Why we should listen to the 97%

[Toddsterpatriot]

Show us your evidence that we aren't headed to 800 ppm.

You mean we might reach the 800 ppm level that gave the planet a mean temperature of 14 C in the Carboniferous?

Don't you have any answers at all? Just questions.

Those who know have answers. Those who don't have only questions.

Your answer was, higher CO2 will make the planet "inhospitable to life", like it was during the Carboniferous.
The Carboniferous, with the same mean temp as today, with double the CO2.
Quick, we must spend tens of trillions, to avoid the same temperature.

 

[freedombecki]

You mean we might reach the 800 ppm level that gave the planet a mean temperature of 14 C in the Carboniferous?

Don't you have any answers at all? Just questions.

Those who know have answers. Those who don't have only questions.

Your answer was, higher CO2 will make the planet "inhospitable to life", like it was during the Carboniferous.
The Carboniferous, with the same mean temp as today, with double the CO2.
Quick, we must spend tens of trillions, to avoid the same temperature.

 

[Foxfyre]

Look up Carboniferous Period. You'll be amazed at how much you don't know.

Are you truly suggesting that the carboniferous period was inhospitable to life? Do you even have a clue where coal and oil and natural gas comes from? Do you honestly think it materialized out of the CO2 in the atmosphere? Good grief, the public school system is worse than I thought.

'' Do you honestly think it materialized out of the CO2 in the atmosphere?''

What do you think plants and animals are made of?

Well since I actually stayed awake in biology class, a living animal cell is composed of mostly Oxygen, Nitrogen, Carbon, Hydrogen, and Calcium with lesser amounts of Sodium, Magnesium, Phosphorus, Sulfur, Chlorine, and Potassium and other trace elements..

A human being cannot survive more than six minutes breathing pure carbon dioxide but can survive sometimes for days breathing pure oxygen. So it is good that the plants utilize the tiny percentage of CO2 in our atmosphere and breath out oxygen for the rest of us to use.

The average atmosphere of the Earth contains: Nitrogen (78%); Oxygen (21%); Argon (0.94%); Carbon dioxide (0.04%).

Our planet has mostly been much hotter and more humid than we know it to be today, and with far more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than exists today. Yet plant and animal life flourished through all that. The notable exception is 300,000,000 years ago during the late Carboniferous Period, which resembles our own climate and atmosphere like no other.

The early carboniferous period was essentially one season year round, but by the end of the carboniferous period--before human activity had any effect on the Earth or its climate--conditions had changed so that the Earth was experiencing different seasons. At that time CO2 levels were believed to be about 1500 ppm parts per million, roughly comparable to CO2 levels today.

So what greatly increased CO2 before human activity? What reduced CO2 before human activity? Maybe the Earth will do what the Earth has always done since its creation in the universe and there isn't a hell of lot any of us can do about it? Certainly something to consider before we hand over our liberties, options, choices, and opportunities to people who don't like us very much and who likely won't have our best interest at heart as they exercise what very well may be bogus science.

 

[westwall]

Show us the science that says that atmospheric GHGs do not warm the planet.

Show us the science that says GHG's other than water vapor do....

GHGs are DEFINED as compounds that absorb longwave EM. DEFINED.

When are you going to stop asking and start showing any evidence at all that of what you want to be true, is?????

Defined? How so? There has been no demonstration in a laboratory how GHG's actually work. The best guess as to how they work is as a blanket (H2O vapor) acting like a blanket to PREVENT heat being lost to the night. Take a look at the temperature swings of planets who are gifted with exo-atmospheres only. Four hundred plus degree swings are the NORM. The Earth has a dense (though nowhere near as dense as Venus, thankfully) blanket that prevents the heat loss at night.

I have yet to see a compelling experiment that shows GHG's actually warm anything...

 

[westwall]

"IMO, the goal of the IPCC is not and has never been to reduce greenhouse emissions or the level of GHG in the atmosphere"

You are absolutely right. It's not possible to reduce the GHGs that are already in the atmosphere. They might over hundreds of years decline naturally but mankind will play no role in that.

The goal of the IPCC is to develop the scientific understanding of the impact to climate of GHGs at the current level and any possible predictable future levels. That's it. The whole story.

Nobody knows yet what the current level will bring about in terms of AGW, mostly because the positive feedbacks are still unfolding. And will for decades.

We know the rate at which the GHG concentrations are rising, but we don't know yet how mankind will respond to the threat.

We do know one thing though. When all of the carbon that's been sequestered in fossil fuels was last in the atmosphere, the climate was inhospitable to life.

So, what are the choices? We know without doubt that we will have to convert to sustainable energy someday. If we wait as long as possible to start that we will have put all of the sequestered carbon back where it was when the climate was inhospitable to life.

