This is why there’s been so much extreme rainfall and flooding in the U.S.

[HikerGuy83]

I'm sure this will come as a blow to your ego, but whether the maga cult thinks I have credibility isn't something I care about.

That's good to know.

We'd hate to think you'd get your feelings hurt because we think your credibility is measured in angstroms.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Got it. Computers bad.

ding, besides being ignorant on the basic science, he doesn't know much about computers or how they work. I suspect, the term "modeling" gets him slobbering over Victoria Secrets pictures.

 

[HikerGuy83]

I’m retired like you. Doing a massive kitchen remodel. Knocking out walls. Complete gut job. Wolf and Subzero appliances. I have 147 scores in GHIN in 2025. You should have my life.

Awesome !!!

 

[HikerGuy83]

MSN

While there are varying meteorological forces behind this month’s extreme rainfall, what has connected them all is significant amounts of atmospheric moisture pulsing above the country.

It is flowing from abnormally warm oceans across the Northern Hemisphere that are likely to stretch elevated flood risks into August, data shows — perhaps into record territory. The conditions are allowing plumes of tropical moisture to stretch into middle latitudes and stagnate there, sending flood risks surging and exemplifying a critical consequence of rising global temperatures that researchers have been predicting and tracking for decades.

Scientist have been warning for decades about climate change. As oceans warm, the added moisture in the atmosphere will lead to more super storms. The repub party has called it lies and propped up their "experts" to refute the science. We can expect to see extreme weather episodes going forward and that will lead to more loss of life and property. Insurance rates are already skyrocketing in parts of the country where these weather extremes are prevalent. We may be too late to change course.

That's what you get for thinking that 100 years is actual history on a planet that has been circling the sun for hundreds of thousands of years.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Tell that to Venus — without its CO₂-rich atmosphere, it would be about -40°C instead of 462°C. That’s what CO₂ does. Satellite and balloon data don’t disprove this — they confirm it.

That's hysterical. Venus is closer to the sun where the radiant heat alone bakes it. Without it's 97% CO2 (versus earth's 400 PPM......massive difference), the average surface temp would be 112 F.

Next time post a link or something.

https://oggardenonline.com/imagine-venus-in-the-absence-of-the-greenhouse-effect.html

 

[EMH]

That's hysterical. Venus is closer to the sun where the radiant heat alone bakes it. Without it's 97% CO2 (versus earth's 400 PPM......massive difference), the average surface temp would be 112 F.

Next time post a link or something.

https://oggardenonline.com/imagine-venus-in-the-absence-of-the-greenhouse-effect.html

The type of gas doesn't make beans of difference. All forms of gas absorb some part of EM. IR is a particularly weak form of EM and amount of CO2 in atmosphere really doesn't matter. The number of gas molecules in total, that matters, the thicker the warmer...

 

[BULLDOG]

You don’t know anything about science.

I never said I don't know anything about science. I have a passing knowledge about things that most share. I'm a pretty fair programmer, I have a working knowledge of electronics, mostly in analog circuitry, Digital has become as much about programming as it is about current and resistance or capacitance. I own and run an alcohol distillation still with batch run and continuous run components. There were a few years that I ran drilling mud. and understand why mud weight is critical at depth, but a non issue for spud mud, why Ph is important and how to regulate it, I'm pretty fair at estimating annular slip velocity , but always calculated it to be sure. I have a general idea about how science works. Perhaps better than some people, but what I don't have is knowledge of climate science that can only be gained through years of study, training and working in that field. I also don't have the arrogance to believe reading a few web sites could possibly qualify anyone to disprove conclusions made by real climate scientists.

 

[BULLDOG]

As soon as you can tell us what she is saying, we'll consider you informed and we'll let you know.

Otherwise, shove off.

I'm not sure your definition of informed matters to me.

 

[BULLDOG]

The mass of what you've accomplished would be measured in single digit nanograms.

