment that should yield a non-imaginary number
Haha...im enjoypng your desperate conman act. "An entire planet!!!!"....uh, hey genius...the atmosphere covers the entire planet.

How much heat would need to be trapped? Please phrase your answer in the proper units. Thanks.
So you can't post the experiment because....
 

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
42,246
Reaction score
4,283
Points
1,870
If your "theory" is correc
Its not "my theory", ya weirdo...


increase from 280 to 400ppm "traps heat", enough heat to radically alter the climate of an entire planet, its a simple experiment that should yield a non-imaginary number
Haha...im enjoypng your desperate conman act. "An entire planet!!!!"....uh, hey genius...the atmosphere covers the entire planet.

How much heat would need to be trapped? Please phrase your answer in the proper units. Thanks.
So you can't post the experiment because....
What experiment? Don't waste my time. Act like an adult, and tell me what sort of experiment/evidence would convince you that increasing atmospheric CO2 would lead to warming. Be specific. And, keep in mind, thay all of your comments thus far have been retarded, as CO2 is not the only greenhouse gas.
 

Dan Stubbs

FORGET ---- HELL
Joined
May 4, 2017
Messages
7,068
Reaction score
1,009
Points
290
Location
Some where in the Deep South.
The numbers and history showing that even if we have a repeat of the Maunder Minimum, it will make little difference to the warming of the Earth.


LAWD that was painful... Same old song.. Only with more deception or at least ignorance from "Just Have a Think" LOL....

Here's the deal old friend.. Total RECOVERY from the last Grand Solar minimum took over 80 YEARS... That's MORE than just "one solar cycle" and the total recovery in Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) was about 0.8 Watts/M2...

What these naive comparisons DON'T take into account is the DIFFERENCE between power and energy.. A loss of a LITTLE power over time can INTEGRATE into a lot of cooling..

That's the entire argument for the both the short time and long time "residency time constants" for FORCINGS that are CO2 based.. They accumulate heating EVEN IF THEY ARE STABLE until a new long term equilibrium is reached in the atmosphere and at the surface..

So what's GOOD for CO2 forcing effects is DOUBLY good for solar irradiation effects -- ESPECIALLY the direct incoming reduced flux of WIDEBAND solar "light" that tends to warm (or cool) the oceans much more EFFICIENTLY than the back radiation from CO2..

So this horseshit of JUST looking at the forcing doesn't tell you in the LEAST what the effect or long term effects on the climate will be... Just as CO2 forcings "stick around" for quite awhile when those levels change...

And the best guesses I've heard, is that after the 60 or 80 years of a solar minimum -- We'll have reduced the global anomaly to about 1/4 or 1/2 of it's current value....
Yep, understood every word of it, NOT. Don't really care, did my part to get the world in this shape and will not see anything bad. (To Old_+)
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
113,498
Reaction score
25,059
Points
2,220
Location
Location, location
If your "theory" is correc
Its not "my theory", ya weirdo...


increase from 280 to 400ppm "traps heat", enough heat to radically alter the climate of an entire planet, its a simple experiment that should yield a non-imaginary number
Haha...im enjoypng your desperate conman act. "An entire planet!!!!"....uh, hey genius...the atmosphere covers the entire planet.

How much heat would need to be trapped? Please phrase your answer in the proper units. Thanks.
So you can't post the experiment because....
What experiment? Don't waste my time. Act like an adult, and tell me what sort of experiment/evidence would convince you that increasing atmospheric CO2 would lead to warming. Be specific. And, keep in mind, thay all of your comments thus far have been retarded, as CO2 is not the only greenhouse gas.
Reread the OP
 

SSDD

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
16,806
Reaction score
1,896
Points
280
But you posted no experiment. Why is that?
Because I've listed hundreds of such experiments before, the reference list of the HITRAN database.

When you claim the IR properties of CO2 haven't been precisely quantified by experiment, you sound like a lunatic. But you're not, not really. You're just lying.
Talk about pathological lying...WOW...
 

Billy_Bob

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
22,458
Reaction score
6,837
Points
1,080
Location
Top Of The Great Divide
But you posted no experiment. Why is that?
Because I've listed hundreds of such experiments before, the reference list of the HITRAN database.

