how much warming from adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere is what we

[itfitzme]

...you are FORCING on America?

There you go with your psychotic, paranoid delusional, transferance crap again.

No one here works for the gov't. *I for one, am just some dude with a computer at home.

I think you've got me confused with your daddy. *

Why don't you give him a call and resolve your shit with him. If it's some boss you had in your early career or your daddy is death, get therapy. *If you wait a year or so, maybe Obamacare will pick it up for you.

And currently, I don't feel much of a need to whine endlessly about shit, you got that covered just fine.

 

[itfitzme]

And Medicare killed my Dad twice.. Once on paper -- a feat that it took a Congressman and 2 months of my life to fix. And then for real when they wouldn't authorize anesthesia for a procedure. That makes us approximately squared off i reckon..*

Govt doesn't drive progress except in pure R&D.. The rest rapidly morphs into corporate welfare and crony patronage. Guess you like it that way so you can BITCH on Thurs about those greedy, tax-dodging corporations.

That's the stupidest crock-o I've ever heard. *You dad died because that interfering gov't didn't interfere/help? *Wow.

Your dad died because you and he were to stupid and lazy to save the money to save his sorry as when he needed it.

Then, after all the years of bitching about the evil gov't and taxes, the evil liberal socialist Medicare blacklisted him because they got tired of listening to it.

It's your fault your dad is dead, you friggin' moron. *Tighten that shit up and deal with it.

My mom died of cancer *My father died of heart failure. *My wife was in a head on collision before there were airbags. *My back is f'ed up from sciatica.

This ain't the therapy forum.

 

[flacaltenn]

The question of how much warming will result from adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere is what we skeptics are skeptical of. The climate system is amazingly complex, and the IPCC position that elements within the climate system (especially clouds) will change in ways which amplify the resulting small warming tendency is highly questionable, to say the least. If the climate system instead acts to reduce the warming, then anthropogenic global warming (AGW) becomes for all practical purposes a non-issue.
*
This represents what I believe to be the simplest description of how greenhouse gases cause warming of the surface. It bypasses all of the esoteric discussions and instead deals only with observations, which I believe cannot be easily explained any other way:
*
FIRST, warming can be caused by a decrease in the rate of energy loss by the climate system (or any other system, for that matter).
*
SECOND, IR absorbing gases are observed from satellites to reduce the rate of energy loss to space.
*
THEREFORE, adding more IR absorbing gases will cause a warming tendency.
*
QED.
*
Again I emphasize, however, the above simple argument is necessarily true only to the extent that all other elements of the climate system remain the same, which they will not. These other changes are called ‘feedbacks’, and they can either make or break theories of global warming and associated climate change.

I never know if I should be morbidly amused or just cry.

You'd think that no one ever thought of "feedback". *I wonder, does be mean "negative feedback"'or "positive feedback"?

Like this is a new idea that the IPCC never considered.*

*The guy must think himself the Einstien of climate science.

Yeppers, there's complex "feedback" in there somewhere.


Which could it be, "positive" or "negative". Maybe it's both and one is stronger.

Someone farted... I can't prove who did it. But it sure is warmer and stinky.

Get it?

Every statement in that OP quote is DIRECT AGW theory.. You got a problem with that? Do you know who authored it? He knows more about climate than any of us.. And I'm certain he's aware of all the "theories" on feedbacks. YOU --- just apparently didn't read to the punchline..

While you're at it --- Give me your OWN interpretation of that middle graph..

I prefer to look at the ice ages THIS way...

where I've circled the areas and magnified the obvious places where TEMPERATURE LEADS the CO2... Either the data is crap or we take that literally or warmers need another explanation.. Critical thinkers would discount ANYTHING in that time period as being typical or normal considering the globe resembled a snow cone and NY City was under a mile of ice.. MEANINGLESS to explain today's climate anyway and huge waste of time..


No fair going back to your partisian website for a clue. I'd like YOUR interpretation of the middle graph...

 

[itfitzme]

I never know if I should be morbidly amused or just cry.

You'd think that no one ever thought of "feedback". *I wonder, does be mean "negative feedback"'or "positive feedback"?

