Merged Global Warming Discussion II: Heated Conversation

Status
Not open for further replies.
icebear said:
Are you aware of the fact that without CO2, every tree and flowering plant on Earth would die?

Have you ever seen a graph showing actual greenhouse gases in the atmosphere? Are you aware that the overwhelming bulk and only meaningful component of greenhouse gases on this planet is water vapor?

http://minnesotansforglobalwarming.com/m4gw/2010/07/16/greenhouse_gases_in_atmosphere.jpg

Are you aware that total human contribution to greenhouse gases on this planet is something like .28 of one percent?

http://www.americanthinker.com/#2 SourcesGreenHouseGas.gif

Are you aware that we are at a 100-year low for solar activity, that there has been snow in Israel and Egypt within the past month and that the coldest temperature ever measured on Earth ( -140F) was measured at Antarctica just a couple of weeks ago?

All of this indicates that we are at the beginning of a second little ice age. Real ice ages had cosmic causes and we'd have a century or more of warning but a little ice age is just a question of fluctions in the way a star operates and the fact they heat up and cool down periodically.

Nonetheless a little ice age is serious business and you should understand that windmills and solar panels are not going to save anybody from what is coming. People are going to die over these asinine "green(TM)" policies.
Click to expand...

Complete and utter BS worthy only of scorn, not to mention debunked over and over again in this and the preceding threads.

Try harder or don't try.
 
icebear said:
Are you aware of the fact that without CO2, every tree and flowering plant on Earth would die?
Click to expand...
That's not quite true. When levels drop below a certain point plants can't grow, and long before there is "none" plants die.
icebear said:
Have you ever seen a graph showing actual greenhouse gases in the atmosphere? Are you aware that the overwhelming bulk and only meaningful component of greenhouse gases on this planet is water vapor?
Click to expand...
It's funny that anyone would argue against those facts. Certainly water vapor is the most important gas. The effects from the trace gases is the question.
icebear said:
Are you aware that we are at a 100-year low for solar activity, that there has been snow in Israel and Egypt within the past month and that the coldest temperature ever measured on Earth ( -140F) was measured at Antarctica just a couple of weeks ago?
Click to expand...
Weather is not climate (oh how I miss that thread now). You have to look at the long term trends to say snow or cold is important. Like the unusual warmth last year, it's most likely an anomaly. Using any weather event as evidence of climate change is poor science.
icebear said:
All of this indicates that we are at the beginning of a second little ice age.
Click to expand...
I feel like I am back in 1976 again! A few decades of colder winters and people go crazy with the ice age stuff.
icebear said:
Nonetheless a little ice age is serious business and you should understand that windmills and solar panels are not going to save anybody from what is coming.
Click to expand...
It's an interesting question. If natural cycles are leading to a much colder period, could we change it? Will extra CO2 actually prevent a LIA? Too bad there isn't a climate topic.

It's such an interesting subject.
 
r-j said:
It's an interesting question. If natural cycles are leading to a much colder period, could we change it?
Click to expand...

No, there's not a single thing humans can do which would have any effect on planetary weather.
 
Ummmm you do understand these climate change denial sites are funded by the fossil fuel industry?
Dear Anthony is a retired weatherman not a climate scientist.
I suggest you inform yourself instead of looking foolish in a science forum.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/climate-of-doubt/

Billion-dollar climate denial network exposed
POLITICS 21 DECEMBER 13 by DUNCAN GEERE

loop_oh / CC BY-ND 2.0
An extensive study into the financial networks that support groups denying the science behind climate change and opposing political action has found a vast, secretive web of think tanks and industry associations, bankrolled by conservative billionaires.
Click to expand...

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-12/21/denial?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook
•••
If you want to read the science - here you go and I suggest strongly you actually read this thread and learn a few things....your idea of what is going on on your one and only planet is woeful.

Background/history
http://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/opinion/9574/five-things-know-about-carbon-dioxide

Carbon cycle
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/research/themes/carbon/

http://agwobserver.wordpress.com/category/agw-evidence/

http://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-global-warming.htm

http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/human-caused
•••

You do understand that the head of Exxon has admitted the climate change presents a serious risk?

ExxonMobil admits climate change is real (2) - Redding.com Blogs ...
blogs.redding.com/dcraig/archives/2013/09/exxonmobil-admi-1.html‎
September 7, 2013 12:34 AM | 10 Comments ... What do the deniers of global climate change think of this? ... They also state, "There is growing recognition that addressing the risk of climate change will require significant efforts
Click to expand...

so who is wrong?? the head of Exxon or you?
 
