Human Caused Global Warming

[sealybobo]

Sorry, but you don't sound like you know a thing about the science or you'd discuss it. You sound like you're parroting something you heard elsewhere. Want to prove yourself? Tell me what happens to the infra-red radiation absorbed by CO2, if the concentration in the atmosphere keeps rising. Despite all your contentions of data supporting one side or another, you still manage to keep dodging the fundamental issue. Are you the guy that can finally clear this up?

I know based on a lab test in 1901 that as CO2 reaches saturation, they will not absorb IR waves, instead they will pass them to space. Herr Koch!!!!!

So what? Clearly there is something else you are leaving out. Because after all the experts got together and discussed this they continued the thought process to it's conclusion and they almost all agreed that GW is real. So you are trying to have an experts conversation with a bunch of people on USMB. Either you are one of the 3% experts who disagrees with all of your colleagues or you are a right wing tool who's not an expert but is using expert information that you yourself don't even fully understand because the coal companies through rush or fox told you what to say in this argument...

That shouldn't even be an argument anymore. You are now a conspiracy theorist if you deny gw. Period. A kook. Like someone who thinks Bush let 9-11 happen.

Dude, you make a statement and my peer gives you the numbers. What is it you're missing?

Who is your peer?

who do you think? Are you that naive?

Climate change skeptics’ talking points have evolved since the 1990s as the scientific evidence has grown. They first said the Earth wasn’t warming. Then they said the Earth was warming, but it’s not caused by human activity. Now, many agree with the science, but it’s not that big of a problem.

 

[jc456]

I know based on a lab test in 1901 that as CO2 reaches saturation, they will not absorb IR waves, instead they will pass them to space. Herr Koch!!!!!

So what? Clearly there is something else you are leaving out. Because after all the experts got together and discussed this they continued the thought process to it's conclusion and they almost all agreed that GW is real. So you are trying to have an experts conversation with a bunch of people on USMB. Either you are one of the 3% experts who disagrees with all of your colleagues or you are a right wing tool who's not an expert but is using expert information that you yourself don't even fully understand because the coal companies through rush or fox told you what to say in this argument...

That shouldn't even be an argument anymore. You are now a conspiracy theorist if you deny gw. Period. A kook. Like someone who thinks Bush let 9-11 happen.

Dude, you make a statement and my peer gives you the numbers. What is it you're missing?

Who is your peer?

who do you think? Are you that naive?

Climate change skeptics’ talking points have evolved since the 1990s as the scientific evidence has grown. They first said the Earth wasn’t warming. Then they said the Earth was warming, but it’s not caused by human activity. Now, many agree with the science, but it’s not that big of a problem.

and yet there is an 18 and half year pause. Hmmmmm.IPCC even recognizes that.

 

[konradv]

and yet there is an 18 and half year pause. Hmmmmm.IPCC even recognizes that.

So? You do realize there are climatic cycles, don't you? I don't doubt you'd be pointing that out if the roles were reversed. Well, regardless, a pause doesn't explain what happens to the INCREASING energy needed to saturate an INCREASING concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.

 

[jc456]

and yet there is an 18 and half year pause. Hmmmmm.IPCC even recognizes that.

So? You do realize there are climatic cycles, don't you? I don't doubt you'd be pointing that out if the roles were reversed. Well, regardless, a pause doesn't explain what happens to the INCREASING energy needed to saturate an INCREASING concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Dude, I don't care. And cycles there are many different ones. climate has been changing for a long long time buddy:

 

[konradv]

Dude, I don't care. And cycles there are many different ones. climate has been changing for a long long time buddy:

You don't care? You don't know. You're just spouting off what you've heard and throwing in a neat graph. Answer the question. What becomes of the energy?

 

[jc456]

Dude, I don't care. And cycles there are many different ones. climate has been changing for a long long time buddy:

You don't care? You don't know. You're just spouting off what you've heard and throwing in a neat graph. Answer the question. What becomes of the energy?

why does it matter? The proof is that it isn't mattering.

You show me the experiment, and I'll answer your question.