When you claim the IR properties of CO2 haven't been precisely quantified by experiment, you sound like a lunatic. But you're not, not really. You're just lying.
The Physics of LWIR and CO2 are pretty secure, its your understanding of them that is flawed..
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
113,498
Reaction score
25,059
Points
2,220
Location
Location, location
If your "theory" is correc
Its not "my theory", ya weirdo...


increase from 280 to 400ppm "traps heat", enough heat to radically alter the climate of an entire planet, its a simple experiment that should yield a non-imaginary number
Haha...im enjoypng your desperate conman act. "An entire planet!!!!"....uh, hey genius...the atmosphere covers the entire planet.

How much heat would need to be trapped? Please phrase your answer in the proper units. Thanks.
So you can't post the experiment because....
What experiment? Don't waste my time. Act like an adult, and tell me what sort of experiment/evidence would convince you that increasing atmospheric CO2 would lead to warming. Be specific. And, keep in mind, thay all of your comments thus far have been retarded, as CO2 is not the only greenhouse gas.
Are you avoiding posting a scientific experiment? That's odd considering how CO2 is even more powerful than the Great and Powerful Oz
 

SSDD

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
16,806
Reaction score
1,896
Points
280
If your "theory" is correc
Its not "my theory", ya weirdo...


increase from 280 to 400ppm "traps heat", enough heat to radically alter the climate of an entire planet, its a simple experiment that should yield a non-imaginary number
Haha...im enjoypng your desperate conman act. "An entire planet!!!!"....uh, hey genius...the atmosphere covers the entire planet.

How much heat would need to be trapped? Please phrase your answer in the proper units. Thanks.
So you can't post the experiment because....
What experiment? Don't waste my time. Act like an adult, and tell me what sort of experiment/evidence would convince you that increasing atmospheric CO2 would lead to warming. Be specific. And, keep in mind, thay all of your comments thus far have been retarded, as CO2 is not the only greenhouse gas.
Are you avoiding posting a scientific experiment? That's odd considering how CO2 is even more powerful than the Great and Powerful Oz
The Wizz is a magical lightweight compared to CO2...all hail the great and powerful CO2 molecule...
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
59,290
Reaction score
8,657
Points
2,030
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
If CO2 is such a powerful "greenhouse gas" why dont you have a single repeatable lab experiment showing the "temperature increase" from increasing CO2 from 280 to 400ppm?
We do. The greenhouse effect of co2 is well studied.
That's not an experiment either
"It's well studied" means that experiments have been done confirming the greenhouse effect. Many times over. Why not look some of them up?

I know why. You love being ignorant. It's true. You do. You would rather be wrong and not know you are wrong than learn something and have to stray from your odd little paradigm.

Like, a cultist.
Let me help. Here's an experiment that demonstrates the greenhouse effect.
Thanks!
Hint: The link doesn't prove what you think it proves.
 

SSDD

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
16,806
Reaction score
1,896
Points
280
We do. The greenhouse effect of co2 is well studied.
That's not an experiment either
"It's well studied" means that experiments have been done confirming the greenhouse effect. Many times over. Why not look some of them up?

I know why. You love being ignorant. It's true. You do. You would rather be wrong and not know you are wrong than learn something and have to stray from your odd little paradigm.

Like, a cultist.
Let me help. Here's an experiment that demonstrates the greenhouse effect.
Thanks!
Hint: The link doesn't prove what you think it proves.
You really don't expect him to know that do you? That experiment is side show huxterism, but it is more than good enough to fool people like him.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
59,290
Reaction score
8,657
Points
2,030
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
That's not an experiment either
"It's well studied" means that experiments have been done confirming the greenhouse effect. Many times over. Why not look some of them up?

I know why. You love being ignorant. It's true. You do. You would rather be wrong and not know you are wrong than learn something and have to stray from your odd little paradigm.

Like, a cultist.
Let me help. Here's an experiment that demonstrates the greenhouse effect.
Thanks!
Hint: The link doesn't prove what you think it proves.
You really don't expect him to know that do you? That experiment is side show huxterism, but it is more than good enough to fool people like him.
Yup, he's the target audience. And he performs exactly as ordered.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top