What if we could do what has to be done someday, sooner. Could we leave some of that problematic carbon sequestered where it is? You betcha. But what consequences would that save us. We got science to answer that and we have the IPCC to work the science.

Is there really any alternative to the path that we're on?

When all of the carbon that's been sequestered in fossil fuels was last in the atmosphere, the climate was inhospitable to life.

Before plants sequestered the carbon as coal and oil, the climate was "inhospitable to life"?

Damn, do you realize how stupid you sound?

Look up Carboniferous Period. You'll be amazed at how much you don't know.

Indeed. You demonstrate how positively ignorant you truly are.


"In addition to having the ideal conditions for the formation of coal, several major biological, geological, and climatic events occurred during this time. Biologically, we see one of the greatest evolutionary innovations of the Carboniferous: the amniote egg, which allowed for the further exploitation of the land by certain tetrapods. It gave the ancestors of birds, mammals, and reptiles the ability to lay their eggs on land without fear of desiccation. Geologically, the Late Carboniferous collision of Laurasia (present-day Europe, Asia, and North America) into Gondwana (present-day Africa, South America, Antarctica, Australia, and India) produced the Appalachian Mountain belt of eastern North America and the Hercynian Mountains in the United Kingdom. A further collision of Siberia and eastern Europe created the Ural Mountains of Russia. And climatically, there was a trend towards mild temperatures during the Carboniferous, as evidenced by the decrease in lycopods and large insects, and an increase in the number of tree ferns.

The stratigraphy of the Mississippian can be easily distinguished from that of the Pennsylvanian. The Mississippian environment of North America was heavily marine, with seas covering parts of the continent. As a result, most Mississippian rocks are limestone, which are composed of the remains of crinoids, lime-encrusted green algae, or calcium carbonate shaped by waves. The North American Pennsylvanian environment was alternately terrestrial and marine, with the transgression and regression of the seas caused by glaciation. These environmental conditions, with the vast amount of plant material provided by the extensive coal forests, allowed for the formation of coal. Plant material did not decay when the seas covered them, and pressure and heat eventually built up over millions of years to transform the plant material to coal."


The Carboniferous Period

 

[westwall]

Those who know have answers. Those who don't have only questions.

Life owns earth.

Humanity is the only life that is enabled to think and plan and do beyond merely survival issues.

Humanity can choose among various futures, and create them, for good or bad.

Climate is an essential component of all of those futures and, to some degree, given our capabilities, we can influence what's coming.

Humanity makes those joint decisions through political processes. Humanity bases those joint decisions on knowledge.

In the case of climate, that knowledge comes from the IPCC.

It is really that simple.

Yes, it really is that simple. Mankind is the first organism on this planet to have the ability to protect it from an exo atmospheric assault. Asteroid strikes are the ONLY thing that we know of that can absolutely end life on this planet as they have almost done on at least two occasions.

You idiots whistle Dixie and ignore the very real threat from above while trying to pass legislation who's only effect will be to enrich rich people and take liberty away from poor people.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJCfB9OnoGw]Meteorite hits central Russia - Video Collection (16 minutes) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[PMZ]

Are you truly suggesting that the carboniferous period was inhospitable to life? Do you even have a clue where coal and oil and natural gas comes from? Do you honestly think it materialized out of the CO2 in the atmosphere? Good grief, the public school system is worse than I thought.

'' Do you honestly think it materialized out of the CO2 in the atmosphere?''

What do you think plants and animals are made of?

Well since I actually stayed awake in biology class, a living animal cell is composed of mostly Oxygen, Nitrogen, Carbon, Hydrogen, and Calcium with lesser amounts of Sodium, Magnesium, Phosphorus, Sulfur, Chlorine, and Potassium and other trace elements..

A human being cannot survive more than six minutes breathing pure carbon dioxide but can survive sometimes for days breathing pure oxygen. So it is good that the plants utilize the tiny percentage of CO2 in our atmosphere and breath out oxygen for the rest of us to use.

The average atmosphere of the Earth contains: Nitrogen (78%); Oxygen (21%); Argon (0.94%); Carbon dioxide (0.04%).

Our planet has mostly been much hotter and more humid than we know it to be today, and with far more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than exists today. Yet plant and animal life flourished through all that. The notable exception is 300,000,000 years ago during the late Carboniferous Period, which resembles our own climate and atmosphere like no other.

The early carboniferous period was essentially one season year round, but by the end of the coniferous period--before human activity had any effect on the Earth or its climate--conditions had changed so that the Earth was experiencing different seasons. At that time CO2 levels were believed to be about 1500 ppm parts per million, roughly comparable to CO2 levels today.

So what greatly increased CO2 before human activity? What reduced CO2 before human activity? Maybe the Earth will do what the Earth has always done since its creation in the universe and there isn't a hell of lot any of us can do about it? Certainly something to consider before we hand over our liberties, options, choices, and opportunities to people who don't like us very much and who likely won't have our best interest at heart as they exercise what very well may be bogus science.

