In summary...

[jc456]

1. climate change is a science, not a theory
2. Global Warming is a fraudulent theory with precisely no evidence to support it
3. the amount of ice on Earth is dictated by the amount of land near the two Earth poles
4. the amount of ice on Earth dictates Earth's climate
5. CO2 has precisely nothing to do with Earth climate change

You forgot about that flaming ball in the sky and its impact on the climate.

And you forgot to check whether we have been receiving less or more energy from the sun in the last couple of decades. The answer is less. So, why don't you actually do a bit of research before proving yourself an ignorant ass?

and you can't post up what the temperature of 120 PPM of CO2 is. Can you? So you have absolutely no evidence to say anything got warmer.

 

[jc456]

When you have two and only two measures of the same thing, and both return highly correlated data, you have to be a completely corrupt taxpayer funded leech to claim that either series needs to be "corrected" with UNCORRELATED "corrections" no less, but that is what your heroes did to preserve their $20 billion per year taxpayer funding....

That's the part I have difficulty understanding about these dunderheads who believe this Warming nonsense. There are literally thousands of people who are making good livings on the government funding of research concerning AGW. It is totally NOT in their best interest to find any evidence to suggest man-made global warming isn't happening. To do that would be to cut their own livelihoods. What moron would ever do that?

So what we continue to get are all these "studies" which conclude the narrative. No government-funded researcher in their right minds are going to ever publicly admit there is inconsequential effects on the climate from man's activities. They will prop up the lie with all kinds of gross speculations and conjecture, manipulate data and even make it up on the fly if they need to. Whatever it takes to keep the government grants coming.

What I wish these supporting morons would realize is, this is billions and billions of dollars being poured into this thing... that's money we could be using to feed the hungry, house the homeless, care for the sick and needy... etc. Instead, it's going to "researchers" who live in $200k homes and "advocates" who fly around in private jets to preach the gospel of AGW. Not one single penny that has been spent on this boondoggle has changed ANY aspect of the climate. It never will!

they can't produce evidence to how CO2 acts as a greenhouse gas and what the temperature variance is when it is added to the atmosphere. The sun is at a minimum so we know the energy coming in is down. there is no way to be warmer. There is absolutely no evidence to show it has. Fudged charts and graphs, continue to be posted to exacerbate the lie.

 

[jc456]

Photosynthesis REQUIRES the energy input of sunlight to convert CO2 and water to sugars. Without sunlight, it does not take place. Plants do not CREATE energy. You can consider it a conversion process if you like: solar energy into chemical energy, but they are producing food, not energy. Again, you comments indicate some educational shortcomings on this general topic

This is now becoming a semantics argument. "Food" is energy! YES... plants create energy (food) from sunlight and CO2. Now this does not mean the laws of conservation are broken... energy can't be created or destroyed... but plants convert energy just like all living things convert energy. And that is what we're talking about.

Which is not what you said it says. CO2 levels got to those "starvation" points at the height of glaciation, not just prior to the Industrial Revolution. The Industrial Revolution did not - as you suggest - save the plant kingdom.

I didn't say it saved the plant kingdom. I'm growing tired of having to correct your twisting and pretzeling of things I say into straw men you can torch. I said that botanists say, up until about 200 years ago, plants were starving for CO2. I'm not a botanist, I don't study plants, I deffer to their expertise. I'm merely repeating what I've read. If you have some argument you should take that up with them.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but the process is already underway. Not as fast as we ought to be switching, but underway.

Not really. I doubt we've reduced our usage of fossil fuels by more than a few percent. Certain efforts, such as Ethanol, actually use more fossil fuel than they save. It will be many, many years before we see man eliminate his need for fossil fuels. It's not going to happen in our lifetime.

No, they are not. We are taking these actions to PREVENT people from starving and dying.

But that's not the effect of implementing government mandates and restrictions on production.

So, you reject all science? That IS what you're saying. We have thousands of studies which show that the planet has been warming since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution and that greenhouse warming from increasing levels of CO2 is the primary cause. These studies do not "suggest" that is what's happening. Those are their conclusions.

