If Obama believes in Global Warming why did he buy oceanfront property at Martha's Vineyard?

[CrusaderFrank]

Yes. Do you not understand the reason that was done? If you want to do so something in the lab, you get to use scaling. You really don't have a choice. Your fundamental weakness on science shows here Frank.

Here is a useful 'factoid' from Quora. "If the 100 km of the mesosphere, stratosphere, and troposphere were all at the same density as at sea-level, the atmosphere would be 8 km thick. If the thermosphere and exosphere were added to that, it would be a few metres thicker." So the effective path through 0.04% CO2 atmosphere that an escaping ray of IR light in the real world has to pass is 8 km thick. The balloons are 65/75/85 cm in diameter and thus have path lengths half that. Let's say 40 cm. Thus the IR in the balloons have 1/20,000th of the length to pass through as would a ray in the actual atmosphere. 100% / 0.04% = 2,500. 2500 / 20,000 = 0.125. The pure CO2 balloons are thus only experiencing 1/8th the CO2 effect of passing through the real atmosphere.

The conclusion remains the same. NO effect could be discerned of increases in the path length through air. Clear effects were seen of increases in the path length through CO2. CO2 absorbs infrared and slows its release. Whine about the scaling all you want Frank but all it does is demonstrate your science ignorance and irrationality in the face of more evidence that your position is simply wrong.

And yet .04% is still only .04% and not 100%

The truer test of the Failed AGW theory would be air with .028% CO2 vs .04% CO2,

But it’s been clearly established that the Jihadist AGWCult avoids these tests of their failed Theory like Dracula greeting the morning sunrise in a field of garlic and sharpened stakes

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Incorrect. 1C per doubling of CO2. That's it. It's not 4.5C or 0 C.

Based on what?

 

[ding]

Based on what?

Simple physics of vibrating molecules which heat the surrounding air through friction.

1C per doubling of CO2 is not a lot. They are adding 3.5C of feedback to arrive at their predictions of catastrophic warming. Which at face value is ridiculous considering the entire atmosphere of GHG is only 44% effective at trapping its theoretical surface temperature because convective currents whisk that heat away into the upper atmosphere.

"...Manabe and Strickler (1964) calculated the global-average strength of the “greenhouse effect” on surface temperatures assuming all energy transfers were radiative (no weather processes), based upon the theory of how infrared energy courses through the atmosphere. They found that the surface of the Earth would average a whopping 75 deg. C warmer than if there was no greenhouse effect. But in reality, the surface of the Earth averages about 33 deg. C warmer, not 75 deg. C warmer than a no-greenhouse Earth. That’s because convective air currents (which create weather) carry excess heat away from the surface, cooling it well below its full greenhouse effect value represented by their imagined “pure radiative energy equilibrium” assumption.​

​

Now, you might be surprised to learn that the amount of warming directly caused by us adding extra CO2 to the atmosphere is, by itself, relatively weak. It has been calculated theoretically that, if there are no other changes in the climate system, a doubling of the atmospheric CO2 concentration would cause about 1 deg C of surface warming. This is NOT a controversial statement…it is well understood by climate scientists. As of early 2019, we were about 50% of the way toward a doubling of atmospheric CO2...."​

​

GW 101 « Roy Spencer, PhD

​

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Simple physics of vibrating molecules which heat the surrounding air through friction.

1C per doubling of CO2 is not a lot. They are adding 3.5C of feedback to arrive at their predictions of catastrophic warming. Which at face value is ridiculous considering the entire atmosphere of GHG is on;y 44% effective at trapping its theoretical surface temperature because convective currents whisk that heat away into the upper atmosphere.

Considering these been no evidence of “excess heat” trapped in the atmosphere, I think the 1C is just wishful thinking.

 

[Crick]

Considering these been no evidence of “excess heat” trapped in the atmosphere, I think the 1C is just wishful thinking.

No evidence?

Global surface temperature - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Earth’s temperature on rise, but steps can be taken to help

Global Warming is becoming an alarming situation for activists, scientists and politicians alike. Every decade since 1880, the average temperature has risen 0.14 F according to NOAA’s 2021 annual Climate Report. That means, since 1880, the world’s temperature has risen a lot. While this number...

lhstomtom.org

Climate Change: Global Temperature

Earth's surface temperature has risen about 2 degrees Fahrenheit since the start of the NOAA record in 1850. It may seem like a small change, but it's a tremendous increase in stored heat.

www.climate.gov

 

[jc456]

Shut up stupid. You don't know anything about climate change.

what do you know about it?

 

[jc456]

No evidence?
View attachment 1001717

Global surface temperature - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

View attachment 1001715

Earth’s temperature on rise, but steps can be taken to help

Global Warming is becoming an alarming situation for activists, scientists and politicians alike. Every decade since 1880, the average temperature has risen 0.14 F according to NOAA’s 2021 annual Climate Report. That means, since 1880, the world’s temperature has risen a lot. While this number...

lhstomtom.org

View attachment 1001716

Climate Change: Global Temperature

Earth's surface temperature has risen about 2 degrees Fahrenheit since the start of the NOAA record in 1850. It may seem like a small change, but it's a tremendous increase in stored heat.

www.climate.gov

 

[CrusaderFrank]

No evidence?
View attachment 1001717

Global surface temperature - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

View attachment 1001715

Earth’s temperature on rise, but steps can be taken to help

Global Warming is becoming an alarming situation for activists, scientists and politicians alike. Every decade since 1880, the average temperature has risen 0.14 F according to NOAA’s 2021 annual Climate Report. That means, since 1880, the world’s temperature has risen a lot. While this number...

lhstomtom.org

View attachment 1001716

Climate Change: Global Temperature

Earth's surface temperature has risen about 2 degrees Fahrenheit since the start of the NOAA record in 1850. It may seem like a small change, but it's a tremendous increase in stored heat.

www.climate.gov

First, it’s absurd to claim accuracy to a tenth of a degree back in 1880! It’s Bernie Madoff’s accountant

Second can you show us repeatable lab work linking incremental increases in CO2 to temperature?

