Search results

thanks for posting...I think. I need a drink now. Extinction is not an exaggeration...... it's a definite for many species, and not impossible for man. We are throwing the earth's climate for a loop. A positive feedback loop. Scary shit. But we still have the Republican morons saying it's...

So you admit that science is neither democratic nor republican. Good. So then you admit that what piezoe wrote is fact right?

Then you need to read it again. Because it is the essential element to understanding AGW. If you are having problem understanding, it would explain your obvious confusion/ignorance/confusion about AGW. Get back to us when you understand what piezoe wrote. Then we can move on.

So what in piezoe's excellent explanation is a lie? I didn't know that science was owned and done by only democrats. We'll be waiting for your well researched and informed response to the science presented. LOL

Yes. But I keep hoping that part of the reason for their denial is not knowing the science and logic behind it. But as some, like jerm amply demonstrate, even when they are not total dummies, their ideology precedes and smothers any rational science-based thought. But you know that.

Great job piezoe! I'm impressed. However, there are Republicans here. I suspect your explanation went over their heads. Everyone get what piezoe said? If so we can move on.

Please see piezoe's excellent, thorough explanation above to answer your question. I'm assuming you missed it.

We are not talking about taxes. Try to concentrate. We are talking about the CO2 that has not formed baking soda. CO2 in the atmosphere is not baking soda. It is free CO2. If it wasn't, it would not be CO2. And CO2 has certain properties with regard to long wave radiation. It absorbs...

Ummm, no. It does not matter what "is around it". The physical property of the CO2 molecule remains the same. It intercepts long wave radiation from singular directions and then re-radiates it in all directions. The "all directions" part is an important concept also. Okay so...

If you have any doubt that the reason we don't have single payer is because of the right's aversion to anything remotely smacking of "socialism", you are even stupider than I thought.

So you are saying that the physical properties of the CO2 molecule is dependent upon whether it is within a glass jar, or a tube or the atmosphere? Because if so, you are wrong. The properties of CO2 reaction to heat is at the molecular level. The molecule does not care where it is, nor...

Okay, so is everyone clear that CO2 molecules absorb and re-radiate heat that would otherwise pass through the air unimpeded?

Oh, you mean the TV meteorologist Watts? This is what the American Meteorological Society says.. "It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric...

Let's not get ahead ourselves here. First you need to understand that C02 molecules absorb and then re-radiate heat radiation. Radiation that without the CO2 would normally pass through the air unimpeded. This is key. You do understand that this property of CO2 molecules is a...

This illustration dates from 1861 and it is taken from one of John Tyndall's books where he describes his setup for measuring the relative radiant-heat absorption of gases and vapors. The galvanometer quantifies the difference in temperature between the left and right sides of the thermopile...

All right. Maybe Republicans are offended by having to listen to ten year old kids tell them stuff. So here. Check it out. It's pretty cool. Really. <iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/SeYfl45X1wo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Maybe I did not make myself clear. Let me try again. CO2 absorbs and then re-radiates infra-red heat radiation. Radiation that would otherwise pass through the air. There is no question about this. None. It's as solid a science as science gets. If you can't accept this there is no...

So then you don't think it is true that CO2 absorbs and then re-radiates infra-red heat radiation. Radiation that would otherwise pass through the air. Again, this is key. If you are having problems with this perhaps I can help. Jem? Can you help him and gwb understand this? You...

What is a fail? Your ability to understand this basic ironclad science? It, and other similar experiments prove CO2 absorbs and then re-radiates infra-red heat radiation. Radiation that would otherwise pass through the air. The class cannot move on until all the Republicans here...

It, and other similar experiments prove CO2 absorbs and then re-radiates infra-red heat radiation. Radiation that would otherwise pass through the air. This is a key concept. I assume that you understand it? Because it's real important. Let's take this one small simple step at time...