Search results

gwb... This might help with your confusion Schulte's paper makes much of the fact that 48% of the papers they surveyed are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject anthropogenic global warming. The fact that so many studies on climate change don't bother to endorse the...

Do you ever tire of being crazy? You're pathetic and delusional. Of course there is 97% consensus. The science is overwhelming and obvious. That's why NASA says it's 97%. Did you understand ANY of my previous posts?

The preceding is why 97% of all the world's climate scientists and all of it's science organizations agree with the basics of AGW science.

I keep coming back to this chart because it is correct and illuminating...

So, given the properties of CO2 and the fact that it's levels have increased by 40% and that at least 10% of the earth's greenhouse effect is due to CO2 we would expect the GH effect to go up by at least 4% and for temperatures to rise. And of course they have.. But could it...

We know that the levels of CO2 have increased by 40% since the beginning of the industrial revolution and that they did so at the same time as the emissions of CO2 from fossil fuel burning started. We know this 40% rise was due to man's burning of these fuels by logic, simple math and things...

OK, let's get back on track... We know by lab experiments that CO2 is transparent to shorter wavelengths but absorbs than re-radiates the longer infrared wavelengths. Satellites and ground instruments can see these effects. On the ground we see increased levels and in space we see...

Eight independent committees absolve the scientists of fraud but the denialist morons like gwb and jerm insist it's all a conspiracy to cover it up. Then they say that temperature records which involve thousands of instruments and readings is fraudulent. That NOAA NASA and the Japanese Met...

Former Republican House Science Committee chairman Sherwood Boehlert called the attacks a "manufactured distraction", and the dispute was described as a "highly orchestrated" and manufactured controversy by Newsweek and The New York Times. Concerns about the media's role in promoting early...

So you are admitting to being crazy enough to think that there is a widespread conspiracy going on and also that you don't have the intellectual honesty and rigor to actually learn the truth. Preferring instead to continue being ignorant and deluded for ego and ideological reasons. Saying...

Do you support continuing to maintain a lie perpetrated and promoted by the denier industry when that lie has been completely debunked? Of course you do because 1) You want to believe it and 2) Because you don't have the intellectual rigor or honesty to actually read any further than the out-of...

Yes, they were looking at the change over time. They come this conclusion ... an energy flux imbalance of 3.5 W/m2 has been created by anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases since 1850. Here's an idea about the relative contributions of the GHG's When ranked by their direct...

Piezoe, my first chart has the water vapor filtered out to better show the other GHG's. https://ams.confex.com/ams/Annual2006/techprogram/paper_100737.htm

Another way we can see the effects of GHG's is by measuring the upward radiation leaving earth. The following chart shows the reduction in radiation leaving the earth during the period 1970 to 1996. As the levels of GHG's have gone up there has been reduction of IR at the wavelengths...

"carbon dioxide accounts for about 20 percent of the greenhouse effect, water vapor and clouds together account for 75 percent, and minor gases and aerosols make up the remaining five percent. However, it is the 25 percent non-condensing greenhouse gas component, which includes carbon dioxide...

So what?

Bingo...exhibit 'A' thank you for so quickly standing up. What's also amazing is how ignorant, deluded and crazy you are to think "climategate" is anything at all, and then extrapolate that delusion into a blanket condemnation of the huge amount of worldwide science on AGW. Even going...

I have no doubt that many of the denialists are convinced of a worldwide liberal conspiracy to falsify the science. That's how deluded, crazy and ignorant they are.

So everyone knows CO2 is a greenhouse gas (GHG) and experiments in the lab prove that CO2 absorbs and then re-radiates heat, or infra-red radiation. But the atmosphere is not a bell jar or a tube. So how do we know that Co2 is doing this in the atmosphere? Well, we have instruments on...

Just how stupid and deluded are you? Very? Extremely? Unbelievably?