So here, you try to talk from both sides of your mouth. You have not shown me where science has concluded anything. When I challenge you, I'm told science can't conclude things... then you return promptly to explaining to me how science has concluded! And so it goes... over and over... rinse and repeat!

Boss, you are playing free and loose with words. Crick stated that science does not prove anything. And he was correct. But you can make conclusions when science points out that the evidence shows this is the case beyond a reasonable doubt. Conclude and prove are words with a very different meaning. You really need to retake your literature and english classes.

sometimes I just have to laugh at statements like this. Science doesn't validate? REally?

 

[Boss]

OK, Boss, find me a single Scientific Society that claims that AGW is a fraud, and is not happening. How about one National Academy of Science? Even of Outer Slobovia. How about a major University? You cannot because they do not exist. Not here, not in any nation.

Meanwhile, almost every Scientific Society in the world has a strongly worded statement that says AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. Every National Academy of Science makes that statement. Almost every major University states the same. And what, Boss, do you have spreading false statements concerning the science involved? An obese junkie on the AM radio, a fake British Lord.

This is really easy.... the globe IS warming. We are in a warming cycle just as we are sometimes in a cooling cycle and the globe is cooling. This happens all the time and has been happening since the planet stabilized about 3 billion years ago. It has nothing to do with man.

Again... Man has done some really devastating things to the environment. We've dumped toxins in rivers and lakes... we've unleashed massive amounts of radiation through nuclear testing... we've spilled untold amounts of raw crude oil in the oceans... poured billions and trillions of metric tons of pollution into the air... Yet, the planet has this amazing ability to recover.

Not only that, but there have been cataclysmic natural disasters that dwarf anything man could ever muster. Huge volcanic eruptions that changed weather patterns and climate for decades sometimes. Things on a scale man couldn't duplicate in 100k years if they were trying. Yet... again... the planet has this amazing ability to recover.

It's not some dainty little delicate system that is effected by every little thing we do and is threatened by our activity. The whole thing isn't going to suddenly collapse because we didn't stop burning fossil fuels. Now, I don't have any problem with us exploring alternatives to fossil fuels... I think that's a great thing to do and mankind will ultimately benefit as well as our planet, if we come up with something to efficiently replace fossil fuels. But it's not some huge emergency crisis that we have to do right now or face imminent destruction of the planet. That is alarmist rhetoric and nothing more.

This entire "Global Warming" thing is the latest attempt of Marxist Socialists to destroy Capitalism. They've been churning out this kind of fear-mongering nonsense for YEARS! You're just the latest gullible little idiot to buy into it. The sky is not falling, Chicken Little!

 

[boedicca]

1. climate change is a science, not a theory
2. Global Warming is a fraudulent theory with precisely no evidence to support it
3. the amount of ice on Earth is dictated by the amount of land near the two Earth poles
4. the amount of ice on Earth dictates Earth's climate
5. CO2 has precisely nothing to do with Earth climate change

You forgot about that flaming ball in the sky and its impact on the climate.

And you forgot to check whether we have been receiving less or more energy from the sun in the last couple of decades. The answer is less. So, why don't you actually do a bit of research before proving yourself an ignorant ass?

Which is why the earth is cooling, bub.

 

[Old Rocks]

LOL

So what we have here is a fruit loopy anonymous poster on a message board claiming that he knows more than all the scientists on this planet. As for #'s 1 and two;

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

The American Institute of Physics is the largest Scientific Society on this planet. And it and every other Scientific Society, as well as all the National Academies of Science and the major Universities state that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

The amount of land at the poles is a factor in the ice ages, but more important factors are the GHGs in the atmosphere and the Milankovic Cycles. There have been vast geological periods when there was land covering the South Pole, and there was no continental ice sheets there.

The two primary drivers of climate are the amount of energy the sun recieves from the sun, and the amount it retains. The latter is controlled by the Earth's albedo, and the amount of GHGs in the atmosphere. Land distribution, Milankovic Cycles, effect the distribution of the heat and cold on earth, but are not primary drivers.

