The CO2 Problem in 6 Easy Steps

[sealybobo]

Do you all know how the GOP gets away with denying human responsibility for Global Warming? Because for one they have purchased the so called "liberal" media ....

Sorry, I couldn't make it past that. You have entered into the flat Earth category.

Let me explain why the media seems liberal to you. Ready? They use wedge issues to divide the middle class votes. Racism, God, Gays and Guns. So the "liberal" media promotes those topics. The show may be pro gay but that gets you to show up and vote doesn't it? It may be pro choice but that gets you to vote, right? They may seem to be anti guns but where does that get us?

None of those things really matter though do they really? As long as the media doesn't report that Bush was warned about 9-11. As long as they don't report that Bush lied us into Iraq. As long as they don't explain exactly how Bush's policies from 2000-2006 are what put us in the poor house. I know it's not that easy but you know what I mean.

You never hear pro union stories. The media wasn't kind to the 99%'ers or Wallsteet protesters. The rest of the country really doesn't know how horrible Scott Walker has been to democracy, or Rick Snyder. He gave corporations huge tax breaks and now he says he has to raise our taxes. Who owns the fucking Detroit News? Wake up stupid.

 

[mamooth]

Chiefio reports that

Chiefo reports a wacky conspiracy theory. We know it's a wacky conspiracy theory because those "dropped" stations showed, on the average, _more_ warming than the stations that are still operating.

It's amusing, how badly most deniers misunderstand the science here. They actually think removing stations from cooler locations would make the trend look warmer. I could explain to them why that's not the case, but I'd rather watch them flail about and create various other conspiracy theories first.

 

[orogenicman]

Why would we have to relocate anyone?

How long do you think people can survive in deserts without water and food?

How many trillions should we spend to prevent "deserts without water and food"?

When we're done, will CO2 be 550 ppm, instead of 560 ppm?

Will the "global temperature" be 0.1 degrees lower or 0.2 degrees lower?

What do you think will be the climatic response of significantly reducing the 30 billion tons of CO2 we release into the atmosphere each year? Will it happen suddenly, or gradually over many years? And if it is not suddenly, does that mean it is not worth it to our children and grandchildren to do? It took decades to reach the point we are at today. It will take many more decades to reverse the damage. To my mind, doing nothing is not an option.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How long do you think people can survive in deserts without water and food?

How many trillions should we spend to prevent "deserts without water and food"?

When we're done, will CO2 be 550 ppm, instead of 560 ppm?

Will the "global temperature" be 0.1 degrees lower or 0.2 degrees lower?

What do you think will be the climatic response of significantly reducing the 30 billion tons of CO2 we release into the atmosphere each year? Will it happen suddenly, or gradually over many years? And if it is not suddenly, does that mean it is not worth it to our children and grandchildren to do? It took decades to reach the point we are at today. It will take many more decades to reverse the damage. To my mind, doing nothing is not an option.

What do you think will be the climatic response of significantly reducing the 30 billion tons of CO2 we release into the atmosphere each year?

When will that number be even slightly reduced?
How many trillions does the US have to spend to make up for next years increase from China and India?

And if it is not suddenly, does that mean it is not worth it to our children and grandchildren to do?

It is not worth it to our children and grandchildren if we ruin our economy and go ever deeper into debt for an unmeasureable decrease in future temperatures.

 

[sealybobo]

Do you all know how the GOP gets away with denying human responsibility for Global Warming? Because for one they have purchased the so called "liberal" media and so the news isn't telling people the truth because they don't want to seem bias. They just report facts. "The Planet Is Heating Up" but they won't admit the impact cars and corporate smokestacks are having on the planet. They can't. Those are their advertisers and CEO's and they know the CEO's and Board of Directors of other companies. It's a good old boys club. And lobbyists.

The other reason they get away with it is why change? They are still winning elections denying it and fighting healthcare reform and everything else they do because they have enough of us with bullshit wedge issues. How many poor people vote GOP because of god, gays, racism and guns? They even have the gun and god freaks arguing IN FAVOR OF GLOBAL WARMING AND WAR and anything else they want to do. And how do they get their message out? The corporate media. Fox and Rush are the big 2. Wake up America. If you are not rich you are a N(#$*r to the Republicans.

