Pretty. Disturbing.

[AVG-JOE]

Published on Nov 17, 2014
An ultra-high-resolution NASA computer model has given scientists a stunning new look at how carbon dioxide in the atmosphere travels around the globe.



All other points notwithstanding, including cost, producing less pollution is better, no?

`​

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Published on Nov 17, 2014
An ultra-high-resolution NASA computer model has given scientists a stunning new look at how carbon dioxide in the atmosphere travels around the globe.



All other points notwithstanding, including cost, producing less pollution is better, no?

`​

Nah, letting businesses churn out as much as they like is better. Makes us more money. Can always buy O2 and carry it around in bottles like resp-ill people do if need be.

 

[AVG-JOE]

It's amazing how it changes as winter relinquishes control to spring.

Scary pretty.

 

[Mr. H.]

The U.S. uses more and pollutes less.

 

[skookerasbil]

not scary........unless one tends to the hysterical..........

It happens.............

 

[asterism]

So carbon dioxide isn't uniformly distributed in the atmosphere?

I swear I was told that it was.

 

[skookerasbil]

So carbon dioxide isn't uniformly distributed in the atmosphere?

I swear I was told that it was.

lmao.............brilliant


yep......the whole "global" thing was tossed years ago due to spectacular levels of losing.

 

[AVG-JOE]

 

[Billy_Bob]

Published on Nov 17, 2014
An ultra-high-resolution NASA computer model has given scientists a stunning new look at how carbon dioxide in the atmosphere travels around the globe.



All other points notwithstanding, including cost, producing less pollution is better, no?

`​

The highlighted is the reason we do not trust these people and their broken models. Models are not empirical evidence of anything.

But it got the desired effect of emotion going in you.. hence the word 'scary' and 'need' to stop it at all costs..

Use your dam head and quit falling for their propaganda aimed at feelings. Its just orchestrated misinformation. Until these fools can show me, using empirical evidence (observed), and they release their data methods and computer information so that it can be refuted or replicated the hype is just propaganda.

 

[Billy_Bob]

So carbon dioxide isn't uniformly distributed in the atmosphere?

I swear I was told that it was.

That is the mantra from may of the atmospherics people. but it clearly is not evenly distributed because physical measurements show it can vary by over 100ppm.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Published on Nov 17, 2014
An ultra-high-resolution NASA computer model has given scientists a stunning new look at how carbon dioxide in the atmosphere travels around the globe.



All other points notwithstanding, including cost, producing less pollution is better, no?

`​

The highlighted is the reason we do not trust these people and their broken models. Models are not empirical evidence of anything.

But it got the desired effect of emotion going in you.. hence the word 'scary' and 'need' to stop it at all costs..

Use your dam head and quit falling for their propaganda aimed at feelings. Its just orchestrated misinformation. Until these fools can show me, using empirical evidence (observed), and they release their data methods and computer information so that it can be refuted or replicated the hype is just propaganda.

So what?

All other points notwithstanding, including cost, producing less pollution is better, no?

Perhaps, for you, it's best viewed as 'art'.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I don't believe that some people are capable of learning or growing or changing. For some reason, they believe ignorance is preferable to education.

Our hope is that the 97% of scientists will be able to make their voices heard and we'll save these fools in spite of themselves.

 

[westwall]

Published on Nov 17, 2014
An ultra-high-resolution NASA computer model has given scientists a stunning new look at how carbon dioxide in the atmosphere travels around the globe.



All other points notwithstanding, including cost, producing less pollution is better, no?

`​

CO2 is not pollution, it IS the fundamental building block of ALL life on this planet. However, reducing pollution should be the goal of everyone. Ridiculous attempts to regulate CO2 will do nothing but harm efforts at true pollution control.

 

[HenryBHough]

So you parked both your limo and your SUV before mounting your stationary bicycle powered generator to charge the battery of your laptop in order to start this thread?

Yeah, I thought not.

 

[AVG-JOE]

I just thought it was a cool graphic that is at least as reflective of industrialization as is the one that shows all the lights on earth at night. And I find it telling that the emissions are so heavily concentrated in the northern hemisphere.

 

[Old Rocks]

So carbon dioxide isn't uniformly distributed in the atmosphere?

I swear I was told that it was.

That is the mantra from may of the atmospherics people. but it clearly is not evenly distributed because physical measurements show it can vary by over 100ppm.

You stupid fuck, the color spread is from 377 to 395, a spread of 18 ppm. Billy Boob, you are such a stupid liar that even the deniars should distance themselves from you.

 

[initforme]

While I have my doubts on GW I wouldn't mind seeing big oil companies make their record profits someday. But it won't happen in my lifetime..right now they have way too much influence on our gov't. I frankly don't trust one of them.

 

[BlackSand]

The U.S. uses more and pollutes less. View attachment 34245

Seems like that is also supported by the NASA graphic AVG-JOE included in the OP. I noticed the only interruption in the red line across the top was variation around North America.

.

 

[Billy_Bob]

I just thought it was a cool graphic that is at least as reflective of industrialization as is the one that shows all the lights on earth at night. And I find it telling that the emissions are so heavily concentrated in the northern hemisphere.

If you look at actual observations and not models you will find that is not true. The planet cycles with the seasons. CO2 increases with warmth and decreases with cold. It is not just industrial input. The short one year cycle they present is disingenuous.

There are much longer versions but they are all models and not direct observations.

Source

 

[saveliberty]

Took eight and a half years for that to come out huh?