Like this is a new idea that the IPCC never considered.*

*The guy must think himself the Einstien of climate science.

Yeppers, there's complex "feedback" in there somewhere.


Which could it be, "positive" or "negative". *Maybe it's both and one is stronger.

Someone farted... I can't prove who did it. *But it sure is warmer and stinky.

Get it?

Every statement in that OP quote is DIRECT AGW theory.. You got a problem with that? Do you know who authored it? He knows more about climate than any of us.. And I'm certain he's aware of all the "theories" on feedbacks. YOU --- just apparently didn't read to the punchline..*

While you're at it --- Give me your OWN interpretation of that middle graph..*

I prefer to look at the ice ages THIS way...*

where I've circled the areas and magnified the obvious places where TEMPERATURE LEADS the CO2... Either the data is crap or we take that literally or warmers need another explanation.. Critical thinkers would discount ANYTHING in that time period as being typical or normal considering the globe resembled a snow cone and NY City was under a mile of ice.. MEANINGLESS to explain today's climate anyway and huge waste of time..*


No fair going back to your partisian website for a clue. I'd like YOUR interpretation of the middle graph...

Well golly gosh, you can draw circles on *graph. *Now how about you go download the GIS Hadcrut, Volsok, and Mua Loa data, add in tree ring lroxy data, finde sunspot data, amd whatever elsy you cam think off then do a multivariate linear regression on it.

I'll be waiting to see the report with the p-values.

 

[SSDD]

Well golly gosh, you can draw circles on *graph. *Now how about you go download the GIS Hadcrut, Volsok, and Mua Loa data, add in tree ring lroxy data, finde sunspot data, amd whatever elsy you cam think off then do a multivariate linear regression on it.

Here is the Vostok ice core. all 450 thousand years of it. As you can see, CO2 has been following temperature around for a long, long time. With the exception of one or two anomolous instances, it is obvious that increased CO2 is a product of increased temperature, not a cause.

 

[flacaltenn]

And Medicare killed my Dad twice.. Once on paper -- a feat that it took a Congressman and 2 months of my life to fix. And then for real when they wouldn't authorize anesthesia for a procedure. That makes us approximately squared off i reckon..*

Govt doesn't drive progress except in pure R&D.. The rest rapidly morphs into corporate welfare and crony patronage. Guess you like it that way so you can BITCH on Thurs about those greedy, tax-dodging corporations.

That's the stupidest crock-o I've ever heard. *You dad died because that interfering gov't didn't interfere/help? *Wow.

Your dad died because you and he were to stupid and lazy to save the money to save his sorry as when he needed it.

Then, after all the years of bitching about the evil gov't and taxes, the evil liberal socialist Medicare blacklisted him because they got tired of listening to it.

It's your fault your dad is dead, you friggin' moron. *Tighten that shit up and deal with it.

My mom died of cancer *My father died of heart failure. *My wife was in a head on collision before there were airbags. *My back is f'ed up from sciatica.

This ain't the therapy forum.

Nice human touch there... I didn't start the diversion about Medicare. Wasn't even talking to you..

BTW: Medicare rules PROHIBITED ME or HIM from paying for the anesthesia portion of the procedure. If you're gonna get your gonads microwaved by the govt, you only get LOCAL anesthesia. No amount of SAVINGS or Recourse could fix that problem. Literally sentenced him to death for lack of CHOICE or FLEXIBILITY.....

 

[flacaltenn]

I never know if I should be morbidly amused or just cry.

You'd think that no one ever thought of "feedback". *I wonder, does be mean "negative feedback"'or "positive feedback"?

Like this is a new idea that the IPCC never considered.*

*The guy must think himself the Einstien of climate science.

Yeppers, there's complex "feedback" in there somewhere.


Which could it be, "positive" or "negative". *Maybe it's both and one is stronger.

Someone farted... I can't prove who did it. *But it sure is warmer and stinky.

Get it?