I thanked you for stating the conservative case so clearly. But before I respond, let me ask you, are you talking about AGW or something else?

 

[Foxfyre]

'' Do you honestly think it materialized out of the CO2 in the atmosphere?''

What do you think plants and animals are made of?

Well since I actually stayed awake in biology class, a living animal cell is composed of mostly Oxygen, Nitrogen, Carbon, Hydrogen, and Calcium with lesser amounts of Sodium, Magnesium, Phosphorus, Sulfur, Chlorine, and Potassium and other trace elements..

A human being cannot survive more than six minutes breathing pure carbon dioxide but can survive sometimes for days breathing pure oxygen. So it is good that the plants utilize the tiny percentage of CO2 in our atmosphere and breath out oxygen for the rest of us to use.

The average atmosphere of the Earth contains: Nitrogen (78%); Oxygen (21%); Argon (0.94%); Carbon dioxide (0.04%).

Our planet has mostly been much hotter and more humid than we know it to be today, and with far more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than exists today. Yet plant and animal life flourished through all that. The notable exception is 300,000,000 years ago during the late Carboniferous Period, which resembles our own climate and atmosphere like no other.

The early carboniferous period was essentially one season year round, but by the end of the coniferous period--before human activity had any effect on the Earth or its climate--conditions had changed so that the Earth was experiencing different seasons. At that time CO2 levels were believed to be about 1500 ppm parts per million, roughly comparable to CO2 levels today.

So what greatly increased CO2 before human activity? What reduced CO2 before human activity? Maybe the Earth will do what the Earth has always done since its creation in the universe and there isn't a hell of lot any of us can do about it? Certainly something to consider before we hand over our liberties, options, choices, and opportunities to people who don't like us very much and who likely won't have our best interest at heart as they exercise what very well may be bogus science.

I thanked you for stating the conservative case so clearly. But before I respond, let me ask you, are you talking about AGW or something else?

The conservative case? Surely you jest. The scientific commentary is basic 7th grade science. (Or it used to be before our education system was trashed in favor of sociopolitical liberalism.) The political commentary is just plain common sense regardless of ones sociopolitical ideology.

The thread is about AGW and I do try to stay on topic as much as possible. But 7th grade science AND common sense are rather important components of addressing a subject like AGW, don't you think?

 

[flacaltenn]

Are you truly suggesting that the carboniferous period was inhospitable to life? Do you even have a clue where coal and oil and natural gas comes from? Do you honestly think it materialized out of the CO2 in the atmosphere? Good grief, the public school system is worse than I thought.

'' Do you honestly think it materialized out of the CO2 in the atmosphere?''

What do you think plants and animals are made of?

Well since I actually stayed awake in biology class, a living animal cell is composed of mostly Oxygen, Nitrogen, Carbon, Hydrogen, and Calcium with lesser amounts of Sodium, Magnesium, Phosphorus, Sulfur, Chlorine, and Potassium and other trace elements..

A human being cannot survive more than six minutes breathing pure carbon dioxide but can survive sometimes for days breathing pure oxygen. So it is good that the plants utilize the tiny percentage of CO2 in our atmosphere and breath out oxygen for the rest of us to use.

The average atmosphere of the Earth contains: Nitrogen (78%); Oxygen (21%); Argon (0.94%); Carbon dioxide (0.04%).

Our planet has mostly been much hotter and more humid than we know it to be today, and with far more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than exists today. Yet plant and animal life flourished through all that. The notable exception is 300,000,000 years ago during the late Carboniferous Period, which resembles our own climate and atmosphere like no other.

The early carboniferous period was essentially one season year round, but by the end of the carboniferous period--before human activity had any effect on the Earth or its climate--conditions had changed so that the Earth was experiencing different seasons. At that time CO2 levels were believed to be about 1500 ppm parts per million, roughly comparable to CO2 levels today.

So what greatly increased CO2 before human activity? What reduced CO2 before human activity? Maybe the Earth will do what the Earth has always done since its creation in the universe and there isn't a hell of lot any of us can do about it? Certainly something to consider before we hand over our liberties, options, choices, and opportunities to people who don't like us very much and who likely won't have our best interest at heart as they exercise what very well may be bogus science.

I agree with your "risk-opportunity" assessment..

1500ppm is about FOUR times what we measure today.. In the IPCC wildest dreams, 1000ppm would be close to DoomsDay.

Jumping to prehistoric conclusions about CO2 without controlling for water vapor is also not advisable.. THere is only a small window of absorption in CO2 that is NOT fully covered by water vapor.. The estimates of its power as GHG are probably much over-rated. After all -- we're dealing with a VERY SMALL shift in radiative flux here. From something like 300W/m2 long wave out --- CO2 increase is said to have caused retention of about 1.5W/m2 of surface temp. forcing.