CO2, being the primary GHG, not the strongest one, that is water vapor, but the primary one. CO2 controls the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere. All the physicists state that.

There have been vast geological periods when there was land covering the South Pole, and there was no continental ice sheets there.

you have evidence to make this statement?

16.1 Glacial Periods in Earth’s History | Physical Geology

Cambrian Period

No continental glaciation during the Cambrian

• 
  Distribution of landmasses, mountainous regions, shallow seas, and deep ocean basins during the …
  Adapted from C.R. Scotese, The University of Texas at Arlington
  Again, mid-Silurian, no continental ice sheets.

 

[jc456]

LOL

So what we have here is a fruit loopy anonymous poster on a message board claiming that he knows more than all the scientists on this planet. As for #'s 1 and two;

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

The American Institute of Physics is the largest Scientific Society on this planet. And it and every other Scientific Society, as well as all the National Academies of Science and the major Universities state that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

The amount of land at the poles is a factor in the ice ages, but more important factors are the GHGs in the atmosphere and the Milankovic Cycles. There have been vast geological periods when there was land covering the South Pole, and there was no continental ice sheets there.

The two primary drivers of climate are the amount of energy the sun recieves from the sun, and the amount it retains. The latter is controlled by the Earth's albedo, and the amount of GHGs in the atmosphere. Land distribution, Milankovic Cycles, effect the distribution of the heat and cold on earth, but are not primary drivers.

CO2, being the primary GHG, not the strongest one, that is water vapor, but the primary one. CO2 controls the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere. All the physicists state that.

There have been vast geological periods when there was land covering the South Pole, and there was no continental ice sheets there.

you have evidence to make this statement?

16.1 Glacial Periods in Earth’s History | Physical Geology

Cambrian Period

No continental glaciation during the Cambrian

• 
  Distribution of landmasses, mountainous regions, shallow seas, and deep ocean basins during the …
  Adapted from C.R. Scotese, The University of Texas at Arlington
  Again, mid-Silurian, no continental ice sheets.

seriously? this is what you got eh? excuse, spppffffffffffftttttttttttttttttttttttttt

 

[Old Rocks]

OK, Boss, find me a single Scientific Society that claims that AGW is a fraud, and is not happening. How about one National Academy of Science? Even of Outer Slobovia. How about a major University? You cannot because they do not exist. Not here, not in any nation.

Meanwhile, almost every Scientific Society in the world has a strongly worded statement that says AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. Every National Academy of Science makes that statement. Almost every major University states the same. And what, Boss, do you have spreading false statements concerning the science involved? An obese junkie on the AM radio, a fake British Lord.

This is really easy.... the globe IS warming. We are in a warming cycle just as we are sometimes in a cooling cycle and the globe is cooling. This happens all the time and has been happening since the planet stabilized about 3 billion years ago. It has nothing to do with man.

Again... Man has done some really devastating things to the environment. We've dumped toxins in rivers and lakes... we've unleashed massive amounts of radiation through nuclear testing... we've spilled untold amounts of raw crude oil in the oceans... poured billions and trillions of metric tons of pollution into the air... Yet, the planet has this amazing ability to recover.

Not only that, but there have been cataclysmic natural disasters that dwarf anything man could ever muster. Huge volcanic eruptions that changed weather patterns and climate for decades sometimes. Things on a scale man couldn't duplicate in 100k years if they were trying. Yet... again... the planet has this amazing ability to recover.

It's not some dainty little delicate system that is effected by every little thing we do and is threatened by our activity. The whole thing isn't going to suddenly collapse because we didn't stop burning fossil fuels. Now, I don't have any problem with us exploring alternatives to fossil fuels... I think that's a great thing to do and mankind will ultimately benefit as well as our planet, if we come up with something to efficiently replace fossil fuels. But it's not some huge emergency crisis that we have to do right now or face imminent destruction of the planet. That is alarmist rhetoric and nothing more.

This entire "Global Warming" thing is the latest attempt of Marxist Socialists to destroy Capitalism. They've been churning out this kind of fear-mongering nonsense for YEARS! You're just the latest gullible little idiot to buy into it. The sky is not falling, Chicken Little!