Every statement in that OP quote is DIRECT AGW theory.. You got a problem with that? Do you know who authored it? He knows more about climate than any of us.. And I'm certain he's aware of all the "theories" on feedbacks. YOU --- just apparently didn't read to the punchline..*

While you're at it --- Give me your OWN interpretation of that middle graph..*

I prefer to look at the ice ages THIS way...*

where I've circled the areas and magnified the obvious places where TEMPERATURE LEADS the CO2... Either the data is crap or we take that literally or warmers need another explanation.. Critical thinkers would discount ANYTHING in that time period as being typical or normal considering the globe resembled a snow cone and NY City was under a mile of ice.. MEANINGLESS to explain today's climate anyway and huge waste of time..*


No fair going back to your partisian website for a clue. I'd like YOUR interpretation of the middle graph...

Well golly gosh, you can draw circles on *graph. *Now how about you go download the GIS Hadcrut, Volsok, and Mua Loa data, add in tree ring lroxy data, finde sunspot data, amd whatever elsy you cam think off then do a multivariate linear regression on it.

I'll be waiting to see the report with the p-values.

THose actors on Big Bang Theory do an excellent job of pretending that they understand world class engineering and physics. So I'm dubious..

You wanna toss stuff up and have a conversation? Or get smarky and walk away from your own stuff. Your choice..

 

[itfitzme]

I never know if I should be morbidly amused or just cry.

You'd think that no one ever thought of "feedback". *I wonder, does be mean "negative feedback"'or "positive feedback"?

Like this is a new idea that the IPCC never considered.*

*The guy must think himself the Einstien of climate science.

Yeppers, there's complex "feedback" in there somewhere.


Which could it be, "positive" or "negative". *Maybe it's both and one is stronger.

Someone farted... I can't prove who did it. *But it sure is warmer and stinky.

Get it?

Every statement in that OP quote is DIRECT AGW theory.. You got a problem with that? Do you know who authored it? He knows more about climate than any of us.. And I'm certain he's aware of all the "theories" on feedbacks. YOU --- just apparently didn't read to the punchline..*

While you're at it --- Give me your OWN interpretation of that middle graph..*

I prefer to look at the ice ages THIS way...*

where I've circled the areas and magnified the obvious places where TEMPERATURE LEADS the CO2... Either the data is crap or we take that literally or warmers need another explanation.. Critical thinkers would discount ANYTHING in that time period as being typical or normal considering the globe resembled a snow cone and NY City was under a mile of ice.. MEANINGLESS to explain today's climate anyway and huge waste of time..*


No fair going back to your partisian website for a clue. I'd like YOUR interpretation of the middle graph...

Every statement in that OP quote is DIRECT AGW theory.. You got a problem with that? Do you know who authored it? He knows more about climate than any of us.. And I'm certain he's aware of all the "theories" on feedbacks. YOU --- just apparently didn't read to the punchline..*

While you're at it --- Give me your OWN interpretation of that middle graph..*

I prefer to look at the ice ages THIS way...*

where I've circled the areas and magnified the obvious places where TEMPERATURE LEADS the CO2... Either the data is crap or we take that literally or warmers need another explanation.. Critical thinkers would discount ANYTHING in that time period as being typical or normal considering the globe resembled a snow cone and NY City was under a mile of ice.. MEANINGLESS to explain today's climate anyway and huge waste of time..*


No fair going back to your partisian website for a clue. I'd like YOUR interpretation of the middle graph...

Well golly gosh, you can draw circles on *graph. *Now how about you go download the GIS Hadcrut, Volsok, and Mua Loa data, add in tree ring lroxy data, finde sunspot data, amd whatever elsy you cam think off then do a multivariate linear regression on it.

I'll be waiting to see the report with the p-values.

THose actors on Big Bang Theory do an excellent job of pretending that they understand world class engineering and physics. So I'm dubious..*

You wanna toss stuff up and have a conversation? Or get smarky and walk away from your own stuff. * *Your choice..

I did.

 

[flacaltenn]

Where? What the hell does sunspot data have to do with it?

What exactly IS the black plot in the middle graph?

 

[itfitzme]

And Medicare killed my Dad twice.. Once on paper -- a feat that it took a Congressman and 2 months of my life to fix. And then for real when they wouldn't authorize anesthesia for a procedure. That makes us approximately squared off i reckon..*

Govt doesn't drive progress except in pure R&D.. The rest rapidly morphs into corporate welfare and crony patronage. Guess you like it that way so you can BITCH on Thurs about those greedy, tax-dodging corporations.