How many stupid fucking union workers in Michigan didn't show up to vote or voted for Rick Snyder? You all deserve what you got. How many people won't show up these midterms? Fuck you all if you don't care about yourselves why should I?

Do you all know how the GOP gets away with denying human responsibility for Global Warming?

How much of the warming since the end of the LIA is human responsibility?
To the nearest 0.1 degrees?

Thanks!

Huh? All I know is I heard that if you add up all the co2 or sulfur that human's are putting out every day we are putting up more pollution co2 or sulfer than all the volcano's now.

We need to exterminate global warming deniers like we did back in Salem to the crazy witches. If they burn they weren't republicans and if they don't they are witches. Either way they dumb. Or maybe Jesus will do as predicted and come take them home.

But you know what the funny thing is? When you can no longer deny GW, and that day was about a couple years ago, then you guys start arguing with us about the solution. Why do we even listen to you? Oh yea, because of the lobbyists who own our politicians. I forget.

 

[sealybobo]

How many trillions should we spend to prevent "deserts without water and food"?

When we're done, will CO2 be 550 ppm, instead of 560 ppm?

Will the "global temperature" be 0.1 degrees lower or 0.2 degrees lower?

What do you think will be the climatic response of significantly reducing the 30 billion tons of CO2 we release into the atmosphere each year? Will it happen suddenly, or gradually over many years? And if it is not suddenly, does that mean it is not worth it to our children and grandchildren to do? It took decades to reach the point we are at today. It will take many more decades to reverse the damage. To my mind, doing nothing is not an option.

What do you think will be the climatic response of significantly reducing the 30 billion tons of CO2 we release into the atmosphere each year?

When will that number be even slightly reduced?
How many trillions does the US have to spend to make up for next years increase from China and India?

And if it is not suddenly, does that mean it is not worth it to our children and grandchildren to do?

It is not worth it to our children and grandchildren if we ruin our economy and go ever deeper into debt for an unmeasureable decrease in future temperatures.

If we don't go green, the only solution for the planet is the either full out or near extinction of man. This planet will turn back into paradise if there are only a few million humans still alive all across the globe.

Think about the bears, cougars, deer, bison, wolves, fish, birds, etc. This planet will turn back into paradise when the masses are all gone. I wish I had a big underground fortress so I could survive it and live in it. A bunch of distilled water and canned goods. I would loot homes for their can goods. I'd fish. I'd hunt with all the guns my fellow Americans left behind. I am grateful for them because I don't know how to make a gun, forge steel, make a telephone. Hell I probably couldn't even make a fire without human flint rocks or magnifying glass or a lighter.

I can't wait to see Planet of the Apes. I bet it was nice after they got rid of humans. I root for the apes. Did you see the preview? Their advantage is they don't need electricity, fire, shelter, light, guns.

 

[RollingThunder]

Which law applies?

CARBON DIOXIDE VS. WATER VAPOR AS GREENHOUSE GASES
METEOROLOGIST JEFF HABY

And stuff like this is why everybody can see that you're a retard, shitweasel.

Pointing out that both CO2 and water vapor are greenhouse gases doesn't magically make CO2 not a greenhouse gas. While it is true that there is more water vapor in the atmosphere, it is also true that because CO2 accumulates in the atmosphere and water vapor doesn't, increased CO2 is the forcing that causes temperature increases while water vapor is the feedback that responds to higher temperatures and amplifies the warming produced by the CO2.

I posted the opinion of a meteorologist that explained it better than I could. Since you weren't able to process the info, he said said CO2s were insignificant in warming the atmosphere. Sorry.

You are sorry, that's for sure.

The actual scientists who study all of the different aspects of the climate and atmospheric physics are virtually unamamous in saying that CO2 is a powerful greenhouse gas and that the 43% increase that mankind has caused is heating the planet. You find a wacko rightwing meteorologist from Texas who disagrees with the rest of the scientific community and who also has this oh-so-scientific material on his website.

DOES GOD CONTROL THE WEATHER?

