Global Warming. Kiss Your Ass Goodbye.

[Flash]

Do you actually believe that? I hate to break it to you but you are wrong and you couldn't support your contention if you tried.



May I ask how YOU would know what real science is?




Climategate. Great. The junk that keeps giving. You didn't understand what they were talking about and you didn't listen when people explained it to you.



No they have not. Why do you make accusations you can't POSSIBLY back up?



You wouldn't understand the science if someone explained it to you. Why do you say stuff like this? You have never done scientific research. Do you like it when people come and critique your janitorial work?



Why don't you take some science classes and get back to us?

You are really confused about this AGW scam, aren't you?

I have an advanced degree in Environmental Engineering. PE. 30 years experience in dealing with real pollution. In retirement occasionally teach university courses in Environmental Science to include climate change.

I am not an expert on Climate Science but I am much better read on the subject than you stupid Environmental Wackos. I know the right questions to ask and know science bullshit when I see it.

AGW is science bullshit based up fraudulent and cherry picked data by assholes that have admitted they screwed with the data for filthy ass political reasons.

Whenever I took the time to trace where the data came from it was always flawed.

Only stupid uneducated morons believe in this scam.

Climate change is real. Also, humans pollute the hell out of the environment.

With farming and ranching humans have turned forest into grasslands or deserts and that has an effect on localized climate but that is not this silly CO2 blamed AGW scam.

There is absolutely no science proof whatsoever that humans have significant changed the climate with fossil fuel emissions. Most of the atmospheric CO2 chemistry by the Environmental Wackos is significantly flawed. CO2 is not a significant greenhouse gas at the levels emitted. If anybody tells you different they are lying to you.
The earth oceans and biosphere buffers most of it very well.

You stupid uneducated Moon Bats don't want to hear the real science or want to hear about the massive fraud that went to promote the scam. You are idiots.

Like I say, you stupid uneducated low information Moon Bats don't know any more about Climate Science than you know about Biology, History, Economics, Ethics or the Constitution.



.

 

[ding]

So of course that isn't going to happen the instant you add a new molecule of CO2 to the atmosphere.

CO2 molecules absorbing outgoing longwave radiation and then back radiate heat into the atmosphere happens pretty dang fast. How long do you believe it takes?

 

[ding]

The Mayan Empire was once EXTREMELY large and extremely powerful in mesoAmerica. Then they had a bunch of multi year/multi decadal droughts and their society collapsed.

AGW may very well collapse our agricultural infrastructure (plants prefer specific growing conditions, and sometimes hotter is NOT better for some food vegetables). The 1930's saw the Dustbowl in the mid continent which resulted in a large number of "climate refugees", now imagine if that had been much larger in extent and hit in, say, the Central Valley where most of our table vegetables are grown in the US.

How about moving the plant hardiness zones in the midwest further north. Now Canada has some of the best conditions for growing staple crops that we rely on for export and for our food industry.

Global warming is already seen melting the Greenland Icesheet which is dumping a lot of fresh water into the upper arch of the AMOC in the North Atlantic. That is the mechanism by which Western Europe retains warmth for its latitude, it gets heat from the tropics pumped up into the upper latitudes. If that re-organizes or shuts down (there's evidence of it happening in the geologic record) it might crater their agriculture and infrastructure very quickly. They are a MAJOR trading partner for the US.

Now you've got most of the free, first world developed nations in crisis. That leads to economic crises all over the place.

Does that make any sense to you? Because pretty much EVERYTHING in this post has a precedent for it. Just not on a global scale like we are looking at now.

That's why I say you are betting against the house by siding with the tiny minority who disagree with the science. YOU don't have any reason to side with them other than your intense WISH that they be right. You have no technical expertise to declare that thousands upon thousands of independent experts all over the world are WRONG. You just don't.

So it sounds like you believe the risk is from famine because we won't be able to grow crops in a warmer wetter climate. Is that correct?