Stupid beyond belief for someone supposedly college educated. John Tyndall of England demonstrated that there were GHGs in the atmosphere in 1858. Svante Arrhenius calculated the effects of CO2 in 1896.

As for your strawman, no credible scientist has stated that we are going to destroy the planet. What is being stated, and you damned well know it, is that we are making it a lot less livable for us and the other life that exists on this planet. As far as your Marxist twaddle goes, **** you, you stupid ignorant rightwingnut.

 

[Old Rocks]

1. climate change is a science, not a theory
2. Global Warming is a fraudulent theory with precisely no evidence to support it
3. the amount of ice on Earth is dictated by the amount of land near the two Earth poles
4. the amount of ice on Earth dictates Earth's climate
5. CO2 has precisely nothing to do with Earth climate change

You forgot about that flaming ball in the sky and its impact on the climate.

And you forgot to check whether we have been receiving less or more energy from the sun in the last couple of decades. The answer is less. So, why don't you actually do a bit of research before proving yourself an ignorant ass?

Which is why the earth is cooling, bub.

Now why don't you take that up with Boss. LOL

 

[jc456]

OK, Boss, find me a single Scientific Society that claims that AGW is a fraud, and is not happening. How about one National Academy of Science? Even of Outer Slobovia. How about a major University? You cannot because they do not exist. Not here, not in any nation.

Meanwhile, almost every Scientific Society in the world has a strongly worded statement that says AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. Every National Academy of Science makes that statement. Almost every major University states the same. And what, Boss, do you have spreading false statements concerning the science involved? An obese junkie on the AM radio, a fake British Lord.

This is really easy.... the globe IS warming. We are in a warming cycle just as we are sometimes in a cooling cycle and the globe is cooling. This happens all the time and has been happening since the planet stabilized about 3 billion years ago. It has nothing to do with man.

Again... Man has done some really devastating things to the environment. We've dumped toxins in rivers and lakes... we've unleashed massive amounts of radiation through nuclear testing... we've spilled untold amounts of raw crude oil in the oceans... poured billions and trillions of metric tons of pollution into the air... Yet, the planet has this amazing ability to recover.

Not only that, but there have been cataclysmic natural disasters that dwarf anything man could ever muster. Huge volcanic eruptions that changed weather patterns and climate for decades sometimes. Things on a scale man couldn't duplicate in 100k years if they were trying. Yet... again... the planet has this amazing ability to recover.

It's not some dainty little delicate system that is effected by every little thing we do and is threatened by our activity. The whole thing isn't going to suddenly collapse because we didn't stop burning fossil fuels. Now, I don't have any problem with us exploring alternatives to fossil fuels... I think that's a great thing to do and mankind will ultimately benefit as well as our planet, if we come up with something to efficiently replace fossil fuels. But it's not some huge emergency crisis that we have to do right now or face imminent destruction of the planet. That is alarmist rhetoric and nothing more.

This entire "Global Warming" thing is the latest attempt of Marxist Socialists to destroy Capitalism. They've been churning out this kind of fear-mongering nonsense for YEARS! You're just the latest gullible little idiot to buy into it. The sky is not falling, Chicken Little!

Stupid beyond belief for someone supposedly college educated. John Tyndall of England demonstrated that there were GHGs in the atmosphere in 1858. Svante Arrhenius calculated the effects of CO2 in 1896.

As for your strawman, no credible scientist has stated that we are going to destroy the planet. What is being stated, and you damned well know it, is that we are making it a lot less livable for us and the other life that exists on this planet. As far as your Marxist twaddle goes, **** you, you stupid ignorant rightwingnut.

did tyndall record any temperature variances for those experiments for the supposed GHGs?

 

[Old Rocks]

OK, Boss, find me a single Scientific Society that claims that AGW is a fraud, and is not happening. How about one National Academy of Science? Even of Outer Slobovia. How about a major University? You cannot because they do not exist. Not here, not in any nation.