METEOROLOGIST JEFF HABY

A. Possible reasons that God does control the weather:

1. An all knowing being must know how to control the weather. Since the weather is there He must be controlling it.

2. It is possible that there are extra dimensions in which the weather can be controlled but we can not tell. It is impossible to have a perfect analysis and perfect atmospheric model in our dimension but perhaps there are other dimensions this can be done from.

3. If God can control any other aspect of our lives then it must be possible that He can control the weather.

4. Since there is existence that we sense, then there is an ultimate reason for this existence (a creator). An entity with that power will have the power to control the weather.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Do you all know how the GOP gets away with denying human responsibility for Global Warming? Because for one they have purchased the so called "liberal" media and so the news isn't telling people the truth because they don't want to seem bias. They just report facts. "The Planet Is Heating Up" but they won't admit the impact cars and corporate smokestacks are having on the planet. They can't. Those are their advertisers and CEO's and they know the CEO's and Board of Directors of other companies. It's a good old boys club. And lobbyists.

The other reason they get away with it is why change? They are still winning elections denying it and fighting healthcare reform and everything else they do because they have enough of us with bullshit wedge issues. How many poor people vote GOP because of god, gays, racism and guns? They even have the gun and god freaks arguing IN FAVOR OF GLOBAL WARMING AND WAR and anything else they want to do. And how do they get their message out? The corporate media. Fox and Rush are the big 2. Wake up America. If you are not rich you are a N(#$*r to the Republicans.

How many stupid fucking union workers in Michigan didn't show up to vote or voted for Rick Snyder? You all deserve what you got. How many people won't show up these midterms? Fuck you all if you don't care about yourselves why should I?

Do you all know how the GOP gets away with denying human responsibility for Global Warming?

How much of the warming since the end of the LIA is human responsibility?
To the nearest 0.1 degrees?

Thanks!

Huh? All I know is I heard that if you add up all the co2 or sulfur that human's are putting out every day we are putting up more pollution co2 or sulfer than all the volcano's now.

We need to exterminate global warming deniers like we did back in Salem to the crazy witches. If they burn they weren't republicans and if they don't they are witches. Either way they dumb. Or maybe Jesus will do as predicted and come take them home.

But you know what the funny thing is? When you can no longer deny GW, and that day was about a couple years ago, then you guys start arguing with us about the solution. Why do we even listen to you? Oh yea, because of the lobbyists who own our politicians. I forget.

All I know is I heard that if you add up all the co2 or sulfur that human's are putting out every day we are putting up more pollution co2 or sulfer than all the volcano's now.

It's true, it takes a lot of energy to run an advanced society.

We need to exterminate global warming deniers like we did back in Salem to the crazy witches.

Da, kill the greedy kulaks, eh comrade?

But you know what the funny thing is?

Your idiocy.

When you can no longer deny GW

Why would I deny it? Without global warming, my back yard in Chicago would be buried under a mile of ice.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And stuff like this is why everybody can see that you're a retard, shitweasel.

Pointing out that both CO2 and water vapor are greenhouse gases doesn't magically make CO2 not a greenhouse gas. While it is true that there is more water vapor in the atmosphere, it is also true that because CO2 accumulates in the atmosphere and water vapor doesn't, increased CO2 is the forcing that causes temperature increases while water vapor is the feedback that responds to higher temperatures and amplifies the warming produced by the CO2.

I posted the opinion of a meteorologist that explained it better than I could. Since you weren't able to process the info, he said said CO2s were insignificant in warming the atmosphere. Sorry.

You are sorry, that's for sure.

The actual scientists who study all of the different aspects of the climate and atmospheric physics are virtually unamamous in saying that CO2 is a powerful greenhouse gas and that the 43% increase that mankind has caused is heating the planet. You find a wacko rightwing meteorologist from Texas who disagrees with the rest of the scientific community and who also has this oh-so-scientific material on his website.

DOES GOD CONTROL THE WEATHER?

METEOROLOGIST JEFF HABY

A. Possible reasons that God does control the weather:

1. An all knowing being must know how to control the weather. Since the weather is there He must be controlling it.

2. It is possible that there are extra dimensions in which the weather can be controlled but we can not tell. It is impossible to have a perfect analysis and perfect atmospheric model in our dimension but perhaps there are other dimensions this can be done from.

