CO2 Experiments posted here

[CrusaderFrank]

They both prove that CO2 experiments were posted here. Thus they both prove that several deniers here lie through their teeth.

We skeptics acknowledged that experiments were posted...we also pointed out that none actually demonstrated what you claimed that they demonstrated...so, now that we have exposed yet another lie on your part, again, which one of those bits of side show slight of hand do you claim demonstrates that 100 or even 200 ppm of additional CO2 can have a measurable effect on the climate.

The video from Mythbusters very explicitly recreates actual atmospheric CO2 levels. And several deniers denied that any experiments had ever been posted.

It's rather fuzzy on what they tested. They never actually show you the amounts of CO2 and they use really sensitive measuring instruments and really crude thermometers.

blalblahblah blah CO2 blahblahblah Methane blahlblahblah

I went as far as to call the scientist who conducted the experiment to ask him but he never got back to me

In any event we've been asking you to demonstrate the effect a 120PPM increase in CO2 has on temperature and pH and my guess is None

 

[jc456]

We skeptics acknowledged that experiments were posted...we also pointed out that none actually demonstrated what you claimed that they demonstrated...so, now that we have exposed yet another lie on your part, again, which one of those bits of side show slight of hand do you claim demonstrates that 100 or even 200 ppm of additional CO2 can have a measurable effect on the climate.

The video from Mythbusters very explicitly recreates actual atmospheric CO2 levels. And several deniers denied that any experiments had ever been posted.

It's rather fuzzy on what they tested. They never actually show you the amounts of CO2 and they use really sensitive measuring instruments and really crude thermometers.

blalblahblah blah CO2 blahblahblah Methane blahlblahblah

I went as far as to call the scientist who conducted the experiment to ask him but he never got back to me

In any event we've been asking you to demonstrate the effect a 120PPM increase in CO2 has on temperature and pH and my guess is None

Also, I went to the Mythbuster facebook page and requested attention on the experiment as well. I complimented them on the experiment, but explained it failed to demonstrate the current issue which is the 120PPM increase factor. I asked them to reconsider setting the experiment back up, bench mark the temperature at 270 PPM of CO2 and then add the 120 PPM CO2 to see if there was any increase in the temperature. I have yet to hear back from them. I did that over three months ago.

Again, if you listen to the audio carefully, they claimed in the video that they incremently added CO2 and at no time did the increase in temperature change during the incrementation.

One other thing they failed to bench mark, was what the CO2 content was in the controlled chamber and the other chambers prior to execution of the experiment.

And then like I stated, they didn't show what the incremental temperature would be at an add of 120 PPM.

So again, the only experiment out of the hundreds and thousands that exist, can't demonstrate what the effect of 120 PPM of CO2 actually does. None, zero, nadda.

One last thing, for me I'd like to see the experiment increment at 10 PPM CO2 upto 120 PPM and see at what level would it affect temperature if it indeed does and if it does does it saturate and level off. Alas, still no proof.

 

[jc456]

They both prove that CO2 experiments were posted here. Thus they both prove that several deniers here lie through their teeth.

We skeptics acknowledged that experiments were posted...we also pointed out that none actually demonstrated what you claimed that they demonstrated...so, now that we have exposed yet another lie on your part, again, which one of those bits of side show slight of hand do you claim demonstrates that 100 or even 200 ppm of additional CO2 can have a measurable effect on the climate.

The video from Mythbusters very explicitly recreates actual atmospheric CO2 levels. And several deniers denied that any experiments had ever been posted.

There was one thing missing, and that was a CO2 meter to show the actual CO2 content of the boxes. Do you know what the PPM of CO2 was in the box? Any of the boxes? We know what they claimed to add to the chamber, but was that what the reading in the box actually was?

 

[SSDD]

Your chart does not say what you claim it says.

That 120 of the current 400 ppm CO2 in the atmosphere comes from humans is an established fact.

