Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
CO2's roll cannot be discerned from noise in our climatic system. The effort to place this somewhere it cannot be detected and invisible is total BS. We are still exploring Solar Dimming and why it caused rapid cooling of our oceans. Again, something that is measurable and observable.And CO2 is about the only culprit of global warming, because it is about the only gas that converts photonic radiation back into vibratory heat, but yet does not condense out at the cold of high altitudes.
Read your sentence. Try to separate your thought process so that you don't ramble on in one sentence.That is not the point.
Sure there is a serious climate catastrophe in the making, but it is not as if there is necessarily any sort of alternative to fossil fuel, or what alternative is best if there is one.
Not necessarily true, but for reasons other than that which you state.While solar and wind power are nice, clearly they can not be relied upon, are not powerful, concentrated, or transportable enough to be practical.
Nobody is claiming that solar and wind can do the job alone.And in fact, solar and wind are very dirty in the production of solar cells and batteries.
So a better solution has to be found.
Most likely it is something like geothermal or nuclear, and hydrogen or methane instead.
Billy, check this guy outBull Shit... You were claiming that CO2's emissions were warming the oceans. This is wrong and it cannot stop energy out of the ocean as evidenced by ERBE satellite measurements. Epic failure. 72% of the earth cannot absorb emitted energy from CO2. That means 72% of the earth's surface cannot react to CO2.
CO2's roll cannot be discerned from noise in our climatic system. The effort to place this somewhere it cannot be detected and invisible is total BS. We are still exploring Solar Dimming and why it caused rapid cooling of our oceans. Again, something that is measurable and observable.
An informational post--> Solar Dimming... What is at stake With This Change on our Sun?
I love your graphic because it shows it shouldn't have been possible for the planet to transition from a greenhouse planet to an icehouse planet. But it did.
Do not bother him with facts... They get in the way of his narrative.I love your graphic because it shows it shouldn't have been possible for the planet to transition from a greenhouse planet to an icehouse planet. But it did.
View attachment 751205
AR6 assumes a 3/1 ratio above the log of CO2. Please get back to me when this "exaggeration" is removed.
There is no conflict between the information in the ERF diagram and Ding's obsession. I have never said that CO2 is the only factor controlling temperature and have repeatedly said otherwise. That Ding thinks his world-shaking "discoveries" about glacial cycles and plate climatology has solidly refuted the greenhouse effect refutes only his claim to any fundamental science knowledge. That you should choose to support his contention doesn't surprise me in the least.Do not bother him with facts... They get in the way of his narrative.
World shaking? No. Proof that water vapor is a net negative feedback? Yes.There is no conflict between the information in the ERF diagram and Ding's obsession. I have never said that CO2 is the only factor controlling temperature and have repeatedly said otherwise. That Ding thinks his world-shaking "discoveries" about glacial cycles and plate climatology has solidly refuted the greenhouse effect refutes only his claim to any fundamental science knowledge. That you should choose to support his contention doesn't surprise me in the least.
