Simple Question About AGW

[CapelDodger]

Have you seen A3 live? F***ing amazing!

Aren't they from Brixton or somewhere equally silly?

 

[bobdroege7]

Correct it or be quiet about it.

Gee, I see you have admitted your mistake.

Oh, any time, big fella! Your jokes suck. Keep your day job.

And I don't have a day job, 9 to 5 maybe, but not a day job.

And another appeal to self authority, 23 rem lifetime dose, I had better know a little about radioactivity.

I've been breathing gases all my life.

And you claimed I didn't know anything about radioactivity, you better stop smoking, it causes cancer you know.

 

[bobdroege7]

I was originally trying to demonstrate that the high pressure on Venus is contributive to the temperature. Now, I've been tarred with predicting the surface of the Earth would be 8 K because it is so similar to Venus. One can't win with people who refuse to listen.

You know it was difficult to get what you were trying to show when you used the pressure of Venus, the temperature of Venus, and the pressure of Earth, and solving for temperature.

It was natural to assume you meant the temperature of Earth was what you were solving for.

 

[bobdroege7]

Dang, now I've got Son of a Preacher Man playing in my head. Time to load up some Alabama 3, that'll flush it out.

Actually its not that song and I'm sorry I can't remember the name of the song, but the applicable lyric is.

ah wait google is your friend
the late great Rory Gallagher

All around man

"I ain't no doctor
I ain't no doctor's son
but I'll fill your prescription
till the real doctor come"

 

[Slimething]

This is why I like you as a poster. You are willing to stick your hand up and admit a mistake. More people should be like this.

fsol, you are a very gracious person. I feel truly awful about what I directed at you. Very sorry. Sometimes I charge ahead with stupid ideas and don't take a look back at what I'm saying early enough to make an ass of myself.

Thank you. Really.

 

[Slimething]

Gee, I see you have admitted your mistake.

Yeah, pretty friggin stoopid can I be. Please accept my apologies for the taunts and idiocy displayed. As you can tell, I'm a very emotional person and I can do myself a lot of damage before I regain what little intelligence I have.

And you claimed I didn't know anything about radioactivity, you better stop smoking, it causes cancer you know.

You're assuming tobacco. (Nah, I don't do drugs but sometimes I think I should.)

You know it was difficult to get what you were trying to show when you used the pressure of Venus, the temperature of Venus, and the pressure of Earth, and solving for temperature.

It was natural to assume you meant the temperature of Earth was what you were solving for.

No, I was trying to determine what, if any, effect the high pressure on Venus would have on the surface temp. My RNF (random neural firings) alit on the Ideal Gas Law and I was off and running. I was tired, is all I can say in my defense. Dumb, dumb, dumb. And sorry.

Be well.

 

[Slimething]

That's not at all clear, but I'll try my best with it.

No need. I see my mistake. Dumb. Sorry about the tirade.

Sorry, I can't make anything out of that. For myself, I regard heat as kinetic energy.

I use the TdS as my definition of heat to remind myself that it's more than temperature and that it must be accompanied by increased entropy. It's the def they beat into you in thermodynamics class (known formally as Physical Chemistry, a rite of passage that makes you think you can survive anything).

So, let's get back to it. I'm really curious as to whether or not there is tropospheric heating. If not, how do you reconcile that with the assertion that any warming has to be accompanied by such heating?

 

[bobdroege7]

Yeah, pretty friggin stoopid can I be. Please accept my apologies for the taunts and idiocy displayed. As you can tell, I'm a very emotional person and I can do myself a lot of damage before I regain what little intelligence I have.



You're assuming tobacco. (Nah, I don't do drugs but sometimes I think I should.)



No, I was trying to determine what, if any, effect the high pressure on Venus would have on the surface temp. My RNF (random neural firings) alit on the Ideal Gas Law and I was off and running. I was tired, is all I can say in my defense. Dumb, dumb, dumb. And sorry.

Be well.

Thanks, apologies accepted.

 

[mhaze]

So, let's get back to it. I'm really curious as to whether or not there is tropospheric heating. If not, how do you reconcile that with the assertion that any warming has to be accompanied by such heating?