And you know how much I value your opinion.

 

[HikerGuy83]

I'm not sure your definition of informed matters to me.

I am pretty sure you have no idea of what it means to be informed. And yet you seem to want to cast shade on people who are much more informed, clearly much smarter, and better at science than you.

How's the view from under the skits of the corrupt "climate scientists"? It's all you've got.

 

[HikerGuy83]

And you know how much I value your opinion.

I've never thought about it and never will.

 

[HikerGuy83]

I also don't have the arrogance to believe reading a few web sites could possibly qualify anyone to disprove conclusions made by real climate scientists.

The people you are up against are clearly much more informed than that. First, there is basic thermo and chemistry. Then there is the ability to synthesize that information into a model or use it to evaluate existing models.

Several here have done good job at that. You seem clueless.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Well, as JimH52, the idiot is going to find out.....things are happening that he'll never stop.

He can stand on the street corner and cry like it's the end of the world and everyone else who have been subjected to this garbage for so long will do what they do best....ignore him.

Get your water wings Jimmy. And get some for bulldog too. He strikes me as someone who never learned to swim.

 

[ding]

Tell that to Venus — without its CO₂-rich atmosphere, it would be about -40°C instead of 462°C. That’s what CO₂ does. Satellite and balloon data don’t disprove this — they confirm it.

From simple physics calculations the direct radiative forcing for a doubling of CO2 is 1C on earth.

 

[ding]

I never said I don't know anything about science. I have a passing knowledge about things that most share. I'm a pretty fair programmer, I have a working knowledge of electronics, mostly in analog circuitry, Digital has become as much about programming as it is about current and resistance or capacitance. I own and run an alcohol distillation still with batch run and continuous run components. There were a few years that I ran drilling mud. and understand why mud weight is critical at depth, but a non issue for spud mud, why Ph is important and how to regulate it, I'm pretty fair at estimating annular slip velocity , but always calculated it to be sure. I have a general idea about how science works. Perhaps better than some people, but what I don't have is knowledge of climate science that can only be gained through years of study, training and working in that field. I also don't have the arrogance to believe reading a few web sites could possibly qualify anyone to disprove conclusions made by real climate scientists.

Like I said before, understanding the climate record using the empirical climate evidence of the geologic record isn’t hard.

 

[JimH52]

Nothing goofy about empirical evidence. Your belief that a keyboard warrior, such as yourself is better able to interpret that evidence and come to a more accurate interpretation than credentialed scientists working in the field is about as goofy as I have seen.

Magats take their lead from the Felon in Chief.

 

[ding]

Magats take their lead from the Felon in Chief.

How much warmer do you believe it will be by the end of the decade?

 

[ReinyDays]

... but what I don't have is knowledge of climate science that can only be gained through years of study, training and working in that field. I also don't have the arrogance to believe reading a few web sites could possibly qualify anyone to disprove conclusions made by real climate scientists.

I can certainly testify to "years of study and training", though I've never worked in the field ...

High school chemistry class introduces the "one molecule, one photon" principle ... do you remember that? ... that's the second mistake most people make, including your so-call expert journalists ... that alone refutes any claims of catastrophe ...

 

[ding]

High school chemistry class introduces the "one molecule, one photon" principle ...

The direct radiative forcing of CO2 which is valid and based upon simple physics.

I contend that the IPCC intentionally includes feedback instead of reporting feedback separately from the direct radiative forcing of CO2 because they know that 1C per doubling of CO2 is insignificant.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Magats take their lead from the Felon in Chief.

Given the quality of your posts (meaning lack of content, lack of supporting data, lack of a balanced approach), I'd say you are in NO position to comment on where people take their lead. Like BULLDOG and schmidlap, you show NO capability when it comes to the actual science and understanding.

People like ding and EMH, while at odds...both have a very good grasp of the concepts they push.

Take a lead from them and open a book instead of crawling up Al Gore's backside.