That's the stupidest crock-o I've ever heard. *You dad died because that interfering gov't didn't interfere/help? *Wow.

Your dad died because you and he were to stupid and lazy to save the money to save his sorry as when he needed it.

Then, after all the years of bitching about the evil gov't and taxes, the evil liberal socialist Medicare blacklisted him because they got tired of listening to it.

It's your fault your dad is dead, you friggin' moron. *Tighten that shit up and deal with it.

My mom died of cancer *My father died of heart failure. *My wife was in a head on collision before there were airbags. *My back is f'ed up from sciatica.

This ain't the therapy forum.

Nice human touch there... I didn't start the diversion about Medicare. Wasn't even talking to you..*

BTW: Medicare rules PROHIBITED ME or HIM from paying for the anesthesia portion of the procedure. If you're gonna get your gonads microwaved by the govt, you only get LOCAL anesthesia. No amount of SAVINGS or Recourse could fix that problem. Literally sentenced him to death for lack of CHOICE or FLEXIBILITY.....

Then you should have a) run for office ahead of time and had the rules corrected before he needed it or b) paid for the whole procedure.

But stop whining about it now cuz you can't do nuthin' bout it.

 

[itfitzme]

Where? What the hell does sunspot data have to do with it?

What exactly IS the black plot in the middle graph?

Where's the report on a multivariate analysis of suspected climate driving variables? When you've completed it, then we'll take a look and see how you did.

 

[flacaltenn]

Where? What the hell does sunspot data have to do with it?

What exactly IS the black plot in the middle graph?

Where's the report on a multivariate analysis of suspected climate driving variables? When you've completed it, then we'll take a look and see how you did.

So the first time in 15 pages that you've posted anything on topic, you tossed some shit up you deemed important. But you won't answer simple questions about it?

 

[itfitzme]

Where? What the hell does sunspot data have to do with it?*

What exactly IS the black plot in the middle graph?

Where? What the hell does sunspot data have to do with it?*

What exactly IS the black plot in the middle graph?

Where's the report on a multivariate analysis of suspected climate driving variables? *When you've completed it, then we'll take a look and see how you did.

So the first time in 15 pages that you've posted anything on topic, you tossed some shit up you deemed important. But you won't answer simple questions about it?

What is the OP?

 

[PMZ]

It is wildly entertaining watching the Dittoheads reporting all of big oil's obfuscation of the simple fact of greenhouse gasses. You would think that in these times flat earth societies would be dead and gone but apparently the tyranny of ignorance has no expiration date.

It matters not. Responsible people are taking on the challange and making progress while those that believe themselves entitled to their own truth will continue to bay at the moon as they always have. That baying will have exactly the same affect on the moon as their squawking will have on sustainable energy. Or, in fact, on America's future politics.

While we will be paying for our unforgivable error of empowering them for a decade for many generations, at least we can claim learning from our mistakes.

 

[itfitzme]

It is wildly entertaining watching the Dittoheads reporting all of big oil's obfuscation of the simple fact of greenhouse gasses. You would think that in these times flat earth societies would be dead and gone but apparently the tyranny of ignorance has no expiration date.*

It matters not. Responsible people are taking on the challange and making progress while those that believe themselves entitled to their own truth will continue to bay at the moon as they always have. That baying will have exactly the same affect on the moon as their squawking will have on sustainable energy. Or, in fact, on America's future politics.*

While we will be paying for our unforgivable error of empowering them for a decade for many generations, at least we can claim learning from our mistakes.

Well, I learned, in grade school, the complete meaning of "critique". *There is a difference between critical thinking and fault-finding. One requires effort. *The other one is just bitching about shit.

 

[PMZ]

Here's the simple fact that those who feel entitled to, and would prefer, an alternate universe must run from. When a photon of light strikes a carbon dioxide molecule it is subject to certain very well known probabilities. There are odds that it will pass through unimpeded, that it will be absorbed, or that it will be reflected from wence it came. It can be shown theoretically and empiracly what those odds are for any wavelength of light.