 

[cultsmasher]

In my thread "Will You Vote Republican," somebody who goes by Vigilante sent me a reply that seems to refute the whole human caused global warming thing. But I thought my reply is something that you would all like to weigh in on.

Well, some of us anyway.

Each year, all the volcanoes on earth put out an estimated 200 MILLION tons of CO2. Though some of this of course goes directly into the oceans. Humans on the other hand are responsible for an estimated 26.8 BILLION tons per year. Also, anybody who wishes to can look up a graph of the amount of CO2 humans have put out since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Lately, human generated CO2 appears to be going up at a rate that is beyond exponential. There is a good chance that temperatures will follow suit.

The problem you will find around here is that the deniers here will argue that no one can prove the greenhouse effect is real. This takes a number of variations. We have those who think CO2 causes some warming but it is a trivial component of the observed warming and essentially irrelevant. We have others who continue to claim that no experiment has ever shown CO2 causing a temperature increase despite having been shown text and video describing several experiments that, of course, show precisely that. We have others who've begun to argue that adding CO2 to the atmosphere actually causes the planet to cool.

We get analogous arguments about the acidification of the oceans: that the amount of CO2 humans have released couldn't possibly have had a significant effect on the ocean's pH to those that argue that CO2 in solution forms not carbonic acid but sodium bicarbonate.

This past summer, temperatures were fairly cool around where I live. But from what I have seen, if there are cooler temperatures in one area, it means that temperatures are hotter in another area of the earth.

It's really not possible to judge the Earth's climate from an isolated location for a limited amount of time.

I have a sister who is a human caused global warming denier. She points that in the far distant past, atmospheric CO2 levels were much higher than they are now. Which is true. Around one hundred million years ago or so, they were much higher. Apparently because of the breakup of the continents, things have been cooling down over a long time. Causing many ice ages. But as far as I have seen, this isn't something that happened a very long time ago. When global CO2 levels were much higher. We are in uncharted territory. No doubt there is much more methane in places like frozen tundra or shallow seas than there was in the far past. And methane is 20 times better at causing global warming than CO2. Just how much warming will it take for that to start getting released in ever greater quantity. It's hard to say. But there is one thing I know for sure. Most people don't really care what happens. As long as it happens to someone else.

I'm not sure what all that was supposed to mean. But... the predominant cause of warming and cooling in the Earth's geological past has been the Milankovitch orbital cycles. When changes in the amount of sunlight the Earth receives take place, it tends to change the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. That has shown itself, at least in studies of the last 22,000 years, to enhance warming and cooling periods. Warming is begun initially by orbital changes but after only a few hundred years, greenhouse warming from increased CO2 becomes the dominant driver. And the extremes in the Earth's past - all of the non-catastrophic changes - took place immensely more slowly than they are taking place today. The same changes in CO2 levels and temperatures that humans have seen in the last 150 years could easily have taken 150,000 years in the pre-human past.

Crick,
I am on your side. Though I can accept the fact than on any other topic besides thr reality of human caused global warming, you're not on mine.

 

[jc456]

In my thread "Will You Vote Republican," somebody who goes by Vigilante sent me a reply that seems to refute the whole human caused global warming thing. But I thought my reply is something that you would all like to weigh in on.

Well, some of us anyway.

Each year, all the volcanoes on earth put out an estimated 200 MILLION tons of CO2. Though some of this of course goes directly into the oceans. Humans on the other hand are responsible for an estimated 26.8 BILLION tons per year. Also, anybody who wishes to can look up a graph of the amount of CO2 humans have put out since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Lately, human generated CO2 appears to be going up at a rate that is beyond exponential. There is a good chance that temperatures will follow suit.

The problem you will find around here is that the deniers here will argue that no one can prove the greenhouse effect is real. This takes a number of variations. We have those who think CO2 causes some warming but it is a trivial component of the observed warming and essentially irrelevant. We have others who continue to claim that no experiment has ever shown CO2 causing a temperature increase despite having been shown text and video describing several experiments that, of course, show precisely that. We have others who've begun to argue that adding CO2 to the atmosphere actually causes the planet to cool.

We get analogous arguments about the acidification of the oceans: that the amount of CO2 humans have released couldn't possibly have had a significant effect on the ocean's pH to those that argue that CO2 in solution forms not carbonic acid but sodium bicarbonate.

This past summer, temperatures were fairly cool around where I live. But from what I have seen, if there are cooler temperatures in one area, it means that temperatures are hotter in another area of the earth.

It's really not possible to judge the Earth's climate from an isolated location for a limited amount of time.

I have a sister who is a human caused global warming denier. She points that in the far distant past, atmospheric CO2 levels were much higher than they are now. Which is true. Around one hundred million years ago or so, they were much higher. Apparently because of the breakup of the continents, things have been cooling down over a long time. Causing many ice ages. But as far as I have seen, this isn't something that happened a very long time ago. When global CO2 levels were much higher. We are in uncharted territory. No doubt there is much more methane in places like frozen tundra or shallow seas than there was in the far past. And methane is 20 times better at causing global warming than CO2. Just how much warming will it take for that to start getting released in ever greater quantity. It's hard to say. But there is one thing I know for sure. Most people don't really care what happens. As long as it happens to someone else.

I'm not sure what all that was supposed to mean. But... the predominant cause of warming and cooling in the Earth's geological past has been the Milankovitch orbital cycles. When changes in the amount of sunlight the Earth receives take place, it tends to change the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. That has shown itself, at least in studies of the last 22,000 years, to enhance warming and cooling periods. Warming is begun initially by orbital changes but after only a few hundred years, greenhouse warming from increased CO2 becomes the dominant driver. And the extremes in the Earth's past - all of the non-catastrophic changes - took place immensely more slowly than they are taking place today. The same changes in CO2 levels and temperatures that humans have seen in the last 150 years could easily have taken 150,000 years in the pre-human past.

Crick,
I am on your side. Though I can accept the fact than on any other topic besides thr reality of human caused global warming, you're not on mine.

ahhhh, do you need a tissue? snif snif.

 

[cultsmasher]

In my thread "Will You Vote Republican," somebody who goes by Vigilante sent me a reply that seems to refute the whole human caused global warming thing. But I thought my reply is something that you would all like to weigh in on.

Well, some of us anyway.

Each year, all the volcanoes on earth put out an estimated 200 MILLION tons of CO2. Though some of this of course goes directly into the oceans. Humans on the other hand are responsible for an estimated 26.8 BILLION tons per year. Also, anybody who wishes to can look up a graph of the amount of CO2 humans have put out since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Lately, human generated CO2 appears to be going up at a rate that is beyond exponential. There is a good chance that temperatures will follow suit.

The problem you will find around here is that the deniers here will argue that no one can prove the greenhouse effect is real. This takes a number of variations. We have those who think CO2 causes some warming but it is a trivial component of the observed warming and essentially irrelevant. We have others who continue to claim that no experiment has ever shown CO2 causing a temperature increase despite having been shown text and video describing several experiments that, of course, show precisely that. We have others who've begun to argue that adding CO2 to the atmosphere actually causes the planet to cool.

We get analogous arguments about the acidification of the oceans: that the amount of CO2 humans have released couldn't possibly have had a significant effect on the ocean's pH to those that argue that CO2 in solution forms not carbonic acid but sodium bicarbonate.

This past summer, temperatures were fairly cool around where I live. But from what I have seen, if there are cooler temperatures in one area, it means that temperatures are hotter in another area of the earth.

It's really not possible to judge the Earth's climate from an isolated location for a limited amount of time.

I have a sister who is a human caused global warming denier. She points that in the far distant past, atmospheric CO2 levels were much higher than they are now. Which is true. Around one hundred million years ago or so, they were much higher. Apparently because of the breakup of the continents, things have been cooling down over a long time. Causing many ice ages. But as far as I have seen, this isn't something that happened a very long time ago. When global CO2 levels were much higher. We are in uncharted territory. No doubt there is much more methane in places like frozen tundra or shallow seas than there was in the far past. And methane is 20 times better at causing global warming than CO2. Just how much warming will it take for that to start getting released in ever greater quantity. It's hard to say. But there is one thing I know for sure. Most people don't really care what happens. As long as it happens to someone else.

I'm not sure what all that was supposed to mean. But... the predominant cause of warming and cooling in the Earth's geological past has been the Milankovitch orbital cycles. When changes in the amount of sunlight the Earth receives take place, it tends to change the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. That has shown itself, at least in studies of the last 22,000 years, to enhance warming and cooling periods. Warming is begun initially by orbital changes but after only a few hundred years, greenhouse warming from increased CO2 becomes the dominant driver. And the extremes in the Earth's past - all of the non-catastrophic changes - took place immensely more slowly than they are taking place today. The same changes in CO2 levels and temperatures that humans have seen in the last 150 years could easily have taken 150,000 years in the pre-human past.

So show those videos of the experiment? However, if you use the mythbuster one, remember what has been pointed out, they didn't show adding 120PPM. They filled the chamber up. Just sayin, you have no link, no video, no anything as proof of an experiment that proves your lousy point! You are challenged Jiminie, or will you lie like your wooden puppet?

jc456,
Do you believe in god? If so, you are probably one of those religious people who actually look forward to the destruction of the earth. So you can go hang out in heaven with Jesus. (Though you would probably prefer that it happens to someone else) I would hope that your denier cult is religiously motivated. Because if it is science that you base your human caused global warming denial on, such moronic stupidity is almost beyond imignation. Maybe it's time I showed you these graphs again.

 

[jc456]

In my thread "Will You Vote Republican," somebody who goes by Vigilante sent me a reply that seems to refute the whole human caused global warming thing. But I thought my reply is something that you would all like to weigh in on.

Well, some of us anyway.

Each year, all the volcanoes on earth put out an estimated 200 MILLION tons of CO2. Though some of this of course goes directly into the oceans. Humans on the other hand are responsible for an estimated 26.8 BILLION tons per year. Also, anybody who wishes to can look up a graph of the amount of CO2 humans have put out since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Lately, human generated CO2 appears to be going up at a rate that is beyond exponential. There is a good chance that temperatures will follow suit.

The problem you will find around here is that the deniers here will argue that no one can prove the greenhouse effect is real. This takes a number of variations. We have those who think CO2 causes some warming but it is a trivial component of the observed warming and essentially irrelevant. We have others who continue to claim that no experiment has ever shown CO2 causing a temperature increase despite having been shown text and video describing several experiments that, of course, show precisely that. We have others who've begun to argue that adding CO2 to the atmosphere actually causes the planet to cool.

We get analogous arguments about the acidification of the oceans: that the amount of CO2 humans have released couldn't possibly have had a significant effect on the ocean's pH to those that argue that CO2 in solution forms not carbonic acid but sodium bicarbonate.

This past summer, temperatures were fairly cool around where I live. But from what I have seen, if there are cooler temperatures in one area, it means that temperatures are hotter in another area of the earth.

It's really not possible to judge the Earth's climate from an isolated location for a limited amount of time.

I have a sister who is a human caused global warming denier. She points that in the far distant past, atmospheric CO2 levels were much higher than they are now. Which is true. Around one hundred million years ago or so, they were much higher. Apparently because of the breakup of the continents, things have been cooling down over a long time. Causing many ice ages. But as far as I have seen, this isn't something that happened a very long time ago. When global CO2 levels were much higher. We are in uncharted territory. No doubt there is much more methane in places like frozen tundra or shallow seas than there was in the far past. And methane is 20 times better at causing global warming than CO2. Just how much warming will it take for that to start getting released in ever greater quantity. It's hard to say. But there is one thing I know for sure. Most people don't really care what happens. As long as it happens to someone else.

I'm not sure what all that was supposed to mean. But... the predominant cause of warming and cooling in the Earth's geological past has been the Milankovitch orbital cycles. When changes in the amount of sunlight the Earth receives take place, it tends to change the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. That has shown itself, at least in studies of the last 22,000 years, to enhance warming and cooling periods. Warming is begun initially by orbital changes but after only a few hundred years, greenhouse warming from increased CO2 becomes the dominant driver. And the extremes in the Earth's past - all of the non-catastrophic changes - took place immensely more slowly than they are taking place today. The same changes in CO2 levels and temperatures that humans have seen in the last 150 years could easily have taken 150,000 years in the pre-human past.

So show those videos of the experiment? However, if you use the mythbuster one, remember what has been pointed out, they didn't show adding 120PPM. They filled the chamber up. Just sayin, you have no link, no video, no anything as proof of an experiment that proves your lousy point! You are challenged Jiminie, or will you lie like your wooden puppet?

jc456,
Do you believe in god? If so, you are probably one of those religious people who actually look forward to the destruction of the earth. So you can go hang out in heaven with Jesus. (Though you would probably prefer that it happens to someone else) I would hope that your denier cult is religiously motivated. Because if it is science that you base your human caused global warming denial on, such moronic stupidity is almost beyond imignation. Maybe it's time I showed you these graphs again.
View attachment 34348 View attachment 34349

 

[cultsmasher]

Man-made global warming is a lie and not backed up by science claims leading meteorologist Daily Mail Online

Wildcard,
Fuck your daily mail online. Try looking up something in Scientific American or some other respectable science publication on the subject. Even the Pentagon knows that HCGW is real. In the documentary, "Greedy Lying Bastards," they showed the CEO of Exxon admiting to it. And he would have every reason to lie about it. But for most people, apart from you, jc456 and SSDD, you can only pretend to be "so" stupid.

 

[cultsmasher]

Robot Sub Finds Much Thicker Than Expected Antarctic Sea Ice

Just wow... Antarctic sea ice is estimated to be 30-40% thicker than the satellite measurements. This means the calibration on those birds is wrong and the amount of ice is much larger than thought.

I know some alarmists that will go sideways hearing that there is more ice than expected...

Billy_Bob,
You are such an idiot. I remember seeing something from about a couple of decades ago where a chunk of sea ice broke off Antarctica and started to float away. It was about the size of Belgium. And when sea ice leaves, the ice on land flows to the sea faster. Also, It is possible to sail a submarine under the Arctic ice cap. But seeing how much of the Antarctic is contenent, it would be a little more difficult to do.

 

[Wyld Kard]

Man-made global warming is a lie and not backed up by science claims leading meteorologist Daily Mail Online

Wildcard,
Fuck your daily mail online. Try looking up something in Scientific American or some other respectable science publication on the subject. Even the Pentagon knows that HCGW is real. In the documentary, "Greedy Lying Bastards," they showed the CEO of Exxon admiting to it. And he would have every reason to lie about it. But for most people, apart from you, jc456 and SSDD, you can only pretend to be "so" stupid.

Fuck you and that bullshit that YOU continually post calling it proof, whining like a little bitch, saying that global warming is real and that it's a threat to the planet, and that it's man-made. WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP!

YOU are wrong, YOU have been wrong, and YOU will continue to be wrong, but YOU are too damn stupid to realize it.

Global warming / climate change is a lie.




.

 

[cultsmasher]

There are mountains of evidence and you know it.

There are mountains of bullshit lies and misinformation that is based on fraudulent science but you're too damn stupid to realize it.

Wildcard,
If 99%+ of scientists say that human caused global is real, I think I will go with them. Not you.

Really? Do you realize that 99% of scientists were at one time wrong on most of what we actually know today? Why go with a group that history shows is most assuredly wrong?

SSDD,
We all know. A long time ago, most scientists didn't believe that man could fly. etc. etc. etc. But the way I think science works is that the more you know about it, as scientists do today, the better it becomes. Also, I'm not a metrologist or anything. But your statements about energy flow through the atmosphere has "BULLSHIT" written all over it. Besides, it isn't the issue. The greenhouse effect is.

 

[cultsmasher]

Man-made global warming is a lie and not backed up by science claims leading meteorologist Daily Mail Online

Wildcard,
Fuck your daily mail online. Try looking up something in Scientific American or some other respectable science publication on the subject. Even the Pentagon knows that HCGW is real. In the documentary, "Greedy Lying Bastards," they showed the CEO of Exxon admiting to it. And he would have every reason to lie about it. But for most people, apart from you, jc456 and SSDD, you can only pretend to be "so" stupid.

Fuck you too, moron. Why don't you go to the people in the Pentagon who's business it is to know such things. Tell them your denier crap so they can laugh you out of their office. Or go to the CEO of Exxon and tell him your views. He will probably hire you and give you a harlequin outfit to wear.


Fuck you and that bullshit that YOU continually post calling it proof, whining like a little bitch, saying that global warming is real and that it's a threat to the planet, and that it's man-made. WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP!

YOU are wrong, YOU have been wrong, and YOU will continue to be wrong, but YOU are too damn stupid to realize it.

Global warming / climate change is a lie.




.

 

[Wyld Kard]

Man-made global warming is a lie and not backed up by science claims leading meteorologist Daily Mail Online

Wildcard,
Fuck your daily mail online. Try looking up something in Scientific American or some other respectable science publication on the subject. Even the Pentagon knows that HCGW is real. In the documentary, "Greedy Lying Bastards," they showed the CEO of Exxon admiting to it. And he would have every reason to lie about it. But for most people, apart from you, jc456 and SSDD, you can only pretend to be "so" stupid.

Fuck you and that bullshit that YOU continually post calling it proof, whining like a little bitch, saying that global warming is real and that it's a threat to the planet, and that it's man-made. WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP!

YOU are wrong, YOU have been wrong, and YOU will continue to be wrong, but YOU are too damn stupid to realize it.

Global warming / climate change is a lie.


Fuck you too, moron. Why don't you go to the people in the Pentagon who's business it is to know such things. Tell them your denier crap so they can laugh you out of their office. Or go to the CEO of Exxon and tell him your views. He will probably hire you and give you a harlequin outfit to wear.

You're just mad cause not everyone believes in and accepts the crap that you do?

 

[konradv]

You don't care? You don't know. You're just spouting off what you've heard and throwing in a neat graph. Answer the question. What becomes of the energy?

why does it matter? The proof is that it isn't mattering.

You don't know that. You're taking a small slice of time and saying it's the standard without accounting for all the facts. Aren't facts nasty when they get in the way of your deeply held biases? So much for being "on full trott at me". So it ends, not with a bang, but a whimper!

 

[konradv]

ahhhh, do you need a tissue? snif snif.

Are you an adult? You do realize this is a board for mature adults, right? Do you have your parents permission to be here? We don't really have time for immature outbursts from children. We get enough of that from the so-called adults around here.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Billy Bob -

That's an excellent and interesting read.

I particularly noted this conclusion:

• Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global average sea level.
• Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in human-induced greenhouse gas concentrations.

This text was edited out of the original text by the blog you linked, but it is in the text on the British Antarctic Survey site.

I'm assuming that you agree with it, given you linked it.

You assume wrong.. Those two statements are conjecture. There is no basis in fact and the facts presented show those two statements false. Their own paper shows the alarmist drivel fraud. Yet they placed them in for the faithful to latch on too as the facts are damming. The statements are an attempt to keep their funding. You will find them in every paper which is damming and the people are trying like hell to keep the money flowing.

The ICE INCREASE is in direct conflict with the AGW meme.. You glossed over that part and went right to the lies..

 

[Billy_Bob]

Observation is that for 2 decades now there has been no warming while CO2 has continued to increase.....Observation is that most of the warming of the past 150 years happened prior to 1950 when CO2 levels were considered safe....observation is that no tropospheric hot spot has materialized even though the greenhouse hypothesis says it must exist....observation is that the hypothesis has repeatedly failed but rather than act as true scientists and scrap a failed hypothesis and go back to the fundamentals to determine why the hypothesis failed, excuse upon excuse upon excuse is made in an attempt to preserve the failed hypothesis...observation is increasing arctic and antarctic ice....observation is data tampering....observation does not support the hoax.

The Null Hypothesis is such a damming thing. No temp rise yet CO2 continued to increase without a corresponding rise in temp. Simple Observation shows the premise False.