Meanwhile, almost every Scientific Society in the world has a strongly worded statement that says AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. Every National Academy of Science makes that statement. Almost every major University states the same. And what, Boss, do you have spreading false statements concerning the science involved? An obese junkie on the AM radio, a fake British Lord.

This is really easy.... the globe IS warming. We are in a warming cycle just as we are sometimes in a cooling cycle and the globe is cooling. This happens all the time and has been happening since the planet stabilized about 3 billion years ago. It has nothing to do with man.

Again... Man has done some really devastating things to the environment. We've dumped toxins in rivers and lakes... we've unleashed massive amounts of radiation through nuclear testing... we've spilled untold amounts of raw crude oil in the oceans... poured billions and trillions of metric tons of pollution into the air... Yet, the planet has this amazing ability to recover.

Not only that, but there have been cataclysmic natural disasters that dwarf anything man could ever muster. Huge volcanic eruptions that changed weather patterns and climate for decades sometimes. Things on a scale man couldn't duplicate in 100k years if they were trying. Yet... again... the planet has this amazing ability to recover.

It's not some dainty little delicate system that is effected by every little thing we do and is threatened by our activity. The whole thing isn't going to suddenly collapse because we didn't stop burning fossil fuels. Now, I don't have any problem with us exploring alternatives to fossil fuels... I think that's a great thing to do and mankind will ultimately benefit as well as our planet, if we come up with something to efficiently replace fossil fuels. But it's not some huge emergency crisis that we have to do right now or face imminent destruction of the planet. That is alarmist rhetoric and nothing more.

This entire "Global Warming" thing is the latest attempt of Marxist Socialists to destroy Capitalism. They've been churning out this kind of fear-mongering nonsense for YEARS! You're just the latest gullible little idiot to buy into it. The sky is not falling, Chicken Little!

Stupid beyond belief for someone supposedly college educated. John Tyndall of England demonstrated that there were GHGs in the atmosphere in 1858. Svante Arrhenius calculated the effects of CO2 in 1896.

As for your strawman, no credible scientist has stated that we are going to destroy the planet. What is being stated, and you damned well know it, is that we are making it a lot less livable for us and the other life that exists on this planet. As far as your Marxist twaddle goes, **** you, you stupid ignorant rightwingnut.

did tyndall record any temperature variances for those experiments for the supposed GHGs?

Well now, silly little ass, you have the world's biggest library right at your fingertips. Someone less stupid and lazy would look up who Tyndall was, and what he did.

 

[Boss]

So, what you are stating is that the vast majority of scientists, worldwide, are in on a conspiracy to commit fraud. Scientists from every nation and culture.

Boss, have you been fitted for your little tin hat yet?

No... I am saying the vast majority of scientists are not saying man is causing cataclysmic global warming. Also, I am saying that "ad populum" arguments are fallacious arguments that conclude a proposition is true because many or most people believe it. That's not how Science has ever worked.

Have you designed your funny little Pope hat for your faith-based religious belief yet?

 

[jc456]

OK, Boss, find me a single Scientific Society that claims that AGW is a fraud, and is not happening. How about one National Academy of Science? Even of Outer Slobovia. How about a major University? You cannot because they do not exist. Not here, not in any nation.

Meanwhile, almost every Scientific Society in the world has a strongly worded statement that says AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. Every National Academy of Science makes that statement. Almost every major University states the same. And what, Boss, do you have spreading false statements concerning the science involved? An obese junkie on the AM radio, a fake British Lord.

This is really easy.... the globe IS warming. We are in a warming cycle just as we are sometimes in a cooling cycle and the globe is cooling. This happens all the time and has been happening since the planet stabilized about 3 billion years ago. It has nothing to do with man.

Again... Man has done some really devastating things to the environment. We've dumped toxins in rivers and lakes... we've unleashed massive amounts of radiation through nuclear testing... we've spilled untold amounts of raw crude oil in the oceans... poured billions and trillions of metric tons of pollution into the air... Yet, the planet has this amazing ability to recover.