3. If God can control any other aspect of our lives then it must be possible that He can control the weather.

4. Since there is existence that we sense, then there is an ultimate reason for this existence (a creator). An entity with that power will have the power to control the weather.

the 43% increase that mankind has caused is heating the planet.

What's the average global temperature now? How do you know?

What would it be if we had never used fossil fuels? How do you know?

Thanks in advance. Please show all your work.

 

[westwall]

Unlike you, reality defines my worldview. You seem to think things work in the other direction.

Then why is reality not supporting your theory

 

[westwall]

How much should you spend to prevent having to relocate several hundred million people?

How much should you spend to prevent a billion people from running short on drinking water?

How much should you spend to prevent a billion people from going hungry?

Why would we have to relocate anyone?

How long do you think people can survive in deserts without water and food?

Ask the Bedouin, they've been doing it for centuries.....hell, millennia.

 

[westwall]

And stuff like this is why everybody can see that you're a retard, shitweasel.

Pointing out that both CO2 and water vapor are greenhouse gases doesn't magically make CO2 not a greenhouse gas. While it is true that there is more water vapor in the atmosphere, it is also true that because CO2 accumulates in the atmosphere and water vapor doesn't, increased CO2 is the forcing that causes temperature increases while water vapor is the feedback that responds to higher temperatures and amplifies the warming produced by the CO2.

I posted the opinion of a meteorologist that explained it better than I could. Since you weren't able to process the info, he said said CO2s were insignificant in warming the atmosphere. Sorry.

You posted the opinion of Jeff Haby, a conservative broadcast meteorologist, not a climate scientist. Next.

Well known charlatans like Jean Dixon have superior predictive rates than your "climatologists". Next.

 

[westwall]

What do you think will be the climatic response of significantly reducing the 30 billion tons of CO2 we release into the atmosphere each year? Will it happen suddenly, or gradually over many years? And if it is not suddenly, does that mean it is not worth it to our children and grandchildren to do? It took decades to reach the point we are at today. It will take many more decades to reverse the damage. To my mind, doing nothing is not an option.

What do you think will be the climatic response of significantly reducing the 30 billion tons of CO2 we release into the atmosphere each year?

When will that number be even slightly reduced?
How many trillions does the US have to spend to make up for next years increase from China and India?

And if it is not suddenly, does that mean it is not worth it to our children and grandchildren to do?

It is not worth it to our children and grandchildren if we ruin our economy and go ever deeper into debt for an unmeasureable decrease in future temperatures.

If we don't go green, the only solution for the planet is the either full out or near extinction of man. This planet will turn back into paradise if there are only a few million humans still alive all across the globe.

Think about the bears, cougars, deer, bison, wolves, fish, birds, etc. This planet will turn back into paradise when the masses are all gone. I wish I had a big underground fortress so I could survive it and live in it. A bunch of distilled water and canned goods. I would loot homes for their can goods. I'd fish. I'd hunt with all the guns my fellow Americans left behind. I am grateful for them because I don't know how to make a gun, forge steel, make a telephone. Hell I probably couldn't even make a fire without human flint rocks or magnifying glass or a lighter.

I can't wait to see Planet of the Apes. I bet it was nice after they got rid of humans. I root for the apes. Did you see the preview? Their advantage is they don't need electricity, fire, shelter, light, guns.

And the progressive environazi bares his soul for all to see. Yes, kill a few billion people and all will be well!

 

[RollingThunder]

How long do you think people can survive in deserts without water and food?

Ask the Bedouin, they've been doing it for centuries.....hell, millennia.

Soooo insane!!!

So the "Bedouin" have been living "without food and water" for millennia, eh walleyed? LOLOL. If you're not already in an insane asylum, you should be, since you are so out of touch with reality.

In the real world, that you and the other denier cultists have obviously gotten a divorce from, this is what is really happening....

Food and Water Shortages May Prove Major Risks of Climate Change
Poor people will suffer the most, unless the world exploits vanishing opportunities to adapt
Scientific American
By David Biello
Mar 30, 2014
The rich play with fire and the poor get burned. That sums up a report issued March 31 by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) about the worsening risks of climate change. Yet even rich nations will face serious challenges. "Nobody on this planet is going to be untouched by climate change," said IPCC chair Rajendra Pachauri at a press conference releasing the report in Yokohama, Japan.