No it isn't...it is an unsubstantiated claim.

 

[mamooth]

The HITRAN database, maintained by those socialists at the US Air Force, catalogs the spectral properties all all atmospheric gases.

HITRAN on the Web

Use the "references" link to get the many papers. That is, the lab setups.

The US Air Force data says that the "trace gas" CO2 has a big effect. But what do they know? They're just trying to make missiles work with IR seeker heads. Or maybe not. The Air Force must be sabotaging their own weapons in the name of the great socialist conspiracy.

^ That's not an experiment

You're right. It was literally hundreds of experiments, as described by the references. There were 19 references for CO2 alone.

And you're going to ignore all of it. That's why you're called deniers, because of the way you auto-deny any data that contradicts your cult's teachings.

 

[jc456]

The HITRAN database, maintained by those socialists at the US Air Force, catalogs the spectral properties all all atmospheric gases.

HITRAN on the Web

Use the "references" link to get the many papers. That is, the lab setups.

The US Air Force data says that the "trace gas" CO2 has a big effect. But what do they know? They're just trying to make missiles work with IR seeker heads. Or maybe not. The Air Force must be sabotaging their own weapons in the name of the great socialist conspiracy.

^ That's not an experiment

You're right. It was literally hundreds of experiments, as described by the references. There were 19 references for CO2 alone.

And you're going to ignore all of it. That's why you're called deniers, because of the way you auto-deny any data that contradicts your cult's teachings.

ok,

Name the one that shows 120PPM of added CO2 increases temperature or drives climate. I certainly ain't going to go through hundreds of experiments. Since you're so confident it's there, offer the one that shows it. If not, your response becomes the mumbo jumbo we normally get.

Name the one, don't need anymore than one.

 

[Kosh]

Your chart does not say what you claim it says.

That 120 of the current 400 ppm CO2 in the atmosphere comes from humans is an established fact. Feel free to deny it if you wish to continue your perfect run of fundamental science blunders.

Once again the deniers of real science are out to push their religion once again..

Of all the carbon emitted into the atmosphere each year, 210 billion tons are from natural sources, and only 6.3 billion tons are from man's activity. Man's burning of fossil fuel, therefore only accounts for 3 percent of total emissions of CO2.

People are never told that the most powerful greenhouse gases by orders of magnitude is water vapor and clouds. When only human emitted CO2 is considered, less than one percent of the greenhouse gas potential comes from human activity. Yet, all the global warming is supposed to be attributed to it. Water vapor plays a huge role in keeping the earth warm; 70 times more powerful than the CO2 emitted by human activity. When clouds are added, CO2 becomes even less important. However, clouds not only trap heat, low elevation clouds also reflect much of the incoming solar radiation, so the sun's heat never reaches the earth's surface which cools the earth. It is this mechanism that a growing number of scientists believe is one of the primary mechanisms warming and cooling the earth.

 

[elektra]

Solar in 30 years will make up at least 20% of the worlds energy needs.

Yet, your petrophobic tendencies persist...

15 years ago solar made up maybe 1gw of total worldwide energy...Today it is 150gw. A mind blowing increase.

In 1983 it was 40mw.
In 1976 it was 500kw

China added 12gw last year alone
America 4gw last year alone

each year that goes up.

Solar is a fact and I don't think it is insane to think it will grow to a fifth of energy needs by 2035.

Solar Energy increases the use if hydrocarbons.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The HITRAN database, maintained by those socialists at the US Air Force, catalogs the spectral properties all all atmospheric gases.

HITRAN on the Web

Use the "references" link to get the many papers. That is, the lab setups.

The US Air Force data says that the "trace gas" CO2 has a big effect. But what do they know? They're just trying to make missiles work with IR seeker heads. Or maybe not. The Air Force must be sabotaging their own weapons in the name of the great socialist conspiracy.

