Breaking: CLIMATEGATE II....Here we go again!!!

[Old Rocks]

CO2 does NOT drive climate, it never has.....

Your proof of which is? A credible scientific source, please.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

8/31/94 - How does carbon dioxide cause global warming?


Fossil fuels such as gasoline, methane and propane contain mostly carbon. When these fuels are burned, they react with oxygen and produce carbon dioxide.
Because of our heavy use of fossil fuels, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been increasing since the industrial revolution. The destruction of forests which use carbon dioxide also contributes to the increase in carbon dioxide.

Most of the light energy from the sun is emitted in wavelengths shorter than 4,000 nanometers (.000004 meters). The heat energy released from the earth, however, is released in wavelengths longer than 4,000 nanometers. Carbon dioxide doesn't absorb the energy from the sun, but it does absorb some of the heat energy released from the earth. When a molecule of carbon dioxide absorbs heat energy, it goes into an excited unstable state. It can become stable again by releasing the energy it absorbed. Some of the released energy will go back to the earth and some will go out into space.

So in effect, carbon dioxide lets the light energy in, but doesn't let all of the heat energy out, similar to a greenhouse.

Currently, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is increasing at the rate of about one part per million per year. If this continues, some meteorologists expect that the average temperature of the earth will increase by about 2.5 degrees Celsius. This doesn't sound like much, but it could be enough to cause glaciers to melt, which would cause coastal flooding.

 

[Old Rocks]

The Carbon Cycle : Feature Articles

Because scientists know which wavelengths of energy each greenhouse gas absorbs, and the concentration of the gases in the atmosphere, they can calculate how much each gas contributes to warming the planet. Carbon dioxide causes about 20 percent of Earth’s greenhouse effect; water vapor accounts for about 50 percent; and clouds account for 25 percent. The rest is caused by small particles (aerosols) and minor greenhouse gases like methane.
Water vapor concentrations in the air are controlled by Earth’s temperature. Warmer temperatures evaporate more water from the oceans, expand air masses, and lead to higher humidity. Cooling causes water vapor to condense and fall out as rain, sleet, or snow.
Carbon dioxide, on the other hand, remains a gas at a wider range of atmospheric temperatures than water. Carbon dioxide molecules provide the initial greenhouse heating needed to maintain water vapor concentrations. When carbon dioxide concentrations drop, Earth cools, some water vapor falls out of the atmosphere, and the greenhouse warming caused by water vapor drops. Likewise, when carbon dioxide concentrations rise, air temperatures go up, and more water vapor evaporates into the atmosphere—which then amplifies greenhouse heating.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The Only this CO2 drives is the AGWCult

Want to try that again?

The only thing CO2 drives is the AGWCult

 

[Crick]

That's better. Now, do you have any evidence?

 

[freedombecki]

That's better. Now, do you have any evidence?

I have some: the sky is not falling on account of CO2, so unless you can prove your earlier postulations, I'm unconvinced.

 

[skookerasbil]

Speculation is ghey s0n.

Based on the number of instances in which you've used this term, I assume you're proud of your homophobicity. It's a shame, considering the numbers of your other failings. You'd think you'd get a leg up somewhere.

.....and that's the whole point.

No, it wasn't.

My post wasn't speculative in the least. Either you don't know what the term means or you simply needed an excuse to take a comment from your severely restricted selection.

Neither is being gay speculative. The term doesn't even apply. Unless, of course, you simply use gay as a general purpose perjorative. That would be what I expect from such a CLEARLY demonstrated ignorant bigot such as yourself.



No. Lots of people know lots of "shit about climate change". It is YOU that doesn't and the shortfall extends WA-A-A-A-Y beyond climate change.



Accordingly, we don't use ANYTHING you say about ANYTHING, 'cept maybe as an example for our children of what NOT to do in any given situation.

......computer models that are consistently wrong.

Which computer models? Which versions? Which runs? And in what way were they "consistently wrong"? Are you trying to suggest that ALL computer models are wrong? Are you trying to suggest that the concept of computer models is wrong? Are you trying to suggest that you even have the faintest idea what a computer model actually is? What it does? Hah!

One thing we do know with 100 certainty!! Climate change science is a closed society....if you are a scientist and your data does not match the data of the alarmist scientists, the response is, "FUCK YOU......you're out!!!" . That's not real science. That's an agenda.

Unfortunately, there is NOTHING in the actual events which took place during the incident "described" in your lead post which supports that contention. What IS supported is that like ALL of Rupert Murdoch's "journalistic" enterprises this piece is filled right up to its banners with his right-wing lies. Bengtsson's submission was rejected because it was a failure in every regard. That he chose to blame that rejection on fantasized persecution rather than on himself where that blame belonged, tells us that he is a failure. That you have decided to blindly and without the least examination accept what Bengtsson has claimed and what Rupert Murdoch knows you WANT to believe, tells us that you and Bengtsson could enjoy each other's company in some suburb of Loserville somewhere where you can continue to stuff your money into the pockets of that decrepit, lying, amoral wasteland known as Rupert Murdoch. That's what we know for certain.