According to Pachauri and the hundreds of scientists who prepared the report, climate change is no longer something that will happen in the future. It is already here, and it is already impacting people on all seven continents and seven seas. The world now has a different climate than it had only a few decades ago, thanks to fossil fuel burning, forest clearing and other human activities.

As a result, the need for nations everywhere to adapt is already here, according to the report of the second team of IPCC scientists (known as Working Group II), who assessed more than 12,000 scientific papers to deliver an authoritative consensus on the impacts of climate change, the vulnerabilities of society and the natural world, as well as how we might adapt to a changed climate. "We see impacts from the equators to the poles and the coast to the mountains," noted biologist Christopher Field of Stanford University, co-chair of Working Group II at the press event.

The opportunity to prevent catastrophic global warming has not disappeared, even if the world has burned through half the fossil fuels it can, according to the first team of IPCC scientists who assessed the fundamental physics of climate change and released their report in September. But the world must drop its carbon habit soon. Since 1880, 531 gigatons of carbon have been emitted, and the IPCC scientists estimate that no more than 800 gigatons should be emitted for a better-than-even chance of keeping global warming below 2 degrees Celsius. If warming rises beyond that threshold, the scientists say, serious harm will be done to ecosystems and societies everywhere. The more warming, the greater the risk of "severe, pervasive and irreversible impacts," the new report states.

Unfortunately, in just the time between this report and the last iteration in 2007, climate change has grown 40 percent stronger thanks to ever increasing emissions of greenhouse gases. Already, the world has warmed 0.85 degree C since 1880. Global warming is now "unequivocal" and concentrations of CO2 have reached levels "unprecedented in at least the last 800,000 years." Or as Michel Jarraud, secretary-general of the World Meteorological Organzation put it at the press conference: "Ignorance is no longer an excuse. We know."

In that light, climate change becomes a risk management proposition, particularly given the uncertainty about exactly how bad impacts might become and when. The worst risks include sea level rise for small islands and coasts, flooding, the breakdown of infrastructure in the face of extreme weather, loss of livelihoods for farmers and fishers, food insecurity and heat-wave deaths. Expect a big demand for energy for air conditioning as the 21st century continues.

Some of these impacts are already here, from a meltdown of polar ice and glaciers everywhere to higher rates of sea level rise than the IPCC predicted in the past. Crops, such as wheat and maize (corn), have been hurt more by heat waves and drought than helped by higher levels of CO2, which can sometimes permit more luxuriant plant growth. Some crop yields in places like northern Europe and southeastern South America where drought has not set in have actually improved.

The bad outweighs the good to date. Reductions in yields of wheat and maize have already had an impact on food prices, and some argue on the stability of nations as well. Extreme weather—from floods to wildfires—continues to take an increasing toll, and climate change will likely exacerbate existing health problems such as malaria and heat stroke. The biggest impact may prove to be changes to the availability of fresh water. All of these hazards, laid out in detail in the new report, afflict the poorest the most, particularly subsistence farmers throughout the world who depend on consistent rains for adequate food. "They are threatened in their very existence," Pachauri argued at the press conference.

Climate change will also raise the risk of conflict, whether civil war or fights between nation states over critical resources or boundaries, according to the new report. In short, climate change will make remedying existing poverty that much harder.

Opportunities still exist for adaptation, however. Communities, cities, states and nations have begun to adapt, whether improved water management in San Diego, Calif., or planting mangroves to stabilize seashores in the island nation of Tuvalu. Cimate change can be ameliorated both by cutting back on the pollution that causes it as well as by improving society to decrease vulnerability.

Future adaptation may include, for the poorest people, moving, either voluntarily or when displaced by disaster. And how societies choose to adapt will be vital as certain choices—geoengineering with artificial volcanoes or building sea walls, for example—may prove maladaptive in the long term.