That's a SMALL number "for a blanket" and actually DEPENDS on KNOWING the exact CO-Concentrations of water vapor in any particular location.. When you are doing an estimates on a GLOBAL scale --- you could be off by a lot..

CO2 causes more warming in the desert than it does over the oceans for instance..
That'll make some warmer heads explode --- but it's a true statement.

 

[Foxfyre]

'' Do you honestly think it materialized out of the CO2 in the atmosphere?''

What do you think plants and animals are made of?

Well since I actually stayed awake in biology class, a living animal cell is composed of mostly Oxygen, Nitrogen, Carbon, Hydrogen, and Calcium with lesser amounts of Sodium, Magnesium, Phosphorus, Sulfur, Chlorine, and Potassium and other trace elements..

A human being cannot survive more than six minutes breathing pure carbon dioxide but can survive sometimes for days breathing pure oxygen. So it is good that the plants utilize the tiny percentage of CO2 in our atmosphere and breath out oxygen for the rest of us to use.

The average atmosphere of the Earth contains: Nitrogen (78%); Oxygen (21%); Argon (0.94%); Carbon dioxide (0.04%).

Our planet has mostly been much hotter and more humid than we know it to be today, and with far more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than exists today. Yet plant and animal life flourished through all that. The notable exception is 300,000,000 years ago during the late Carboniferous Period, which resembles our own climate and atmosphere like no other.

The early carboniferous period was essentially one season year round, but by the end of the carboniferous period--before human activity had any effect on the Earth or its climate--conditions had changed so that the Earth was experiencing different seasons. At that time CO2 levels were believed to be about 1500 ppm parts per million, roughly comparable to CO2 levels today.

So what greatly increased CO2 before human activity? What reduced CO2 before human activity? Maybe the Earth will do what the Earth has always done since its creation in the universe and there isn't a hell of lot any of us can do about it? Certainly something to consider before we hand over our liberties, options, choices, and opportunities to people who don't like us very much and who likely won't have our best interest at heart as they exercise what very well may be bogus science.

I agree with your "risk-opportunity" assessment..

1500ppm is about FOUR times what we measure today.. In the IPCC wildest dreams, 1000ppm would be close to DoomsDay.

Jumping to prehistoric conclusions about CO2 without controlling for water vapor is also not advisable.. THere is only a small window of absorption in CO2 that is NOT fully covered by water vapor.. The estimates of its power as GHG are probably much over-rated. After all -- we're dealing with a VERY SMALL shift in radiative flux here. From something like 300W/m2 long wave out --- CO2 increase is said to have caused retention of about 1.5W/m2 of surface temp. forcing.

That's a SMALL number "for a blanket" and actually DEPENDS on KNOWING the exact CO-Concentrations of water vapor in any particular location.. When you are doing an estimates on a GLOBAL scale --- you could be off by a lot..

CO2 causes more warming in the desert than it does over the oceans for instance..
That'll make some warmer heads explode --- but it's a true statement.

Well, it isn't my estimates. It is 7th Grade (pre-AGW religion) estimates based on the best guesses that scientists can make from the paleontological record that we have. But if it informs us of nothing else, it at least should provide some perspective to what we should be alarmed about and what we should accept as the normal climate shifts that have been occurring on Planet Earth since there has been a Planet Earth.

 

[PMZ]

Show us the science that says GHG's other than water vapor do....

GHGs are DEFINED as compounds that absorb longwave EM. DEFINED.

When are you going to stop asking and start showing any evidence at all that of what you want to be true, is?????

Defined? How so? There has been no demonstration in a laboratory how GHG's actually work. The best guess as to how they work is as a blanket (H2O vapor) acting like a blanket to PREVENT heat being lost to the night. Take a look at the temperature swings of planets who are gifted with exo-atmospheres only. Four hundred plus degree swings are the NORM. The Earth has a dense (though nowhere near as dense as Venus, thankfully) blanket that prevents the heat loss at night.

I have yet to see a compelling experiment that shows GHG's actually warm anything...

Well since I actually stayed awake in biology class, a living animal cell is composed of mostly Oxygen, Nitrogen, Carbon, Hydrogen, and Calcium with lesser amounts of Sodium, Magnesium, Phosphorus, Sulfur, Chlorine, and Potassium and other trace elements..

A human being cannot survive more than six minutes breathing pure carbon dioxide but can survive sometimes for days breathing pure oxygen. So it is good that the plants utilize the tiny percentage of CO2 in our atmosphere and breath out oxygen for the rest of us to use.

The average atmosphere of the Earth contains: Nitrogen (78%); Oxygen (21%); Argon (0.94%); Carbon dioxide (0.04%).