What can I say s0n? Except the vast majority concurs with me >>>


69% Say It?s Likely Scientists Have Falsified Global Warming Research - Rasmussen Reports?



Even before this story broke, everybody and their brother was thinking the scientists are fucking with the data!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Note the progressives, as they are always doing on these threads.......trying to change the topic!!

So.....back on point s0ns!!!

I guess Einstien was a k00k too!!!

All science interpretations of the truth are susceptible to human failings.
Albert Einstein, Philosophy of Science.

It was agree to by 72 Nobel Laureates that the essentials of science are;

It is guided by natural law.
It has to be explanatory by reference to natural law.
It is testable against the empirical world.
Its conclusions are tentative (are not necessarily the final word).
It is falsifiable.


Ooooooooooooooops!!!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Also stated by Einstein >>>

"Truth" in science is almost always conditional on some assumption.



In other words, the idea of climate science being "settled" is comical.

 

[Crick]

As I suggested, you don't know the definition of the word "speculation"... and thousands of other things to boot. Feel free to continue the demonstration.

 

[mamooth]

Pity the poor deniers. As always happens now, their latest attempts to fabricate a phony scandal are getting ignored by everyone, other than a couple tabloids and the kook denier websites. Deniers have cried wolf too many times, and now the world correctly assumes they're lying about everything.

How deniers do "science" ...

 

[mamooth]

Some more of the AGW cultists. The whole world has joined the AGW cult, leaving only a handful of brave deniers to defend freedom fries, or something like that.

The US military
The US military leads on climate change | TheHill

The insurance companies
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/15/b...ne-on-climate-change.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

The credit rating agencies
How Climate Change Will Destroy Your Country's Credit Rating - Todd Woody - The Atlantic

 

[Crick]

That's better. Now, do you have any evidence?

I have some: the sky is not falling on account of CO2, so unless you can prove your earlier postulations, I'm unconvinced.

I rather doubt you'd be convinced if God appeared in front of you and swore on himself it was true. Be that as it may, specifically to what "postulations" do you refer?

 

[Crick]

What can I say s0n? Except the vast majority concurs with me >>>

No, they do not.

 

[skookerasbil]

As I suggested, you don't know the definition of the word "speculation"... and thousands of other things to boot. Feel free to continue the demonstration.

The only demonstration that matters s0n!!!! >>>






The rest of the shit is nothing but internet hobbyists spending the day typing about shit nobody cares about.

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[CrusaderFrank]

CO2 does NOT drive climate, it never has.....

Your proof of which is? A credible scientific source, please.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

8/31/94 - How does carbon dioxide cause global warming?


Fossil fuels such as gasoline, methane and propane contain mostly carbon. When these fuels are burned, they react with oxygen and produce carbon dioxide.
Because of our heavy use of fossil fuels, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been increasing since the industrial revolution. The destruction of forests which use carbon dioxide also contributes to the increase in carbon dioxide.

Most of the light energy from the sun is emitted in wavelengths shorter than 4,000 nanometers (.000004 meters). The heat energy released from the earth, however, is released in wavelengths longer than 4,000 nanometers. Carbon dioxide doesn't absorb the energy from the sun, but it does absorb some of the heat energy released from the earth. When a molecule of carbon dioxide absorbs heat energy, it goes into an excited unstable state. It can become stable again by releasing the energy it absorbed. Some of the released energy will go back to the earth and some will go out into space.

So in effect, carbon dioxide lets the light energy in, but doesn't let all of the heat energy out, similar to a greenhouse.

Currently, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is increasing at the rate of about one part per million per year. If this continues, some meteorologists expect that the average temperature of the earth will increase by about 2.5 degrees Celsius. This doesn't sound like much, but it could be enough to cause glaciers to melt, which would cause coastal flooding.

How can you ignore a 600,000 years data set showing CO2 lagging temperature???????????

Oh right, you're an AGWCultist

"Fossil fuels such as gasoline, methane and propane contain mostly carbon."

 

[skookerasbil]

What can I say s0n? Except the vast majority concurs with me >>>

No, they do not.

Indeed s0n....indeed!!!!



"Global warming isn’t a top priority. In the Pew Research Center’s poll of 20 possible priorities for the President and Congress in 2014, dealing with global warming ranked second from the last."

Earth Day 2014: Why The Public Isn't Warming To The Climate Change Debate - Forbes

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[Crick]

Don't hurt yourselves with all that mutual back-slapping. The point under contention was whether or not the majority of the public agreed with Skooerasshole there. The obvious answer, even given how dumb the American public can be, is an obvious no. Their standards may be low, but they've got 'em.

 

[ScienceRocks]

What can I say s0n? Except the vast majority concurs with me >>>

No, they do not.

Indeed s0n....indeed!!!!



"Global warming isn’t a top priority. In the Pew Research Center’s poll of 20 possible priorities for the President and Congress in 2014, dealing with global warming ranked second from the last."

Earth Day 2014: Why The Public Isn't Warming To The Climate Change Debate - Forbes

Yet, our government spends more on global warming than science.