Last edited:
icebear said:
No, there's not a single thing humans can do which would have any effect on planetary weather.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure if we had a hundred oil wells, like the Gulf BP disaster, pumping crude into the oceans, it would screw with the planet in ways nobody can imagine. Certainly the weather would change.
 
Are you aware of the fact that without CO2, every tree and flowering plant on Earth would die?

Have you ever seen a graph showing actual greenhouse gases in the atmosphere? Are you aware that the overwhelming bulk and only meaningful component of greenhouse gases on this planet is water vapor?
Click to expand...

umm without C02 the planet would be freezing.
CO2 is the thermostat to keep it habitable.
We have increased C02 from 240 ppm to 400 ppm - not seen for millions of years.
Water vapour which is transient magnifies C02 which is persistant in the atmosphere - the impact out to 100,000 years.
It is getting warmer
We're responsible.
Deal with it.

and the fossil fuel companies knew this in the mid 90s..

Industry Ignored Its Scientists on Climate

By ANDREW C. REVKINPublished: April 23, 2009

For more than a decade the Global Climate Coalition, a group representing industries with profits tied to fossil fuels, led an aggressive lobbying and public relations campaign against the idea that emissions of heat-trapping gases could lead to global warming.

“The role of greenhouse gases in climate change is not well understood,” the coalition said in a scientific “backgrounder” provided to lawmakers and journalists through the early 1990s, adding that “scientists differ” on the issue.

But a document filed in a federal lawsuit demonstrates that even as the coalition worked to sway opinion, its own scientific and technical experts were advising that the science backing the role of greenhouse gases in global warming could not be refuted.
Click to expand...

Industry Ignored Its Scientists on Climate - NYTimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/24/science/earth/24deny.html?_r=2

and some coal companies acknowledge it

http://www.griffincoal.com.au/climatechangeactionplan.html

http://www.skepticalscience.com/prudent-path.html

are they wrong?? or you....??
 
Last edited:
icebear said:
Are you aware of the fact that without CO2, every tree and flowering plant on Earth would die?
Click to expand...

More importantly, do you realize that without CO2 in our atmosphere our planet would be a lifeless, frozen ice ball, care to explain why?

icebear said:
Have you ever seen a graph showing actual greenhouse gases in the atmosphere? Are you aware that the overwhelming bulk and only meaningful component of greenhouse gases on this planet is water vapor?
Click to expand...

If you can correctly answer and understand the implications of the question I ask above, you can figure out why your question is misleading and incorrect in its assertions.

icebear said:
http://minnesotansforglobalwarming.com/m4gw/2010/07/16/greenhouse_gases_in_atmosphere.jpg

Are you aware that total human contribution to greenhouse gases on this planet is something like .28 of one percent?
Click to expand...

A pseudoscience political blog is that last place any reasonable person would look to for accurate science information. Annual contributions of CO2, CH4, O3, NO, etc., are not as important to AGW issues as the cumulative buildup of these gasses over the last couple of centuries. Human contributions, over that time frame, have increased CO2 levels in our atmosphere by more than 30% (270ppm in 1800 to 400ppm in 2013). Water vapor is a feedback effect due to short atmospheric persistence under Earthly conditions largely tied to ambient temperature conditions.

icebear said:
http://www.americanthinker.com/#2 SourcesGreenHouseGas.gif

Are you aware that we are at a 100-year low for solar activity, that there has been snow in Israel and Egypt within the past month and that the coldest temperature ever measured on Earth ( -140F) was measured at Antarctica just a couple of weeks ago?
Click to expand...

DO you realize that despite the sun being at a "100 year low in activity" (according to your assertions), average global surface temperatures are higher than they've been in tens of millions of years?
Even just sticking to modern records:
  • The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for November 2013 was record highest for the 134-year period of record, at 0.78°C (1.40°F) above the 20th century average of 12.9°C (55.2°F).
  • The global land surface temperature was 1.43°C (2.57°F) above the 20th century average of 5.9°C (42.6°F), the second highest for November on record, behind 2010. For the global oceans, the November average sea surface temperature was 0.54°C (0.97°F) above the 20th century average of 15.8°C (60.4°F), tying with 2009 as the third highest for November.
  • The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the year-to-date (January–November) was 0.62°C (1.12°F) above the 20th century average of 14.0°C (57.2°F), tying with 2002 as the fourth warmest such period on record.