Revise the hypothesis?

Not a direction to make the climatoza happy...

 

[Round Robin]

My RNF (random neural firings) alit on the Ideal Gas Law and I was off and running.

I need to remember that turn of phrase the next time I passionately argue forth, then realize I made a mistake. I hope I'll have the courage to do so though and admit my mistake and apologize, as you have. Your integrity and honesty is appreciated.

If history is any judge, though, I'll have an opportunity to test my courage very soon.

 

[Alric]

So, let's get back to it. I'm really curious as to whether or not there is tropospheric heating. If not, how do you reconcile that with the assertion that any warming has to be accompanied by such heating?

So there you go. Find data of troposphere temperature measurements why is it important. The important thing is to make sure is not yet another contrarian straw man.

 

[mhaze]

So there you go. Find data of troposphere temperature measurements why is it important. The important thing is to make sure is not yet another contrarian straw man.

IPCC Chapter 9. Already posted. Isn't it obvious why it is important?

This is called actually going looking for the greenhouse effect.

 

[TrueSceptic]

IPCC Chapter 9. Already posted. Isn't it obvious why it is important?

This is called actually going looking for the greenhouse effect.

So what is your view of the greenhouse effect?

 

[mhaze]

So what is your view of the greenhouse effect?

You mean my view of the greenhouse effect, which is defined as requiring a mid level atmospheric temperatures hotter than surface temperatures?

 

[BobK]

Since it appears no one has posted a link to it yet, some of the more open-minded people here might be interested in reading this pdf. Entitled Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate.

 

[Megalodon]

Yes, the Science & Environmental Policy Project... While you're at it, check their work on second-hand smoke, and on the ozone layer...

There's no losing horse that Singer won't back, it seems...

 

[mhaze]

Since it appears no one has posted a link to it yet, some of the more open-minded people here might be interested in reading this pdf. Entitled Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate.

Starting on page 5, they discuss going out and looking for the actual presence or lack of of the greenhouse effect.

 

[BobK]

Yes, the Science & Environmental Policy Project... While you're at it, check their work on second-hand smoke, and on the ozone layer...

There's no losing horse that Singer won't back, it seems...

From the tone of your post I take it you don't intend to bother reading it. How open-minded of you. Evidently you feel the perspective of other educated people cannot possibly inhance your knowledge of the subject or change your perspective in any manner. Hey. It's your brain, fill it with whatever you want.

When I'm interested in a subject I find that getting the perspective of others educated in the subject to be better than thinking I know all there is worth knowing about subject. It may lead to a re-evaluation of my perspective, or it may not.

 

[a_unique_person]

Yes, the Science & Environmental Policy Project... While you're at it, check their work on second-hand smoke, and on the ozone layer...

There's no losing horse that Singer won't back, it seems...

They might be losing, he still gets paid. I don't make accusations of people doing it for funding often, but for Singer I'll make an exception.

 

[Megalodon]

From the tone of your post I take it you don't intend to bother reading it. How open-minded of you. Evidently you feel the perspective of other educated people cannot possibly inhance your knowledge of the subject or change your perspective in any manner. Hey. It's your brain, fill it with whatever you want.

From the tone of your post I take it you suck at guessing. I've seen the document, and it didn't take me that long either... most of the graphs and arguments have been posted and debunked here before.

They mix and match disciplines, cherrypick data and, when nothing else works, lie. All, I admit under language that makes them look very scientific to the layperson.

When I'm interested in a subject I find that getting the perspective of others educated in the subject to be better than thinking I know all there is worth knowing about subject. It may lead to a re-evaluation of my perspective, or it may not.

The document is a pile of garbage. Deal with it. Only the preface is so full of bare-faced lies that it's hard to not close the pdf there... It's a hit-piece, made with the sole purpose of casting a doubt on the work of scientists around the world.

You call the SEPP a different perspective, but they are also a different perspective on the CFC-ozone, secondhand smoking-cancer and air pollution-acid rain "debates". Always backing corporate interests against mainstream science...