Not only that, but there have been cataclysmic natural disasters that dwarf anything man could ever muster. Huge volcanic eruptions that changed weather patterns and climate for decades sometimes. Things on a scale man couldn't duplicate in 100k years if they were trying. Yet... again... the planet has this amazing ability to recover.

It's not some dainty little delicate system that is effected by every little thing we do and is threatened by our activity. The whole thing isn't going to suddenly collapse because we didn't stop burning fossil fuels. Now, I don't have any problem with us exploring alternatives to fossil fuels... I think that's a great thing to do and mankind will ultimately benefit as well as our planet, if we come up with something to efficiently replace fossil fuels. But it's not some huge emergency crisis that we have to do right now or face imminent destruction of the planet. That is alarmist rhetoric and nothing more.

This entire "Global Warming" thing is the latest attempt of Marxist Socialists to destroy Capitalism. They've been churning out this kind of fear-mongering nonsense for YEARS! You're just the latest gullible little idiot to buy into it. The sky is not falling, Chicken Little!

Stupid beyond belief for someone supposedly college educated. John Tyndall of England demonstrated that there were GHGs in the atmosphere in 1858. Svante Arrhenius calculated the effects of CO2 in 1896.

As for your strawman, no credible scientist has stated that we are going to destroy the planet. What is being stated, and you damned well know it, is that we are making it a lot less livable for us and the other life that exists on this planet. As far as your Marxist twaddle goes, **** you, you stupid ignorant rightwingnut.

did tyndall record any temperature variances for those experiments for the supposed GHGs?

Well now, silly little ass, you have the world's biggest library right at your fingertips. Someone less stupid and lazy would look up who Tyndall was, and what he did.

well now, see what someone without any evidence does when challenged? Why don't you, mr rocks, just post up one of those tyndall recorded tests. Cause he never recorded temperatures. that's why you won't.

 

[jc456]

When you have two and only two measures of the same thing, and both return highly correlated data, you have to be a completely corrupt taxpayer funded leech to claim that either series needs to be "corrected" with UNCORRELATED "corrections" no less, but that is what your heroes did to preserve their $20 billion per year taxpayer funding....

That's the part I have difficulty understanding about these dunderheads who believe this Warming nonsense. There are literally thousands of people who are making good livings on the government funding of research concerning AGW. It is totally NOT in their best interest to find any evidence to suggest man-made global warming isn't happening. To do that would be to cut their own livelihoods. What moron would ever do that?

So what we continue to get are all these "studies" which conclude the narrative. No government-funded researcher in their right minds are going to ever publicly admit there is inconsequential effects on the climate from man's activities. They will prop up the lie with all kinds of gross speculations and conjecture, manipulate data and even make it up on the fly if they need to. Whatever it takes to keep the government grants coming.

What I wish these supporting morons would realize is, this is billions and billions of dollars being poured into this thing... that's money we could be using to feed the hungry, house the homeless, care for the sick and needy... etc. Instead, it's going to "researchers" who live in $200k homes and "advocates" who fly around in private jets to preach the gospel of AGW. Not one single penny that has been spent on this boondoggle has changed ANY aspect of the climate. It never will!

So, what you are stating is that the vast majority of scientists, worldwide, are in on a conspiracy to commit fraud. Scientists from every nation and culture.

Boss, have you been fitted for your little tin hat yet?

yes and they admitted it. email gate. all you need to know. funny how you continue to ignore email gate.

 

[Boss]

Stupid beyond belief for someone supposedly college educated. John Tyndall of England demonstrated that there were GHGs in the atmosphere in 1858....

OH Noooz!1!! The Terrible Greenhouse Gases is a gonna kill us to death!!1!!

The #1, most abundant and prevalent Greenhouse "gas" is water vapor!

Look dummy... if not for the greenhouse effect, no life would exist on this planet! We would be like Mars! It is the greenhouse effect that stabilizes our climate and helps regulate a temperature range conducive to the process of life. Without it, we'd see night time temperatures drop to over 100 degrees below zero and parts of our planet would reach temperatures of 300+ degrees during the day. Water on our planet would simply evaporate away into space if there wasn't some mechanism (the greenhouse effect) to keep it contained.