Our planet has mostly been much hotter and more humid than we know it to be today, and with far more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than exists today. Yet plant and animal life flourished through all that. The notable exception is 300,000,000 years ago during the late Carboniferous Period, which resembles our own climate and atmosphere like no other.

The early carboniferous period was essentially one season year round, but by the end of the coniferous period--before human activity had any effect on the Earth or its climate--conditions had changed so that the Earth was experiencing different seasons. At that time CO2 levels were believed to be about 1500 ppm parts per million, roughly comparable to CO2 levels today.

So what greatly increased CO2 before human activity? What reduced CO2 before human activity? Maybe the Earth will do what the Earth has always done since its creation in the universe and there isn't a hell of lot any of us can do about it? Certainly something to consider before we hand over our liberties, options, choices, and opportunities to people who don't like us very much and who likely won't have our best interest at heart as they exercise what very well may be bogus science.

I thanked you for stating the conservative case so clearly. But before I respond, let me ask you, are you talking about AGW or something else?

The conservative case? Surely you jest. The scientific commentary is basic 7th grade science. (Or it used to be before our education system was trashed in favor of sociopolitical liberalism.) The political commentary is just plain common sense regardless of ones sociopolitical ideology.

The thread is about AGW and I do try to stay on topic as much as possible. But 7th grade science AND common sense are rather important components of addressing a subject like AGW, don't you think?

Tell us, with your 7th grade science, which of the following statements is not true.

Fossil fuels, when burned, produce as products of combustion, primarily water and carbon dioxide, which are normally released to the atmosphere.

Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas meaning that it absorbs long wave radiation, rather than reflecting it or transmitting it.

A body in space receives radiation from all bodies in space warmer than absolute zero, in proportion to the fourth power of the emitters temperature and inversely proportional to the second power of their distance.

A body in space must maintain radiative energy balance. If more energy is received than emitted, it will warm. Less, it will cool.

 

[PMZ]

You mean we might reach the 800 ppm level that gave the planet a mean temperature of 14 C in the Carboniferous?

Don't you have any answers at all? Just questions.

Those who know have answers. Those who don't have only questions.

Your answer was, higher CO2 will make the planet "inhospitable to life", like it was during the Carboniferous.
The Carboniferous, with the same mean temp as today, with double the CO2.
Quick, we must spend tens of trillions, to avoid the same temperature.

The Toddbot says that the temperature at the beginning of the Carboniferous period, with all of the CO2 in the atmosphere that we are returning from fossil fuels today, was the same as today.

As usual, he's full of shit.

Climate during the Carboniferous Period

How come conservatives are compelled to lie all of the time!

 

[PMZ]

Show us the science that says GHG's other than water vapor do....

GHGs are DEFINED as compounds that absorb longwave EM. DEFINED.

When are you going to stop asking and start showing any evidence at all that of what you want to be true, is?????

Defined? How so? There has been no demonstration in a laboratory how GHG's actually work. The best guess as to how they work is as a blanket (H2O vapor) acting like a blanket to PREVENT heat being lost to the night. Take a look at the temperature swings of planets who are gifted with exo-atmospheres only. Four hundred plus degree swings are the NORM. The Earth has a dense (though nowhere near as dense as Venus, thankfully) blanket that prevents the heat loss at night.

I have yet to see a compelling experiment that shows GHG's actually warm anything...

"There has been no demonstration in a laboratory how GHG's actually work"

"I have yet to see a compelling experiment that shows GHG's actually warm anything"

Do you believe that if you shutdown all of your senses, the world stays the same because you don't know what's changing?

 

[PMZ]

Those who know have answers. Those who don't have only questions.

Life owns earth.

Humanity is the only life that is enabled to think and plan and do beyond merely survival issues.

Humanity can choose among various futures, and create them, for good or bad.

Climate is an essential component of all of those futures and, to some degree, given our capabilities, we can influence what's coming.

Humanity makes those joint decisions through political processes. Humanity bases those joint decisions on knowledge.

In the case of climate, that knowledge comes from the IPCC.

It is really that simple.

Yes, it really is that simple. Mankind is the first organism on this planet to have the ability to protect it from an exo atmospheric assault. Asteroid strikes are the ONLY thing that we know of that can absolutely end life on this planet as they have almost done on at least two occasions.

You idiots whistle Dixie and ignore the very real threat from above while trying to pass legislation who's only effect will be to enrich rich people and take liberty away from poor people.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJCfB9OnoGw]Meteorite hits central Russia - Video Collection (16 minutes) - YouTube[/ame]

Though the competition is pretty tough here, this is still a first class portrayal of ignorance, including the DK syndrome of having no idea what you don't know.

 

[PMZ]

'' Do you honestly think it materialized out of the CO2 in the atmosphere?''

What do you think plants and animals are made of?