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

So it sounds like you believe the risk is from famine because we won't be able to grow crops in a warmer wetter climate. Is that correct?

Again, you grossly oversimplify the situation. SURELY you don't think that AGW means that every point on earth gets warmer and wetter do you?

AGW means that the overall global average temperature is increasing, but locally there can even be COOLING and even DRYING of areas.

(The example of the shutdown of the GUlf Stream is a great example. Surely you understood that part, right?)

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

CO2 molecules to absorbing outgoing longwave radiation and then back radiate heat into the atmosphere happens pretty dang fast. How long do you believe it takes?

Why are you ignoring the more complete explanation of the greenhouse effect?

 

[ding]

Again, you grossly oversimplify the situation. SURELY you don't think that AGW means that every point on earth gets warmer and wetter do you?

AGW means that the overall global average temperature is increasing, but locally there can even be COOLING and even DRYING of areas.

(The example of the shutdown of the GUlf Stream is a great example. Surely you understood that part, right?)

Sure but the overall effect is warmer and wetter, right?

I believe you are the one over simplifying it. A warmer wetter planet is conducive to plant growth. Just look at the geologic record.

 

[ding]

Why are you ignoring the more complete explanation of the greenhouse effect?

Because you don't seem to be able to understand the GHG effect happens quickly. How long do you believe it takes?

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

You are really confused about this AGW scam, aren't you?

Not as much as you are.

I have an advanced degree in Environmental Engineering. PE. 30 years experience in dealing with real pollution. In retirement occasionally teach university courses in Environmental Science to include climate change.

Have you had a lobotomy because your posts don't indicate anything even remotely like that.

I am not an expert on Climate Science but I am much better read on the subject than you stupid Environmental Wackos.

Nope. I technically "outrank" you in terms of education in the earth sciences.

AGW is science bullshit based up fraudulent and cherry picked data by assholes that have admitted they screwed with the data for filthy ass political reasons.

^^^^THIS is how I know you aren't really speaking as a trained scientist. Otherwise you would know more about this and you could actually even SUPPORT your point. But you can't because no such wholesale fraud is real.

Whenever I took the time to trace where the data came from it was always flawed.

Not it wasn't. You just didn't understand it.

climate change is real. Also, humans pollute the hell out of the environment.

Agreed!

With farming and ranching humans have turned forest into grasslands or deserts and that has an effect on localized climate but that is not this silly CO2 blamed AGW scam.

See? There again YOU ARE DEMONSTRABLY WRONG. Someone who had never read any of the science might think that CO2 is the only thing anyone blames, but that isn't what the SCIENCE says. You claim you are well read on this topic, but you clearly haven't actually read any of it.

There is absolutely no science proof whatsoever that humans have significant changed the climate with fossil fuel emissions. Most of the atmospheric CO2 chemistry by the Environmental Wackos is significantly flawed. CO2 is not a significant greenhouse gas at the levels emitted. If anybody tells you different they are lying to you.
The earth oceans and biosphere buffers most of it very well.

If you actually WERE functioning as a real scientist you'd support your claims. But you are wrong so you can't really support them.

You stupid uneducated Moon Bats don't want to hear the real science or want to hear about the massive fraud that went to promote the scam. You are idiots.

I've got more real science under my belt than you do. Again, sorry to pull rank on you.

Like I say, you stupid uneducated low information Moon Bats don't know any more about Climate Science than you know about Biology, History, Economics, Ethics or the Constitution.



.

You don't know what you are talking about.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Sure but the overall effect is warmer and wetter, right?

Nope.

Maybe you should look at the science more closely. You don't actually seem to know much about climate in general let alone AGW.

 

[ding]

Nope.

Maybe you should look at the science more closely. You don't actually seem to know much about climate in general let alone AGW.

You do realize you have already admitted that warmer temperatures increase water vapor, right?

What are the effects of increased water vapor in the atmosphere?

 

[ding]

You don't actually seem to know much about climate in general let alone AGW.

