Time history of atmospheric carbon dioxide from 800,000 years to the present

[SSDD]

...and you have a lab experiment that shows how a doubling of CO2 will raise temperature?

What? No, you don't?

That's odd.

If it works as you theorize, why can't you show us how it works?

Seems like old rocks got his old rocks in a vice. Has cricket responding for him.

Hey old rocks, I'm here most any day, you give me the experiment that shows 120PPM increases temperatures, and I'll apologize to each and every one of you. But now, you are just an old rock!

Damn but you are gullible. That experiment, as with most experiments that claim to demonstrate the greenhouse effect does not demonstrate it at all. It is an excellent demonstration of the heat of compression. That experiment is easy enough to do yourself so try it and instead of plugging up the top of the bottles, do it with the bottles open. If the CO2 can expand out into the open atmosphere, rather than being held under pressure in the bottle, the temperatures inside the bottles will be identical.

What is disappointing is that a government agency claims that idiot experiment is an somehow proof that CO2 in the open atmosphere can cause warming. Again, ample proof of your ignorance and sufficient explanation as to how you were so easily duped.

 

[G.T.]

here's a cool one from MIT, Frank's superiors at: everything,

 

[G.T.]

Seems like old rocks got his old rocks in a vice. Has cricket responding for him.

Hey old rocks, I'm here most any day, you give me the experiment that shows 120PPM increases temperatures, and I'll apologize to each and every one of you. But now, you are just an old rock!

Damn but you are gullible. That experiment, as with most experiments that claim to demonstrate the greenhouse effect does not demonstrate it at all. It is an excellent demonstration of the heat of compression. That experiment is easy enough to do yourself so try it and instead of plugging up the top of the bottles, do it with the bottles open. If the CO2 can expand out into the open atmosphere, rather than being held under pressure in the bottle, the temperatures inside the bottles will be identical.

What is disappointing is that a government agency claims that idiot experiment is an somehow proof that CO2 in the open atmosphere can cause warming. Again, ample proof of your ignorance and sufficient explanation as to how you were so easily duped.

you're an idiot.

the bottle is capped to represent our atmosphere, my-fuggin-gaaawd your Neanderthals are dumb

 

[G.T.]

 

[G.T.]

 

[G.T.]

 

[SSDD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwtt51gvaJQ

Damn but you are gullible. That experiment, as with most experiments that claim to demonstrate the greenhouse effect does not demonstrate it at all. It is an excellent demonstration of the heat of compression. That experiment is easy enough to do yourself so try it and instead of plugging up the top of the bottles, do it with the bottles open. If the CO2 can expand out into the open atmosphere, rather than being held under pressure in the bottle, the temperatures inside the bottles will be identical.

What is disappointing is that a government agency claims that idiot experiment is an somehow proof that CO2 in the open atmosphere can cause warming. Again, ample proof of your ignorance and sufficient explanation as to how you were so easily duped.

you're an idiot.

the bottle is capped to represent our atmosphere, my-fuggin-gaaawd your Neanderthals are dumb

You are aware, aren't you, that there is a difference between a closed system and an open system? Exactly where should I look in the sky to see the cap? Matter and energy can enter and exit our atmosphere....in that experiment, matter can't leave the bottle which is why the CO2 builds up pressure and warms...see the ideal gas laws.

 

[jc456]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5GT0v0I

Knowing the argument is everything. In this video, they state they increase the CO2 up to 380PPM and during each increment, the temperature remained at 1% C above the one with the control. Remained is the big word here. Again, prove that 120PPM causes an increase in tempertature is the argument. We've already been throuh this one experiment it busts your theory.

 

[G.T.]

Damn but you are gullible. That experiment, as with most experiments that claim to demonstrate the greenhouse effect does not demonstrate it at all. It is an excellent demonstration of the heat of compression. That experiment is easy enough to do yourself so try it and instead of plugging up the top of the bottles, do it with the bottles open. If the CO2 can expand out into the open atmosphere, rather than being held under pressure in the bottle, the temperatures inside the bottles will be identical.

What is disappointing is that a government agency claims that idiot experiment is an somehow proof that CO2 in the open atmosphere can cause warming. Again, ample proof of your ignorance and sufficient explanation as to how you were so easily duped.

you're an idiot.

the bottle is capped to represent our atmosphere, my-fuggin-gaaawd your Neanderthals are dumb

You are aware, aren't you, that there is a difference between a closed system and an open system? Exactly where should I look in the sky to see the cap? Matter and energy can enter and exit our atmosphere....in that experiment, matter can't leave the bottle which is why the CO2 builds up pressure and warms...see the ideal gas laws.

c02 doesn't just freely leave the atmosphere dunce, hence the closed system. It takes close to 2 years.