Everything else is irrelavant.

They might as well switch now from the denial of AGW science to something else like denying gravity or time.

They've become the laughing stock of not only the country but the world.

 

[PMZ]

It is wildly entertaining watching the Dittoheads reporting all of big oil's obfuscation of the simple fact of greenhouse gasses. You would think that in these times flat earth societies would be dead and gone but apparently the tyranny of ignorance has no expiration date.*

It matters not. Responsible people are taking on the challange and making progress while those that believe themselves entitled to their own truth will continue to bay at the moon as they always have. That baying will have exactly the same affect on the moon as their squawking will have on sustainable energy. Or, in fact, on America's future politics.*

While we will be paying for our unforgivable error of empowering them for a decade for many generations, at least we can claim learning from our mistakes.

Well, I learned, in grade school, the complete meaning of "critique". *There is a difference between critical thinking and fault-finding. One requires effort. *The other one is just bitching about shit.

Critical thinking is so hard though. It requires education and that requires time and effort. It can't be done from the Lazy Boy. Way too much work!

 

[itfitzme]

It is wildly entertaining watching the Dittoheads reporting all of big oil's obfuscation of the simple fact of greenhouse gasses. You would think that in these times flat earth societies would be dead and gone but apparently the tyranny of ignorance has no expiration date.*

It matters not. Responsible people are taking on the challange and making progress while those that believe themselves entitled to their own truth will continue to bay at the moon as they always have. That baying will have exactly the same affect on the moon as their squawking will have on sustainable energy. Or, in fact, on America's future politics.*

While we will be paying for our unforgivable error of empowering them for a decade for many generations, at least we can claim learning from our mistakes.

Well, I learned, in grade school, the complete meaning of "critique". *There is a difference between critical thinking and fault-finding. One requires effort. *The other one is just bitching about shit.

Critical thinking is so hard though. It requires education and that requires time and effort. It can't be done from the Lazy Boy. Way too much work!

Hmm...*

You're not saying that some people expect easy ideas, easy education and easy money?*

Do you think they mean, "If Keyenes, the Federal *Reserve and liberal Congressman hadn't interfered with the easy and "free" market then we'd all be rich."?


You mean they think that "free market" literally means "free", as in "I wouldn't have to work so hard?"

Like watching some advertisement on TV, they apply the feeling associated with "free", as in "costs nothing" and apply it to "free market" and "freedom"? *Then they work from there as in "It is should be free but for ..."?

God made it all for me to have for free? Literally, the Garden of Eden? Free apples? Oh, I have to go pick them?

Then all the rest is just projection and transferance bullshit?

 

[gslack]

Here's the simple fact that those who feel entitled to, and would prefer, an alternate universe must run from. When a photon of light strikes a carbon dioxide molecule it is subject to certain very well known probabilities. There are odds that it will pass through unimpeded, that it will be absorbed, or that it will be reflected from wence it came. It can be shown theoretically and empiracly what those odds are for any wavelength of light.

Everything else is irrelavant.

They might as well switch now from the denial of AGW science to something else like denying gravity or time.

They've become the laughing stock of not only the country but the world.

LOL, the theory is that GH gases absorb and re-emit IR energy. If it's "reflecting" now it's whole other situation isn't it..

Dude seriously, this fake scientist is no better than the last several we have had here. You just altered the theory you spent pages defending...

 

[itfitzme]

Here's the simple fact that those who feel entitled to, and would prefer, an alternate universe must run from. When a photon of light strikes a carbon dioxide molecule it is subject to certain very well known probabilities. There are odds that it will pass through unimpeded, that it will be absorbed, or that it will be reflected from wence it came. It can be shown theoretically and empiracly what those odds are for any wavelength of light.

Everything else is irrelavant.

They might as well switch now from the denial of AGW science to something else like denying gravity or time.

They've become the laughing stock of not only the country but the world.

LOL, the theory is that GH gases absorb and re-emit IR energy. If it's "reflecting" now it's whole other situation isn't it..


.

So whatbis the differences between reflection, refraction, and difraction at an atomic level?