You SAY that increased in CO2 is solely responsible for the fictional temperature increase, that you’ve eliminated all other variables.

OK, show us

 

[ding]

Considering these been no evidence of “excess heat” trapped in the atmosphere, I think the 1C is just wishful thinking.

Well, it's only about 0.5C right now at the most.

 

[Crick]

First, it’s absurd to claim accuracy to a tenth of a degree back in 1880! It’s Bernie Madoff’s accountant

If I average 10 sets of data each good to a degree, the average may be quoted to a tenth. See Estimating precision

Second can you show us repeatable lab work linking incremental increases in CO2 to temperature?

I did so yesterday.

You SAY that increased in CO2 is solely responsible for the fictional temperature increase

I have NEVER said that and, of course, it is NOT fictional.

that you’ve eliminated all other variables.

Frank, what are you qualifications to judge a scientific experiment? What education have you had in the sciences?

 

[ding]

If I average 10 sets of data each good to a degree, the average may be quoted to a tenth. See Estimating precision

I did so yesterday.

I have NEVER said that and, of course, it is NOT fictional.

Frank, what are you qualifications to judge a scientific experiment? What education have you had in the sciences?

If that averaging smooths out climate fluctuations so as to hide the fluctuations, it's as dishonest AF. The climate community is fraudulent.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If I average 10 sets of data each good to a degree, the average may be quoted to a tenth. See Estimating precision

I did so yesterday.

I have NEVER said that and, of course, it is NOT fictional.

Frank, what are you qualifications to judge a scientific experiment? What education have you had in the sciences?

You never once showed any lab work showing how increasing CO2 from 280 to 420 PPM raises temperatures

Not one time!

That’s the core of the $3 Trillion annual heist the AGWCult hopes to pull off on the American people

That’s why the AGWCult lies so consistently

 

[ding]

No evidence?
View attachment 1001717

Global surface temperature - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

View attachment 1001715

Earth’s temperature on rise, but steps can be taken to help

Global Warming is becoming an alarming situation for activists, scientists and politicians alike. Every decade since 1880, the average temperature has risen 0.14 F according to NOAA’s 2021 annual Climate Report. That means, since 1880, the world’s temperature has risen a lot. While this number...

lhstomtom.org

View attachment 1001716

Climate Change: Global Temperature

Earth's surface temperature has risen about 2 degrees Fahrenheit since the start of the NOAA record in 1850. It may seem like a small change, but it's a tremendous increase in stored heat.

www.climate.gov

So typical interglacial behavior?

 

[ding]

Why does the climate community deny that when the northern hemisphere deglaciates the ocean and atmosphere warms?

It's not like there's not an overwhelming amount of data for this. SMH.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Well, it's only about 0.5C right now at the most.

I’m a simple guy.

If you tell me increasing red pigment in water from 280 to 400PPM makes the water redder, just show me.

I keep hearing increasing CO2 from 280 to 400 PPM “raises temperatures” just show me

I’m skeptical because there’s a 450,000 year side by side dataset showing CO2 LAGGING temperatures on both increases and decreases so the bar is pretty fucking high to price a 120PPM increase can “raise temperatures”

 

[hjmick]

If the oceans are rising, why did Obama buy a property in Martha's Vineyard that is at sea level?

Answer (1 of 22): Mudeford Sandbank near Bournemouth has sleep in beach huts for mist of the year which has got the attention of the wealthy, the area has only had one arrest in 100 years. But it is at risk, no more than a metre higher than storm level sea heights. So a half a million dollar / po...

www.quora.com

Obama doesn't believe in global warming. If he did he'd build his mansion at a higher elevation than sea level.

Perhaps he recognizes the fact that he will be dead before his property will suffer any ill effects from the rising seas?

 

[ding]

I’m a simple guy.

If you tell me increasing red pigment in water from 280 to 400PPM makes the water redder, just show me.

I keep hearing increasing CO2 from 280 to 400 PPM “raises temperatures” just show me

I’m skeptical because there’s a 450,000 year side by side dataset showing CO2 LAGGING temperatures on both increases and decreases so the bar is pretty fucking high to price a 120PPM increase can “raise temperatures”

Two different things, Frank. CO2 lagging temperature is proof that CO2 has never driven climate changes. But that doesn't mean it has no effect on temperature. It's just not much of an effect at these concentrations because of the logarithmic relationship between concentration and associated surface temperature.

 

[ding]

Perhaps he recognizes the fact that he will be dead before his property will suffer any ill effects from the rising seas?

Seas have been rising for over 20,000 years. The rate of rise hasn't changed much over the last 6,000 years.

 

[Crick]

You never once showed any lab work showing how increasing CO2 from 280 to 420 PPM raises temperatures

Not one time!

That’s the core of the $3 Trillion annual heist the AGWCult hopes to pull off on the American people

That’s why the AGWCult lies so consistently

Please explain to us in as much detail as you can muster, why you seem to believe that the experiment I showed you yesterday did not demonstrate that CO2 traps IR and that more CO2 traps more IR.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Please explain to us in as much detail as you can muster, why you seem to believe that the experiment I showed you yesterday did not demonstrate that CO2 traps IR and that more CO2 traps more IR.

You confuse 100% with .04%