 

[G.T.]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5GT0v0I

Knowing the argument is everything. In this video, they state they increase the CO2 up to 380PPM and during each increment, the temperature remained at 1% C above the one with the control. Remained is the big word here. Again, prove that 120PPM causes an increase in tempertature is the argument. We've already been throuh this one experiment it busts your theory.

watch it again dipshit

the experiment doesn't begin until they reach 380ppm

they don't then continue to increase the c02

jesus christ

 

[IlarMeilyr]

you're an idiot.

the bottle is capped to represent our atmosphere, my-fuggin-gaaawd your Neanderthals are dumb

You are aware, aren't you, that there is a difference between a closed system and an open system? Exactly where should I look in the sky to see the cap? Matter and energy can enter and exit our atmosphere....in that experiment, matter can't leave the bottle which is why the CO2 builds up pressure and warms...see the ideal gas laws.

c02 doesn't just freely leave the atmosphere dunce, hence the closed system. It takes close to 2 years.

But it does get incorporated into those big wet things we like to call oceans and seas.

How long does it take to get absorbed into the liquids and solids of planet Earth? What effect does this have on the overall system? What time periods are involved? The oceans also release much CO2, more-so under certain specific conditions. What is the difference in the rates of absorption versus the rate of release by the Oceans of CO2?

Gravity may sort of kind of act a little bit like the cap on a bottle, but the analogy is poor. What if the bottle material itself absorbed CO2?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Oceans May Absorb More Carbon Dioxide - Scientific American

 

[mamooth]

Given that the oceans won't absorb 120 ppm in a few minutes, all of that whining has jack to do with the experiments. The reasons denier use to explain why the experiments didn't actually show what they showed keep getting every more desperate.

 

[G.T.]

Not even sure what oceans absorbing c02 has to do with ATMOSPHERIC c02 and its measured increase since the ind. Revolution

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Given that the oceans won't absorb 120 ppm in a few minutes, all of that whining has jack to do with the experiments. The reasons denier use to explain why the experiments didn't actually show what they showed keep getting every more desperate.

manboob doesn't deny that oceans will absorb much CO2, but pretends that it has to all be accomplished in "minutes."

Where did that urgent time requirement come from?

A warming planet may be expected to yield greater microbial life in the oceans. The planktons and so forth gobble up CO2.

Some studies show that about half of all of human-kinds CO2 emissions since the industrial revolution HAVE been absorbed by the oceans.

Sometimes the oceans release the stuff, sometimes it absorbs the stuff.

It's almost like the basis for a system of sorts.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Not even sure what oceans absorbing c02 has to do with ATMOSPHERIC c02 and its measured increase since the ind. Revolution

That's right. You aren't sure. You are, in fact, fairly clueless.

 

[mamooth]

manboob doesn't deny that oceans will absorb much CO2, but pretends that it has to all be accomplished in "minutes."

Where did that urgent time requirement come from?

How long it takes to run the experiment. Remember the experiment, the topic under discussion?

Some studies show that about half of all of human-kinds CO2 emissions since the industrial revolution HAVE been absorbed by the oceans.

Is there any point to your rambling?

Sometimes the oceans release the stuff, sometimes it absorbs the stuff.

It's almost like the basis for a system of sorts.

Oh, that's your point. You're pushing the Gaian hypothesis, the self-regulating earth. Prior to deniers embracing so fervently, you only saw it coming from the most addleheaded hippie treehugger types.

 

[G.T.]

I think its fairly clear who is clueless. The side who thinks a world wide conspiracy of fake science is taking place and their misnomer data proves the science wrong!!

No, clowns.

Also if the water were able to absorb some of that bottles c02 that quicky....and the temperature STILL increased? What do ya reckon that derp hickup....means? Derp.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

I think its fairly clear who is clueless.

So you AGREE that you are clueless? Because that is increasingly clear.

The side who thinks a world wide conspiracy of fake science is taking place and their misnomer data proves the science wrong!!

No, silly lad. The contention of all of those who question your FAITH is that the "science" you purport to "show" is not actual science.

No, clowns.

No, said the clown. About what? About your false claim about what your opponents contend?

Also if the water were able to absorb some of that bottles c02 that quicky....and the temperature STILL increased? What do ya reckon that derp hickup....means? Derp.

Well, Derpy, you git, it would LIKELY mean that the bottle is not a good analog for the planet anymore than that a bottle cop is a good analog for the gravity that keeps our atmosphere from sliding off into the vacuum of space.

There is such a thing as a greenhouse effect. We see it in greenhouses all the time.

It's nowhere near established that our planet's atmospheric and climatic systems act like the glass walls of a greenhouse, however.

 

[Crick]

Idiot. Complete idiot.