Well since I actually stayed awake in biology class, a living animal cell is composed of mostly Oxygen, Nitrogen, Carbon, Hydrogen, and Calcium with lesser amounts of Sodium, Magnesium, Phosphorus, Sulfur, Chlorine, and Potassium and other trace elements..

A human being cannot survive more than six minutes breathing pure carbon dioxide but can survive sometimes for days breathing pure oxygen. So it is good that the plants utilize the tiny percentage of CO2 in our atmosphere and breath out oxygen for the rest of us to use.

The average atmosphere of the Earth contains: Nitrogen (78%); Oxygen (21%); Argon (0.94%); Carbon dioxide (0.04%).

Our planet has mostly been much hotter and more humid than we know it to be today, and with far more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than exists today. Yet plant and animal life flourished through all that. The notable exception is 300,000,000 years ago during the late Carboniferous Period, which resembles our own climate and atmosphere like no other.

The early carboniferous period was essentially one season year round, but by the end of the carboniferous period--before human activity had any effect on the Earth or its climate--conditions had changed so that the Earth was experiencing different seasons. At that time CO2 levels were believed to be about 1500 ppm parts per million, roughly comparable to CO2 levels today.

So what greatly increased CO2 before human activity? What reduced CO2 before human activity? Maybe the Earth will do what the Earth has always done since its creation in the universe and there isn't a hell of lot any of us can do about it? Certainly something to consider before we hand over our liberties, options, choices, and opportunities to people who don't like us very much and who likely won't have our best interest at heart as they exercise what very well may be bogus science.

I agree with your "risk-opportunity" assessment..

1500ppm is about FOUR times what we measure today.. In the IPCC wildest dreams, 1000ppm would be close to DoomsDay.

Jumping to prehistoric conclusions about CO2 without controlling for water vapor is also not advisable.. THere is only a small window of absorption in CO2 that is NOT fully covered by water vapor.. The estimates of its power as GHG are probably much over-rated. After all -- we're dealing with a VERY SMALL shift in radiative flux here. From something like 300W/m2 long wave out --- CO2 increase is said to have caused retention of about 1.5W/m2 of surface temp. forcing.

That's a SMALL number "for a blanket" and actually DEPENDS on KNOWING the exact CO-Concentrations of water vapor in any particular location.. When you are doing an estimates on a GLOBAL scale --- you could be off by a lot..

CO2 causes more warming in the desert than it does over the oceans for instance..
That'll make some warmer heads explode --- but it's a true statement.

Water vapor isn't changing. CO2 is.

 

[Foxfyre]

Well since I actually stayed awake in biology class, a living animal cell is composed of mostly Oxygen, Nitrogen, Carbon, Hydrogen, and Calcium with lesser amounts of Sodium, Magnesium, Phosphorus, Sulfur, Chlorine, and Potassium and other trace elements..

A human being cannot survive more than six minutes breathing pure carbon dioxide but can survive sometimes for days breathing pure oxygen. So it is good that the plants utilize the tiny percentage of CO2 in our atmosphere and breath out oxygen for the rest of us to use.

The average atmosphere of the Earth contains: Nitrogen (78%); Oxygen (21%); Argon (0.94%); Carbon dioxide (0.04%).

Our planet has mostly been much hotter and more humid than we know it to be today, and with far more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than exists today. Yet plant and animal life flourished through all that. The notable exception is 300,000,000 years ago during the late Carboniferous Period, which resembles our own climate and atmosphere like no other.

The early carboniferous period was essentially one season year round, but by the end of the carboniferous period--before human activity had any effect on the Earth or its climate--conditions had changed so that the Earth was experiencing different seasons. At that time CO2 levels were believed to be about 1500 ppm parts per million, roughly comparable to CO2 levels today.

So what greatly increased CO2 before human activity? What reduced CO2 before human activity? Maybe the Earth will do what the Earth has always done since its creation in the universe and there isn't a hell of lot any of us can do about it? Certainly something to consider before we hand over our liberties, options, choices, and opportunities to people who don't like us very much and who likely won't have our best interest at heart as they exercise what very well may be bogus science.

I agree with your "risk-opportunity" assessment..

1500ppm is about FOUR times what we measure today.. In the IPCC wildest dreams, 1000ppm would be close to DoomsDay.

Jumping to prehistoric conclusions about CO2 without controlling for water vapor is also not advisable.. THere is only a small window of absorption in CO2 that is NOT fully covered by water vapor.. The estimates of its power as GHG are probably much over-rated. After all -- we're dealing with a VERY SMALL shift in radiative flux here. From something like 300W/m2 long wave out --- CO2 increase is said to have caused retention of about 1.5W/m2 of surface temp. forcing.

That's a SMALL number "for a blanket" and actually DEPENDS on KNOWING the exact CO-Concentrations of water vapor in any particular location.. When you are doing an estimates on a GLOBAL scale --- you could be off by a lot..