I usually don't allow personal comments like this to distract me from making my point but you are more than welcome to keep trying.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The altitude at which the IR photons re-radiate back into space does, yes.

Why does the altitude get higher with more CO2?

 

[ding]

Cardinal Carminative

In general, do you believe a warmer wetter climate is conducive to plant growth?

 

[ding]

Cardinal Carminative

How long do you believe it takes for a CO2 molecule to absorb longwave radiation and then back radiate it into the atmosphere?

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

You do realize you have already admitted that warmer temperatures increase water vapor, right?

What are the effects of increased water vapor in the atmosphere?

Climate is NOT solely driven ONLY by the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Climate is also a function of a number of other factors.

Western Europe is currently warmer than it should be for it's latitude. The reason they are as warm as they are is because the Gulf Stream in the North Atlantic is pumping heat from the tropics into the higher latitudes.

If you warm the planet enough and melt the Greenland Ice sheet it will dump cold, fresh water into the upper reaches of the Gulf Stream. The Gulf Stream is part of a larger THERMOHALINE CIRCULATION. That means it relies on temperature and salinity to control density and flow of the current.

If the Gulf Stream shuts down (which geologic history shows it has done in the past) because it's flow has been disrupted by a bunch of cold fresh water it will cause western Europe to get cooler and possibly drier.

Why is this hard to understand? Do you think the earth has one homogenous climate and it is ONLY driven by the greenhouse gases?

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Why does the altitude get higher with more CO2?

The altitude at which the IR photons RE-RADIATE OUT BACK INTO SPACE.

With increased CO2 molecules in the atmosphere it provides more chances for a given IR photon to be absorbed, re-emitted and then absorbed AGAIN. The IR photon is ultimately going to re-radiate back out into space. With more CO2 in the atmosphere the level at which that happens gets higher and higher.

That's the Greenhouse Effect.

 

[ding]

Climate is NOT solely driven ONLY by the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Climate is also a function of a number of other factors.

Western Europe is currently warmer than it should be for it's latitude. The reason they are as warm as they are is because the Gulf Stream in the North Atlantic is pumping heat from the tropics into the higher latitudes.

If you warm the planet enough and melt the Greenland Ice sheet it will dump cold, fresh water into the upper reaches of the Gulf Stream. The Gulf Stream is part of a larger THERMOHALINE CIRCULATION. That means it relies on temperature and salinity to control density and flow of the current.

If the Gulf Stream shuts down (which geologic history shows it has done in the past) because it's flow has been disrupted by a bunch of cold fresh water it will cause western Europe to get cooler and possibly drier.

Why is this hard to understand? Do you think the earth has one homogenous climate and it is ONLY driven by the greenhouse gases?

That's nice but we are discussing what happens in a warmer wetter climate. You have already admitted that warmer temperatures increase water vapor. What are the effects of increased water vapor in the atmosphere?

 

[ding]

Climate is NOT solely driven ONLY by the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Which is why it's odd that the models the IPCC relies upon tune out everything else but CO2.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

I usually don't allow personal comments like this to distract me from making my point but you are more than welcome to keep trying.

But you don't seem to understand basic climate. It is VERY hard to discuss this technical topic with someone who doesn't even seem to understand what the Gulf Stream does.

I hope you will understand that it is frustrating to answer your one-liners because you NEVER discuss ANY topic in ANY technical detail.

Literally 99% of your posts are one-line questions and cartoon oversimplifications.

Help me out a bit. Talk to me like you have a technical background.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

That's nice but we are discussing what happens in a warmer wetter climate. You have already admitted that warmer temperatures increase water vapor. What are the effects of increased water vapor in the atmosphere?

You want to make it sound like the entire earth will get warmer and wetter as if it will do so on every point on the earth. That's simply wrong. IT has NOTHING to do with how climate actually works.

So I'm not going to follow you down your cartoon rabbit hole.

If you have a technical point, make it.