 

[Old Rocks]

Stupid beyond belief for someone supposedly college educated. John Tyndall of England demonstrated that there were GHGs in the atmosphere in 1858....

OH Noooz!1!! The Terrible Greenhouse Gases is a gonna kill us to death!!1!!

The #1, most abundant and prevalent Greenhouse "gas" is water vapor!

Look dummy... if not for the greenhouse effect, no life would exist on this planet! We would be like Mars! It is the greenhouse effect that stabilizes our climate and helps regulate a temperature range conducive to the process of life. Without it, we'd see night time temperatures drop to over 100 degrees below zero and parts of our planet would reach temperatures of 300+ degrees during the day. Water on our planet would simply evaporate away into space if there wasn't some mechanism (the greenhouse effect) to keep it contained.

Why yes, the most abundant and prevalent GHG is water vapor. And it's residence time in the atmosphere is about 10 days. While that of CO2 is centuries. So, in times of rapidly declining CO2, like the end of the Ordivician, there were continental glaciations near the equator. Even though there was still the same amount of water on this planet.

And, yes, without the Greenhouse effect of CO2, the oceans would be frozen almost to the equator. That has actually happened in the past, see Snowball Earth. What we are facing today, is a very rapid increase in GHG's due to the burning of fossil fuels. The last time the CO2 level was at 300 ppm, the sea levels were 20 feet higher than today. That was 120,000 years ago during the Eemian. Now we are over 400 ppm, and rising rapidly. No, the sea level rise will not be instant, but by the end of this century it is likely that our seaport infrastructure will not be usable due to a 3 foot plus rise in sea level. And we are already seeing the effect of the 'stuck' weather systems due to the loss of Arctic Ice.

As the atmosphere and ocean warm, we will and are seeing more precipitation events. Thing like one storm flooding 80,000 homes Louisiana. One can go to the sites of Swiss Re and Munich Re concerning the increase in extreme weather events. GHGs have a very strong effect on the climate and weather. And we are the source of the very rapid increase in GHGs in the atmosphere at this time.

 

[jc456]

Stupid beyond belief for someone supposedly college educated. John Tyndall of England demonstrated that there were GHGs in the atmosphere in 1858....

OH Noooz!1!! The Terrible Greenhouse Gases is a gonna kill us to death!!1!!

The #1, most abundant and prevalent Greenhouse "gas" is water vapor!

Look dummy... if not for the greenhouse effect, no life would exist on this planet! We would be like Mars! It is the greenhouse effect that stabilizes our climate and helps regulate a temperature range conducive to the process of life. Without it, we'd see night time temperatures drop to over 100 degrees below zero and parts of our planet would reach temperatures of 300+ degrees during the day. Water on our planet would simply evaporate away into space if there wasn't some mechanism (the greenhouse effect) to keep it contained.

Why yes, the most abundant and prevalent GHG is water vapor. And it's residence time in the atmosphere is about 10 days. While that of CO2 is centuries. So, in times of rapidly declining CO2, like the end of the Ordivician, there were continental glaciations near the equator. Even though there was still the same amount of water on this planet.

And, yes, without the Greenhouse effect of CO2, the oceans would be frozen almost to the equator. That has actually happened in the past, see Snowball Earth. What we are facing today, is a very rapid increase in GHG's due to the burning of fossil fuels. The last time the CO2 level was at 300 ppm, the sea levels were 20 feet higher than today. That was 120,000 years ago during the Eemian. Now we are over 400 ppm, and rising rapidly. No, the sea level rise will not be instant, but by the end of this century it is likely that our seaport infrastructure will not be usable due to a 3 foot plus rise in sea level. And we are already seeing the effect of the 'stuck' weather systems due to the loss of Arctic Ice.

As the atmosphere and ocean warm, we will and are seeing more precipitation events. Thing like one storm flooding 80,000 homes Louisiana. One can go to the sites of Swiss Re and Munich Re concerning the increase in extreme weather events. GHGs have a very strong effect on the climate and weather. And we are the source of the very rapid increase in GHGs in the atmosphere at this time.

the most abundant and prevalent GHG is water vapor. And it's residence time in the atmosphere is about 10 days. While that of CO2 is centuries.