CO2 causes more warming in the desert than it does over the oceans for instance..
That'll make some warmer heads explode --- but it's a true statement.

Water vapor isn't changing. CO2 is.

I will again refer you to that 7th grade science class discussing the carboniferous period. If you do just a teensy bit of reading, you will see that the climate was MUCH more humid during the large part of that time than it is now. What is humidity? It is the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere. Water vapor not only changes, but it changes almost hourly. And it has intensely more affect on the temperatures we endure than does CO2 levels. Also, the use of fossil fuels creates far more water vapor than it does CO2, so why is it only CO2 that the AGW religionist focus on? Even if water vapor doesn't stay in the atmosphere as long as CO2, the sheer volume of it would overcome any differences in shelf life.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Don't you have any answers at all? Just questions.

Those who know have answers. Those who don't have only questions.

Your answer was, higher CO2 will make the planet "inhospitable to life", like it was during the Carboniferous.
The Carboniferous, with the same mean temp as today, with double the CO2.
Quick, we must spend tens of trillions, to avoid the same temperature.

The Toddbot says that the temperature at the beginning of the Carboniferous period, with all of the CO2 in the atmosphere that we are returning from fossil fuels today, was the same as today.

As usual, he's full of shit.

Climate during the Carboniferous Period

How come conservatives are compelled to lie all of the time!

The Toddbot says that the temperature at the beginning of the Carboniferous period, with all of the CO2 in the atmosphere that we are returning from fossil fuels today, was the same as today.

No I didn't, not once. Why do you lie?

Thanks for the link. Where did it say the Carboniferous was "inhospitable to life"?

West Virginia today is mostly an erosional plateau carved up into steep ridges and narrow valleys, but 300 million years ago, during the Carboniferous Period, it was part of a vast equatorial coastal swamp extending many hundreds of miles and barely rising above sea level. This steamy, tropical quagmire served as the nursery for Earth's first primitive forests, comprised of giant lycopods, ferns, and seed ferns.

North America was located along Earth's equator then, courtesy of the forces of continental drift. The hot and humid climate of the Middle Carboniferous Period was accompanied by an explosion of terrestrial plant life.

Not there. It sounds like life thrived during this time.

Let me know if you ever find a link that backs up your idiotic claim. Thanks!

 

[Foxfyre]

Your answer was, higher CO2 will make the planet "inhospitable to life", like it was during the Carboniferous.
The Carboniferous, with the same mean temp as today, with double the CO2.
Quick, we must spend tens of trillions, to avoid the same temperature.

The Toddbot says that the temperature at the beginning of the Carboniferous period, with all of the CO2 in the atmosphere that we are returning from fossil fuels today, was the same as today.

As usual, he's full of shit.

Climate during the Carboniferous Period

How come conservatives are compelled to lie all of the time!

The Toddbot says that the temperature at the beginning of the Carboniferous period, with all of the CO2 in the atmosphere that we are returning from fossil fuels today, was the same as today.

No I didn't, not once. Why do you lie?

Thanks for the link. Where did it say the Carboniferous was "inhospitable to life"?

West Virginia today is mostly an erosional plateau carved up into steep ridges and narrow valleys, but 300 million years ago, during the Carboniferous Period, it was part of a vast equatorial coastal swamp extending many hundreds of miles and barely rising above sea level. This steamy, tropical quagmire served as the nursery for Earth's first primitive forests, comprised of giant lycopods, ferns, and seed ferns.

North America was located along Earth's equator then, courtesy of the forces of continental drift. The hot and humid climate of the Middle Carboniferous Period was accompanied by an explosion of terrestrial plant life.

Not there. It sounds like life thrived during this time.

Let me know if you ever find a link that backs up your idiotic claim. Thanks!

Interesting Toddster. I had not read up on West Virginia though we did live there for a brief time. But New Mexico is a fascinating study in the paleontological record. We now live on high desert terrain, extremely dry and arid interspersed with confer forested mountains that barely exist in this dry climate. We have less surface water than any of the 50 states with normal rainfall about 8 inches per year over desert terrain Humidity normally stays under 15%--often under 10%--we have all four seasons with summer temperatures normally ranging between 90 and 100 degrees all over the state except in the highest terrain.

What was it like over 300 million years ago?

During the Carboniferous period, New Mexico was an archipelago of islands rising from the shallow, warm seaways. On land, lush vegetation grew in areas of dense forests and swamps, while clams, brachiopods, and other organisms inhabited the sea floor. Humidity was high with near constant temperatures probably in the 80's farenheit.

And then when the climate shifted yet again, in the Early Permian, the climate became drier. The broad river floodplains were replaced by dune fields and a shallow, hypersaline sea. When more normal marine conditions returned during the Middle Permian, the huge reef at El Capitan in southeastern New Mexico developed.