^ That's not an experiment

You're right. It was literally hundreds of experiments, as described by the references. There were 19 references for CO2 alone.

And you're going to ignore all of it. That's why you're called deniers, because of the way you auto-deny any data that contradicts your cult's teachings.

Yes, there are experiments, but none of them test your "Theory" which is a 120PPM increase in CO2 will end Western Civilization

 

[mamooth]

Yes, there are experiments, but none of them test your "Theory" which is a 120PPM increase in CO2 will end Western Civilization

Frank, why are you so consistently such a dishonest piece of shit?

Nobody holds these positions you claim we hold, yet you still always lie your ass off and say we hold them. Other than getting everyone to agree that you're a pathological liar for your cult, what do you hope to accomplish by lying so loud and so often? And given that you'll just lie your ass off in response to anything anyone says, why should anyone waste time addressing you?

 

[mamooth]

I certainly ain't going to go through hundreds of experiments.

That's your problem. The info is there, so look at it. We're not wasting further time trying to educate those who refuse to be educated.

The world doesn't care about your tantrums or proclamations of victory. Scream, pout, stamp your feet, you're still considered to be kooks. The burden of proof is on you to show why the whole world is wrong and your cult is right. If you can't meet that burden of proof, learn to enjoy the humiliation you'll be experiencing for the rest of your life.

 

[Kosh]

I certainly ain't going to go through hundreds of experiments.

That's your problem. The info is there, so look at it. We're not wasting further time trying to educate those who refuse to be educated.

The world doesn't care about your tantrums or proclamations of victory. Scream, pout, stamp your feet, you're still considered to be kooks. The burden of proof is on you to show why the whole world is wrong and your cult is right. If you can't meet that burden of proof, learn to enjoy the humiliation you'll be experiencing for the rest of your life.

Yet not one link (from the AGW cult) to datasets with source code that proves CO2 drives climate..

 

[westwall]

Yes, there are experiments, but none of them test your "Theory" which is a 120PPM increase in CO2 will end Western Civilization

Frank, why are you so consistently such a dishonest piece of shit?

Nobody holds these positions you claim we hold, yet you still always lie your ass off and say we hold them. Other than getting everyone to agree that you're a pathological liar for your cult, what do you hope to accomplish by lying so loud and so often? And given that you'll just lie your ass off in response to anything anyone says, why should anyone waste time addressing you?

My guess would be because he's not. The experiment posted, demonstrates the Ideal Gas Laws and nothing else. Take a physics course and learn what the hell they are.

 

[mamooth]

The experiment posted, demonstrates the Ideal Gas Laws and nothing else. Take a physics course and learn what the hell they are.

Westwall seems to be reluctant to do the math, as usual, so, as usual, I'll have to help him out. I'll start by pointing out it's not determined by the Ideal Gas Law. This is the gas compression equation for temperature.

k for air is 1.4

Call T1 300K.

(P2/P1), for adding 120 ppm CO2 -- essentially compressing the air -- will be 1.00012

Running the numbers ... T2 is ... 300.01 K.

That is, a 0.01 degree temperature increase. Briefly. For the CO2 case. For the methane case, it was more like .00015 degree. Yet the experiment showed a sustained temperature increases of around 1 degree.

So, those claiming the Mythbusters experiment just showed heat of compression -- that is, Westwall -- are totally wrong. Which was obvious to those with practical experience at physics. Which excludes almost all deniers.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum - Search Results

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/353339-time-history-of-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-from-800-000-years-to-the-present-20.html#post9183020

Yeah like 500,000 PPM of CO2 added

Fucking fraud

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Your "Theory" is 120PPM of CO2 raises temperature 2-8 degrees and lowers pH from 8.25 to 8.15

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yes, there are experiments, but none of them test your "Theory" which is a 120PPM increase in CO2 will end Western Civilization

Frank, why are you so consistently such a dishonest piece of shit?