So if the sun were to explode or extinguish, life on earth can be maintained for centuries cause CO2 hangs around that long? Oh my the nonsense that you post.

CO2 does not create heat never has. how warm is 120PPM of CO2 in the atmosphere and how much warmth does it add to the surface? got those numbers somewhere?

 

[Old Rocks]

Well, jc, I can very well see you believing that. LOL

 

[SSDD]

[
Why yes, the most abundant and prevalent GHG is water vapor. And it's residence time in the atmosphere is about 10 days. While that of CO2 is centuries. So, in times of rapidly declining CO2, like the end of the Ordivician, there were continental glaciations near the equator. Even though there was still the same amount of water on this planet..

One word for you rocks....BULLSHIT. You know perfectly well that the residence time for CO2 is nothing like that and study after study has stated as much...

Here are 37 studies...31 of them find the residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere to be less than 10 years...notice that the IPCC has pegged the bullshit meter at 100 years and you are claiming multiple centuries....

 

[Boss]

Why yes, the most abundant and prevalent GHG is water vapor. And it's residence time in the atmosphere is about 10 days. While that of CO2 is centuries. So, in times of rapidly declining CO2, like the end of the Ordivician, there were continental glaciations near the equator. Even though there was still the same amount of water on this planet.

And, yes, without the Greenhouse effect of CO2, the oceans would be frozen almost to the equator. That has actually happened in the past, see Snowball Earth. What we are facing today, is a very rapid increase in GHG's due to the burning of fossil fuels.

False. We are facing an approximate increase of 1 degree average over the past century. There is no evidence to PROVE man's burning fossil fuels has anything to do with that, it's all based on theories and speculations. The CO2 levels have been MUCH higher, long before man was ever industrialized. What the CO2 actually does in our atmosphere, is provide an "insulating" quality, trapping both heat and cold. This has resulted in a very slight increase in median temperatures over the past century and is nothing to be alarmed about.

Mother nature doesn't compile annual statistical data and make adjustments. So sometimes the averages over a year, a decade or even a century, might be higher or lower than the previous period. Mother Nature also doesn't consult Liberals to determine if she has "too much" or "not enough" of any particular element in her atmosphere at any given time.

The last time the CO2 level was at 300 ppm, the sea levels were 20 feet higher than today. That was 120,000 years ago during the Eemian. Now we are over 400 ppm, and rising rapidly. No, the sea level rise will not be instant, but by the end of this century it is likely that our seaport infrastructure will not be usable due to a 3 foot plus rise in sea level. And we are already seeing the effect of the 'stuck' weather systems due to the loss of Arctic Ice.

We're not rising rapidly and we're not at 400 ppm yet. I think the latest data shows around 360. 120,000 years ago, the Earth was a completely different planet, our atmosphere was completely different. Man, if he even existed yet, was indeed not industrialized.

Now let me explain something to you with this nonsense about rising sea levels.... If enough ice melts at our northern pole to generate enough water to raise the sea level one single foot, it will have such a dramatic cooling effect on the ocean's natural convection that most sea life would become endangered and we would have MUCH bigger problems than flooded coast lines. What we know is happening, is at the southern pole, sea ice is growing. This is offsetting what is happening in the Arctic.

The dramatic weather systems you call "stuck" are largely the result of El Niño and La Niña phenomenon that are completely natural and have been happening for all of Earth's existence as a stable planet.

As the atmosphere and ocean warm, we will and are seeing more precipitation events. Thing like one storm flooding 80,000 homes Louisiana. One can go to the sites of Swiss Re and Munich Re concerning the increase in extreme weather events. GHGs have a very strong effect on the climate and weather. And we are the source of the very rapid increase in GHGs in the atmosphere at this time.

There is just no proof of this. It's a THEORY. You are taking perfectly normal catastrophic events that happen all the time throughout the history of the world, and trying to make some correlation with man's activities based on a speculative theory that can't be proven.