CO2 Has Almost No Effect on Global Temperature, Says Leading Climate Scientist

[Billy_Bob]

The green movement does not want to end fossil fuels but reduce their use.

Are you going to commit to dying for the green movement to work? Population reduction is the only way it can work.. So, who do you plan to kill to make it happen?

 

[Billy_Bob]

The teacher is likely very skilled but the idiot pupil CC denier who has never been told anything in his life is the problem.

The kid is smarter than the teacher who is indoctrinating him..

 

[Shareprofit]

Human caused global warming is not happening now.

How do you know this? Is this like another Donald Trump CC is a Chinese hoax rant ?

 

[Shareprofit]

Are you going to commit to dying for the green movement to work? Population reduction is the only way it can work.. So, who do you plan to kill to make it happen?

Dying? Idiot.

 

[Leo123]

How do you know this? Is this like another Donald Trump CC is a Chinese hoax rant ?

Because humans cannot control global climate.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Dying? Idiot.

You don't know much about your movement... I would say that makes you the USEFUL IDIOT...

 

[Shareprofit]

Because humans cannot control global climate.

I didn't say they do but influence it by increasing GHGs. It's not difficult to understand.

 

[Shareprofit]

You don't know much about your movement... I would say that makes you the USEFUL IDIOT...

Neither do you.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Todd the modeling is wrong. The ERBE satellite data tells us it is wrong. Come on Todd, use that thing between your ears, even if it is for just one minuet.

View attachment 749306

So you won't answer?

 

[Billy_Bob]

So you won't answer?

I just did... The evidence and the answers are in the satellite data. Have a nice day, Todd. You can jerk off all by yourself.

 

[Leo123]

I didn't say they do but influence it by increasing GHGs. It's not difficult to understand.

That has not been proven. It is speculation only.

 

[Crick]

That [that human activity affects the global climate] has not been proven. It is speculation only.

Since it is a question of the natural sciences, it wil never be proven, but the amount of evidence supporting that theory has led the IPCC to state:

"It is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land. Widespread and rapid
changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere and biosphere have occurred."

AND

"The evidence for human influence on recent climate change strengthened from the IPCC Second Assessment Report to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, and is now even stronger in this assessment. The IPCC Second Assessment Report (SAR, 1995) concluded ‘the balance of evidence suggests that there is a discernible human influence on global climate’. In subsequent assessments (TAR, 2001; AR4, 2007; and AR5, 2013), the evidence for human influence on the climate system was found to have progressively strengthened. The AR5 concluded that human influence on the climate system is clear, evident from increasing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, positive radiative forcing, observed warming, and physical understanding of the climate system. This chapter updates the assessment of human influence on the climate system for large-scale indicators of climate change, synthesizing information from paleo records, observations and climate models. It also provides the primary evaluation of large-scale indicators of climate change in this Report, complemented by fitness-for-purpose evaluation in subsequent chapters."

To call that speculation marks you clearly as ill-informed and disingenuous

 

[ding]

Glacial periods take thousands of years not global warming in decades as is happing now. CO2 is a GHG it's a fact so stop your irrational denial. You sound like a Trumpter.

There’s nothing irrational about the geologic record. The previous interglacial period was 2C warmer than the present interglacial period. And had 26 ft higher sea levels than today and 120 ppm less atmospheric CO2 than today. There is nothing controversial about those statements. They are statements of fact and prove there is no correlation between CO2 and temperature.

 

[ding]

Glacial periods take thousands of years not global warming in decades as is happing now. CO2 is a GHG it's a fact so stop your irrational denial. You sound like a Trumpter.

It sounds like you don’t know the difference between glacial periods and interglacial periods. Do you have a background in science? Because I do.

 

[ding]

Glacial periods take thousands of years not global warming in decades as is happing now. CO2 is a GHG it's a fact so stop your irrational denial. You sound like a Trumpter.

Yes CO2 does have a GHG effect but their models triple that effect through water vapor feedback which is incorrect.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I just did... The evidence and the answers are in the satellite data. Have a nice day, Todd. You can jerk off all by yourself.

What is it being absorbed by?

No answer.

The satellites tell us IR hits the water and is immediately re-radiated to space? Link?

No answer.

Who doesn't account for what energy loss? Link?

No answer.

Thanks for this.....

But it isn't an answer. Run away now.

 

[Crick]

I just did... The evidence and the answers are in the satellite data. Have a nice day, Todd. You can jerk off all by yourself.

So glad and so impressed that you never lower yourself to personal insults.

 

[Billo_Really]

The rats are starting to abandon ship:

https://dailysceptic.org/2022/09/24/co2-has-almost-no-effect-on-global-temperature-says-leading-climate-scientist/​

CO2 Has Almost No Effect on Global Temperature, Says Leading Climate Scientist​

​

Forget ‘settled’ science or ‘consensus’ – that is a political construct designed to quash debate in the interests of promoting a command-and-control Net Zero agenda. One of the great drivers of continual changes in the climate is heat exchange within both the atmosphere and the Earth’s surface. Current understanding of the entire picture is limited, and it seems the opportunity has been taken to fill this gap by blaming carbon dioxide almost entirely for the recent gentle warming. A new paper on the so-called ‘greenhouse’ effect highlights the vital role played by oceans and water vapour flows. CO2 is said to have “minimal effect” on the Earth’s temperature and climate.​

​

The paper has been published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) and is written by meteorologist William Kininmonth, a former consultant to the World Meteorological Organisation’s Commission for Climatology and former head of the Australian Government’s National Climate Centre. Kininmonth argues that the oceans are the “vital inertial and thermal flywheels” of the climate system. If one wants to control climate, it will be necessary to control the oceans, he argues. “Efforts to decarbonise in the hope of affecting global temperatures will be in vain,” he adds.​

​

In Kininmonth’s view, the recent warming is “probably simply the result of fluctuations in the ever-changing ocean circulation”. CO2 “must be recognised” as a very minor contributor to the observed warming, and one that is unlikely to prolong the warming trend beyond the peak generated by the natural oceanic oscillations, he notes. He explains that the main driver of global temperature is the movement of energy in water, both in the oceans and the atmosphere after evaporation.​

​

As CO₂ concentration increases from 0 to 600 parts per million (green bars), the total strength of the greenhouse effect, measured as the energy the greenhouse gases radiate to the Earth’s surface, barely changes (orange line). Source: Kininmonth 2022​

Only a real dumbass would believe garbage like this!

 

[jc456]

The teacher is likely very skilled but the idiot pupil CC denier who has never been told anything in his life is the problem.

Empirical evidence is all you need to post

 

[jc456]

Only a real dumbass would believe garbage like this!

Post empirical evidence