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2013/11/

icebear said:
All of this indicates that we are at the beginning of a second little ice age. Real ice ages had cosmic causes and we'd have a century or more of warning but a little ice age is just a question of fluctions in the way a star operates and the fact they heat up and cool down periodically.

Nonetheless a little ice age is serious business and you should understand that windmills and solar panels are not going to save anybody from what is coming. People are going to die over these asinine "green(TM)" policies.
Click to expand...

Incorrect and inaccurate, but given the sources of your information, hardly surprising.
 
No, there's not a single thing humans can do which would have any effect on planetary weather.
Click to expand...

Um weather is not climate....

image518336x3.jpg


wiki image.....you think this is not impacting the "weather" in China?

Severe-smog-and-air-pollu-010.jpg



The Asian brown cloud shown from space in the Wiki image above produces the "weather" below when it settles over the cities reducing sunlight to the surface as much as 25%.

That same brown cloud is formed by particulates some of which are S02 which cools the planet temporarily ( as a volcano does ).

Learn something then come back when you can discuss it intelligently instead of from the pages of Faux news et al
 
Last edited:
Are you aware that we are at a 100-year low for solar activity, that there has been snow in Israel and Egypt within the past month and that the coldest temperature ever measured on Earth ( -140F) was measured at Antarctica just a couple of weeks ago?
Click to expand...

for the umpteenth time.....snow in odd places is the product of the changes in the Arctic induced by AGW. The Arctic dipole

Warm Arctic, Cold Continents
Changes in the Arctic Are Hitting Closer to Home

arctic_atmosphere_december_300.png

Arctic atmospheric pressue.

The low Arctic pressure field is shown by purple colors in the figure for December 1968–1996. Strong Polar Vortex winds circle this pressure field, trapping cold air in the Arctic regions.

In December 2009, this pattern broke down, Polar Vortex winds weakened (green colors) and cold Arctic air (which parallels the color contours) flowed southward.Download here. (Credit: NOAA)
It’s a puzzle: How could warmth in the Arctic produce frigid conditions elsewhere?

NOAA scientists may have a clue.

Extremely cold winds have swept down through the Northern Hemisphere recently, reaching as far south as the state of Florida and causing record low temperatures in January. The unusually cold winter of 2009–2010 – which saw massive snowstorms dubbed “Snowpocalypse” and “Snowmageddon” — and the frigid start to 2011 in the eastern United States and Europe have scientists talking about what might be influencing the weather.
Click to expand...

http://www.noaa.gov/features/02_monitoring/warmarctic.html

The same weather pattern is in play now and we expect more snow storms..

•••

The Antarctic will always be in deep freeze until the ice melts and for the eastern continent that is a long time in the future. The Western Antarctic is losing ice at a increasing rate.

West Antarctic ice loss speeds up | Climate News Network
www.climatenewsnetwork.net/2013/12/west-antarctic-ice-loss-speeds-up/‎
Dec 20, 2013 - By Tim Radford. The rate of ice loss from the West Antarctic appears to have accelerated sharply in the last four years, European scientists say.
Click to expand...
http://www.climatenewsnetwork.net/2013/12/west-antarctic-ice-loss-speeds-up/

When there is no sunlight there is no source of IR for CO2 to trap so when a clear air stationary high settles in it can get colder and colder as it has in a few other spots over the last decades.

You simply have no clue how your world works.
 
Last edited:
r-j said:
It's an interesting question. If natural cycles are leading to a much colder period, could we change it? Will extra CO2 actually prevent a LIA? Too bad there isn't a climate topic.

It's such an interesting subject.
Click to expand...

Most climate science consideration indicates that human emissions long ago forestalled the effects of orbital evolutions that were on track to generate a gradually cooling climate over the next 30,000 years and the mildly enhanced glaciation that would have accompanied such. (BTW LIA was generally a regional anomaly (predominantly centered around the North Atlantic) due to a number of coincident factors, with an increase in northern hemisphere volcanism being the primary factor)
 
Trakar said:
Most climate science consideration indicates that human emissions long ago forestalled the effects of orbital evolutions that were on track to generate a gradually cooling climate over the next 30,000 years and the mildly enhanced glaciation that would have accompanied such. (BTW LIA was generally a regional anomaly (predominantly centered around the North Atlantic) due to a number of coincident factors, with an increase in northern hemisphere volcanism being the primary factor)
Click to expand...


What, pray tell, is an "orbital evolution(TM)"??
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom