MIT Scientist Debunks Global Warming Hysteria

[Dagosa]

Westy my Friend,

You’re now reduced to making friends on the net ? At least a beggar has to look real people in the eye for a hand out.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

More specifically, it precipitates out at the upper edge of the atmosphere to space, where the heat energy has to be to leave the planet.
Its way too cold at those high altitudes.
But CO2 never precipitates out.
So although water vapor can hold more heat, it is only CO2 that traps planetary heat.

Water vapor "precipitates out"?

Do you want to use a different term?

 

[Rigby5]

Chicago isn’t near an ocean?

Of course any body of water will increase local humidity, depending upon temperature.
Warm water will increase humidity more than cold water will.

 

[Rigby5]

Cause he turrets it out means it’s true in his world!! Hahaha

Because we have the prehistoric record, in sedimentary rocks, petrified tree rings, etc.
There have been at least 12 regular glacial/intergalacial periods, with a 110k year long cycle.

 

[Rigby5]

If CO2 “drives” temperatures, why does ice core data over 450,000 years show CO2 lagging on both increase and decrease?

Probably a slight defect in our means of calculating dates.
These cycles did not exist when you go back far enough, so then can not be planetary or solar orbits or anything like that.
Pretty much has to be linked to plants and CO2.

 

[Rigby5]

Did you look at the chart you posted? It shows warming starting about 20,000 years ago, not 500 years ago

Never said anything about "500 years ago".
What I said is that the total cycle is about 110k years long, and that we started a warming that ended the last ice age, about 20,000 years ago.
But now that the ice is gone and plants are back, they are absorbing the excess CO2 again, so are supposed to be starting a cooling period.
Instead, it is getting hotter yet, on top of the hottest part of the cycle.
That will produce a double heating that has never before happened in the history of the planet.
Artificial CO2 being released from ancient, sequestered sources, is extremely dangerous and irresponsible.
We are going to make the planet hotter than it has ever been.

 

[Rigby5]

Where’s that 20 ft of water coming from?

There is about 250' of ocean depth that is missing because that water is piled up as several mile high as glaciers on the poles, like Antartica and to a lesser degree, Greenland.
If we were to raise the planetary temperature a full 10 degrees, then the oceans would rise to the max, which is 250' higher than present.
It has happened before, but hundreds of millions of years ago.
For example, the western US is mostly sedimentary rock from an ocean that covered most of the US at one time.

 

[Rigby5]

In twenty years, global temperature has increased 0.4 Celsius.

O.M.G.

An increase of 0.4 Celsius from 20 degrees to 20.4 would increase
atmospheric water pressure from 17.5424 torr to perhaps 18.1 torr.

We're all gonna die!!!

What the frightened sheep cannot realize is that the water vapor
TODAY still far exceeds the warming capacity of carbon dioxide.
It is ignorant as hell to ignore the science of the absorption graph I present
below this vapor pressure chart.


View attachment 743013

View attachment 743022

Wrong.
Water vapor does not count at all.
That is because water vapor condenses out at cold temperatures.
And the ONLY place where is matters how much greenhouse gas you have, is on the boundary to space.
It is only at the boundary to space that the planet loses solar energy.
And that is the only place where it matters how much greenhouse gas you have, because that is where greenhouse gases prevent heat energy from escaping the planet as infrared light.
When you have more greenhouse gases on the boundary to space, the planet retains more solar heat.
When you have less greenhouse gases on the boundary to space, the planet loses more solar heat.
Get it?
CO2 is what regulates retention of solar heat or not.

 

[Rigby5]

View attachment 743054

Your Universities are worthless if they can't explain how CO2 suddenly drives temperature when lagged temperature over a 450,000 year data set

There are some additional complexities.
For example, when you heat water like oceans, it will also give off CO2 because it can not hold as much dissolved CO2 when warmer.
So it is still CO2 that precedes warming, but the warming then outgases additional delayed CO2 as well.

 

[Rigby5]

Incorrect.

Wrong.
The video says exactly what I am saying.
The normal ice age/interglacial is about 110k long.
We ended the last ice age about 20,000 years ago with a short warming period.
Now that plants have returned and are sequestering CO2 out of the air, we are supposed to be entering into a long cooling period.
But clearly we are not.
Instead, we are spiking with additional warming on top of the warmest part of the natural cycle.
We not only are preventing the natural cooling, but are stacking an artificial warming period on top of what is already the warmest of the natural cycle.
That double warming could easily be catastrophic and end most life on the planet.