Nobody holds these positions you claim we hold, yet you still always lie your ass off and say we hold them. Other than getting everyone to agree that you're a pathological liar for your cult, what do you hope to accomplish by lying so loud and so often? And given that you'll just lie your ass off in response to anything anyone says, why should anyone waste time addressing you?

I'm not the one passing myself off as a nuclear weapons Officer. I'm asking you Warmers to show us how a 120PPM increase in CO2 raises temperature 2-8 degrees and lowers pH.

So far, you haven't.

 

[jc456]

I certainly ain't going to go through hundreds of experiments.

That's your problem. The info is there, so look at it. We're not wasting further time trying to educate those who refuse to be educated.

The world doesn't care about your tantrums or proclamations of victory. Scream, pout, stamp your feet, you're still considered to be kooks. The burden of proof is on you to show why the whole world is wrong and your cult is right. If you can't meet that burden of proof, learn to enjoy the humiliation you'll be experiencing for the rest of your life.

Wrong that's your problem. The challenge that has been in front of you is to provide the evidence to support your claim that 120 PPM of CO2 drives climate. I'm not going to waste my time if you haven't given yours. LOL, here thousand links find it. Sir you remain classless. I can only perceive you are a fraud and have zero evidence. Good luck with your future endeavors.

 

[SSDD]

I certainly ain't going to go through hundreds of experiments.

That's your problem. The info is there, so look at it. We're not wasting further time trying to educate those who refuse to be educated.

The world doesn't care about your tantrums or proclamations of victory. Scream, pout, stamp your feet, you're still considered to be kooks. The burden of proof is on you to show why the whole world is wrong and your cult is right. If you can't meet that burden of proof, learn to enjoy the humiliation you'll be experiencing for the rest of your life.

Wrong that's your problem. The challenge that has been in front of you is to provide the evidence to support your claim that 120 PPM of CO2 drives climate. I'm not going to waste my time if you haven't given yours. LOL, here thousand links find it. Sir you remain classless. I can only perceive you are a fraud and have zero evidence. Good luck with your future endeavors.

Of course there is no actual evidence supporting their claims...if there were, it would be splashed across every thread in 15 point red flashing letters every day...You would not be able to escape it as it would be everywhere all the time....such would be their glee at finally having some real evidence to support their claims.

So long as you get bitter insult, ad hominems, and knee deep bullshit when you ask for some actual evidence to support their claims, you can be quite sure than it doesn't exist...ergo the bitter insult, ad hominems and bullshit.

 

[jc456]

That's your problem. The info is there, so look at it. We're not wasting further time trying to educate those who refuse to be educated.

The world doesn't care about your tantrums or proclamations of victory. Scream, pout, stamp your feet, you're still considered to be kooks. The burden of proof is on you to show why the whole world is wrong and your cult is right. If you can't meet that burden of proof, learn to enjoy the humiliation you'll be experiencing for the rest of your life.

Wrong that's your problem. The challenge that has been in front of you is to provide the evidence to support your claim that 120 PPM of CO2 drives climate. I'm not going to waste my time if you haven't given yours. LOL, here thousand links find it. Sir you remain classless. I can only perceive you are a fraud and have zero evidence. Good luck with your future endeavors.

Of course there is no actual evidence supporting their claims...if there were, it would be splashed across every thread in 15 point red flashing letters every day...You would not be able to escape it as it would be everywhere all the time....such would be their glee at finally having some real evidence to support their claims.

So long as you get bitter insult, ad hominems, and knee deep bullshit when you ask for some actual evidence to support their claims, you can be quite sure than it doesn't exist...ergo the bitter insult, ad hominems and bullshit.

I clearly understand. This thread is the verification of what you wrote. A little link with absolutely no reference to their claim. They fell right on their face!!!!! The debate is indeed over, the conclusion is 120 PPM of CO2 cannnot do what is claimed. Neither will 400 PPM. And it is science they do not understand about the properties of CO2.