Climate change has been occuring on Planet Earth since there has been a Planet Earth and nothng, and I do mean nothing, we puny humans are capable of doing is likely to change that in any way.

 

[PMZ]

I agree with your "risk-opportunity" assessment..

1500ppm is about FOUR times what we measure today.. In the IPCC wildest dreams, 1000ppm would be close to DoomsDay.

Jumping to prehistoric conclusions about CO2 without controlling for water vapor is also not advisable.. THere is only a small window of absorption in CO2 that is NOT fully covered by water vapor.. The estimates of its power as GHG are probably much over-rated. After all -- we're dealing with a VERY SMALL shift in radiative flux here. From something like 300W/m2 long wave out --- CO2 increase is said to have caused retention of about 1.5W/m2 of surface temp. forcing.

That's a SMALL number "for a blanket" and actually DEPENDS on KNOWING the exact CO-Concentrations of water vapor in any particular location.. When you are doing an estimates on a GLOBAL scale --- you could be off by a lot..

CO2 causes more warming in the desert than it does over the oceans for instance..
That'll make some warmer heads explode --- but it's a true statement.

Water vapor isn't changing. CO2 is.

I will again refer you to that 7th grade science class discussing the carboniferous period. If you do just a teensy bit of reading, you will see that the climate was MUCH more humid during the large part of that time than it is now. What is humidity? It is the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere. Water vapor not only changes, but it changes almost hourly. And it has intensely more affect on the temperatures we endure than does CO2 levels. Also, the use of fossil fuels creates far more water vapor than it does CO2, so why is it only CO2 that the AGW religionist focus on? Even if water vapor doesn't stay in the atmosphere as long as CO2, the sheer volume of it would overcome any differences in shelf life.

Where did all of that "much greater humidity" come from and go to? Was it imported/exported bucket by bucket from/to another planet? Were oceans deeper then?

I don't blame you at all for not answering my questions. It would be mighty embarrassing for you.

 

[PMZ]

The Toddbot says that the temperature at the beginning of the Carboniferous period, with all of the CO2 in the atmosphere that we are returning from fossil fuels today, was the same as today.

As usual, he's full of shit.

Climate during the Carboniferous Period

How come conservatives are compelled to lie all of the time!

The Toddbot says that the temperature at the beginning of the Carboniferous period, with all of the CO2 in the atmosphere that we are returning from fossil fuels today, was the same as today.

No I didn't, not once. Why do you lie?

Thanks for the link. Where did it say the Carboniferous was "inhospitable to life"?

West Virginia today is mostly an erosional plateau carved up into steep ridges and narrow valleys, but 300 million years ago, during the Carboniferous Period, it was part of a vast equatorial coastal swamp extending many hundreds of miles and barely rising above sea level. This steamy, tropical quagmire served as the nursery for Earth's first primitive forests, comprised of giant lycopods, ferns, and seed ferns.

North America was located along Earth's equator then, courtesy of the forces of continental drift. The hot and humid climate of the Middle Carboniferous Period was accompanied by an explosion of terrestrial plant life.

Not there. It sounds like life thrived during this time.

Let me know if you ever find a link that backs up your idiotic claim. Thanks!

Interesting Toddster. I had not read up on West Virginia though we did live there for a brief time. But New Mexico is a fascinating study in the paleontological record. We now live on high desert terrain, extremely dry and arid interspersed with confer forested mountains that barely exist in this dry climate. We have less surface water than any of the 50 states with normal rainfall about 8 inches per year over desert terrain Humidity normally stays under 15%--often under 10%--we have all four seasons with summer temperatures normally ranging between 90 and 100 degrees all over the state except in the highest terrain.

What was it like over 300 million years ago?

During the Carboniferous period, New Mexico was an archipelago of islands rising from the shallow, warm seaways. On land, lush vegetation grew in areas of dense forests and swamps, while clams, brachiopods, and other organisms inhabited the sea floor. Humidity was high with near constant temperatures probably in the 80's farenheit.

And then when the climate shifted yet again, in the Early Permian, the climate became drier. The broad river floodplains were replaced by dune fields and a shallow, hypersaline sea. When more normal marine conditions returned during the Middle Permian, the huge reef at El Capitan in southeastern New Mexico developed.

Climate change has been occuring on Planet Earth since there has been a Planet Earth and nothng, and I do mean nothing, we puny humans are capable of doing is likely to change that in any way.

Absolutely right except for the fact that 7B energy hungry humans are recreating past climates by restoring that ancient atmosphere.

During the Carboniferous period there wasn't one human here. Therefore we hadn't built civilization yet.

How many different climates do you think we can adapt to when each one requires a different civilization?

Or, are you thinking that humanity is dispensable.