 

[Dagosa]

Probably a slight defect in our means of calculating dates.
These cycles did not exist when you go back far enough, so then can not be planetary or solar orbits or anything like that.
Pretty much has to be linked to plants and CO2.

He’s asks kind of a silly question. If it lags at all, it “ lags” for the same reason all CO2 level measures had a slower rate of change prior to the industrial revolution.
Compared to the time of beginning of the industrial revolution, nothing has shown a greater rate of increase of accumulating CO2. His very question bolsters AGW.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Ahhhh, c'mon! I like slapping him around! It amuses me!

Like so many other Biden Leftists, he's a Hunter Biden Charm School Graduate.
Nobody talks such spite and hate face to face, say at a party. They would be shown the door
tout de suite.

 

[Rigby5]

Water vapor "precipitates out"?

Do you want to use a different term?

No, precipitates is the correct term for water vapor turning into snow or rain.

{...
In meteorology, precipitation is any product of the condensation of atmospheric water vapor that falls under gravitational pull from clouds.[2] The main forms of precipitation include drizzle, rain, sleet, snow, ice pellets, graupel and hail.
… }

Precipitation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The point being that CO2 has such a low temp at which it condenses, that only CO2 is affecting energy radiation out into space from earth's upper atmosphere.
Water vapor would hold more if it could be there, but it can't because it is too cold for there to be significant water vapor at the upper edge of the atmosphere.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We are going to make the planet hotter than it has ever been.

What is the hottest it's ever been? When?

 

[Ivan88]

Anyone withe even 1/2 of an honest mind has known that Globull warming was a fraud all along, along with their confusing temperature terminology. celcius vs centigrade versus Fahrenheit.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No, precipitates is the correct term for water vapor turning into snow or rain.

{...
In meteorology, precipitation is any product of the condensation of atmospheric water vapor that falls under gravitational pull from clouds.[2] The main forms of precipitation include drizzle, rain, sleet, snow, ice pellets, graupel and hail.
… }

Precipitation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The point being that CO2 has such a low temp at which it condenses, that only CO2 is affecting energy radiation out into space from earth's upper atmosphere.
Water vapor would hold more if it could be there, but it can't because it is too cold for there to be significant water vapor at the upper edge of the atmosphere.

Snow or rain is forming, "at the upper edge of the atmosphere"?

The point being that CO2 has such a low temp at which it condenses

What temperature?

 

[westwall]

Like so many other Biden Leftists, he's a Hunter Biden Charm School Graduate.
Nobody talks such spite and hate face to face, say at a party. They would be shown the door
tout de suite.

All of which is true. But I still enjoy slapping the crap out of him.

 

[Dagosa]

Did you look at the chart you posted? It shows warming starting about 20,000 years ago, not 500 years ago

Immaterial. AGW is not about the increase of CO2 in our atmosphere alone. It’s about the rate of increase while modern man has inhabited the earth. So, YOU post any ligit chart you want on CO2 and temp increases from whenever to now over a period of at least 300k years, and we‘ll easily show why deniers are FOS. It’s easy, but you’re afraid to aren’t you ?

 

[Rigby5]

What is the hottest it's ever been? When?

Not entirely fair.
I am referring to earth's global temperature due to accumulation of solar energy.
(The earth retains more solar energy than it radiates back into space.)
If the earth did not retain some solar energy, they calculate it would be about 40 degrees colder over all, and the change from day to night would be hundreds of degrees.

But if you go back far enough, then you have much more volcanic activity from the heat generated by gravity.
That greatly increased the temperature of the planet, but is no longer a factor.
That gravitation heat is slowly leaving the planet and has essentially no effect on the surface or the weather any more.

You can see the gray stripe is much warmer than most of the history of the planet as we know it.
To get to warming temperatures, you have to go back over 40 million years.
And I do not care to live under perpetual fog, in an earth covered in swamps and almost constantly raining.

 

[Rigby5]

Anyone withe even 1/2 of an honest mind has known that Globull warming was a fraud all along, along with their confusing temperature terminology. celcius vs centigrade versus Fahrenheit.

Why do you think that?
How could digging up and burning millions of tons of ancient fossil carbon not have a massive effect?