The natural world has had to adapt as well, with animals and even plants moving or shifting seasonal behaviors or migration. Some marine animals have shifted their range by as much as 400 kilometers in pursuit of equally cold climes, and ocean acidification is accelerating. As the climate continues to change, species will face even greater challenges, and many may go extinct as global warming tips them into disaster when paired with other threats such as habitat loss. Entire ecosystems will be transformed, like the march of shrubs into the former tundra of Siberia and North America. "We may already be on the threshold or over the threshold of the sixth mass extinction in earth's history," Field noted.

Undercutting the optimism for ongoing adaptation is the fact that the IPCC has consistently underestimated the speed and scale of climate change. Continuing to improve the data about impacts is an ongoing challenge for the scientific community. And, in the larger view, as co-chair Field put it in his speech to open the session finalizing the new report: "Dealing effectively with climate change is one of the defining challenges of the 21st century."

 

[Iceweasel]

And stuff like this is why everybody can see that you're a retard, shitweasel.

Pointing out that both CO2 and water vapor are greenhouse gases doesn't magically make CO2 not a greenhouse gas. While it is true that there is more water vapor in the atmosphere, it is also true that because CO2 accumulates in the atmosphere and water vapor doesn't, increased CO2 is the forcing that causes temperature increases while water vapor is the feedback that responds to higher temperatures and amplifies the warming produced by the CO2.

I posted the opinion of a meteorologist that explained it better than I could. Since you weren't able to process the info, he said said CO2s were insignificant in warming the atmosphere. Sorry.

You posted the opinion of Jeff Haby, a conservative broadcast meteorologist, not a climate scientist. Next.

What are your credentials?

Meteorologist - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Definition of METEOROLOGY
1
: a science that deals with the atmosphere and its phenomena and especially with weather and weather forecasting



NEXT.

 

[Iceweasel]

The actual scientists who study all of the different aspects of the climate and atmospheric physics are virtually unamamous in saying that CO2 is a powerful greenhouse gas and that the 43% increase that mankind has caused is heating the planet.

Bullshit.

 

[Iceweasel]

You posted the opinion of Jeff Haby, a conservative broadcast meteorologist, not a climate scientist. Next.

Well known charlatans like Jean Dixon have superior predictive rates than your "climatologists". Next.

A particularly fraudulent and insane denier cult myth that ignorant fools like walleyedretard have latched onto in desperation as their cult of reality denial sinks into the cesspit of failed, corporate-sponsored propaganda front-groups.

Wow, so much hate and vitriol wrapped up in such a dense package. That takes talent!

Sorta like telling an Imam that Muhammad was a fraud and a pedophile.

 

[orogenicman]

I posted the opinion of a meteorologist that explained it better than I could. Since you weren't able to process the info, he said said CO2s were insignificant in warming the atmosphere. Sorry.

You posted the opinion of Jeff Haby, a conservative broadcast meteorologist, not a climate scientist. Next.

What are your credentials?

Meteorologist - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Definition of METEOROLOGY
1
: a science that deals with the atmosphere and its phenomena and especially with weather and weather forecasting



NEXT.

Right. If I want the weather forecast, I'll give him a call. If I need brain surgery, I'll call a neurosurgeon. If I want to know something about climate, I'll consult a climatologist. You people seem to think if a person has some random degree, say, in horticulture, that makes them an expert in some other random discipline, say, atomic energy. If only life worked that way, we'd all be living the conservative 1950 dream portrayed on black and white television.

 

[orogenicman]

I posted the opinion of a meteorologist that explained it better than I could. Since you weren't able to process the info, he said said CO2s were insignificant in warming the atmosphere. Sorry.

You posted the opinion of Jeff Haby, a conservative broadcast meteorologist, not a climate scientist. Next.

Well known charlatans like Jean Dixon have superior predictive rates than your "climatologists". Next.

That's great. I can't wait for you to offer up her next 'prediction' as your denial evidence. That will be loads of fun.

 

[orogenicman]

Why would we have to relocate anyone?

How long do you think people can survive in deserts without water and food?

Ask the Bedouin, they've been doing it for centuries.....hell, millennia.

No sir, they have not been living without food and water for centuries, much less for millenia, you friggin moron. That said, the fact that you apparently believe that kind of lifestyle to be the ultimate goal of modern civilization tells me everything I need to know about your level of intelligence (don't worry, we can all go live as camel herders in Utah if we have to). Congratulations.