Depends in large part on how one feels about the concept of objective reality.
I'd like to believe that these right-wingers down here are all imaginary.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Climate Change... its the sun... again.
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
Depends in large part on how one feels about the concept of objective reality.
I'd like to believe that these right-wingers down here are all imaginary.
so lets say it was the warmest year since 1880 but .01 or so.
it does not even rank it in top 1 million warmest years in earths history.
so without any science showing man made co2 causes warming, how do you know its not natural climate variability.
I want to know why you think that CO2 is not a GHG. That's just stupid. You must be an idiot.
there that proof you are the king the douche...again.
There's that deja vu.
Again.
BTW, anyone else notice that after I expose piehole's bullshit arguments for what they are, complete and total bullshit, he runs away?
hey moron troll is water vapor a greenhouse gas?
it also cools and warms the earth.
they don't just warm.
if you don't want to believe that co2 also cools, even though NASA says it does...
go learn something about water vapor. it cools when it evaporates...
and I have read it arguably does more cooling when it evaporates than it warms.
and its the primary greenhouse gas.
there are also studies which indicate it is responsible for a good chunk of the warming in the 80s.
so stop with your juvenile/leftist drone misrepresentations about science start doing presenting the science that shows man made co2 warms.
or admit...
science has a lot more work to do before it knows if we are warming outside natural variability.
it also cools and warms the earth.
they don't just warm.
if you don't want to believe that co2 also cools, even though NASA says it does...
go learn something about water vapor. it cools when it evaporates...
and I have read it arguably does more cooling when it evaporates than it warms.
and its the primary greenhouse gas.
there are also studies which indicate it is responsible for a good chunk of the warming in the 80s.
so stop with your juvenile/leftist drone misrepresentations about science start doing presenting the science that shows man made co2 warms.
or admit...
science has a lot more work to do before it knows if we are warming outside natural variability.
I want to know why you think that CO2 is not a GHG. That's just stupid. You must be an idiot.
Last edited:
hey moron is water vapor a greenhouse gas?
it also cools and warms the earth.
they don't just warm.
if you don't want to believe that co2 also cools even though NASA says it does...
go learn something about water vapor. it cools when it evaporates... and I have read it does more cooling when it evaporates than it does warming.
And still the right wing idiot does not know that CO2 is a GHG. Amazing. Only a righty can be this fucking stupid.
hey lying moron I have told you that by definition it is a greenhouse gas and that by science greenhouse gases warm... and cool.
after writing an article shilling for co2 being the culprit in the end... your beloved american chemical society tells the truth...
http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/c...cenarratives/its-water-vapor-not-the-co2.html
There is also a possibility that adding more water vapor to the atmosphere could produce a negative feedback effect. This could happen if more water vapor leads to more cloud formation. Clouds reflect sunlight and reduce the amount of energy that reaches the Earth’s surface to warm it. If the amount of solar warming decreases, then the temperature of the Earth would decrease. In that case, the effect of adding more water vapor would be cooling rather than warming. But cloud cover does mean more condensed water in the atmosphere, making for a stronger greenhouse effect than non-condensed water vapor alone – it is warmer on a cloudy winter day than on a clear one. Thus the possible positive and negative feedbacks associated with increased water vapor and cloud formation can cancel one another out and complicate matters. The actual balance between them is an active area of climate science research.
after writing an article shilling for co2 being the culprit in the end... your beloved american chemical society tells the truth...
http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/c...cenarratives/its-water-vapor-not-the-co2.html
There is also a possibility that adding more water vapor to the atmosphere could produce a negative feedback effect. This could happen if more water vapor leads to more cloud formation. Clouds reflect sunlight and reduce the amount of energy that reaches the Earth’s surface to warm it. If the amount of solar warming decreases, then the temperature of the Earth would decrease. In that case, the effect of adding more water vapor would be cooling rather than warming. But cloud cover does mean more condensed water in the atmosphere, making for a stronger greenhouse effect than non-condensed water vapor alone – it is warmer on a cloudy winter day than on a clear one. Thus the possible positive and negative feedbacks associated with increased water vapor and cloud formation can cancel one another out and complicate matters. The actual balance between them is an active area of climate science research.
hey lying moron I have told you that by definition it is a greenhouse gas and that by science greenhouse gases warm... and cool.
after writing an article shilling for co2 being the culprit in the end... your beloved american chemical society tells the truth...
http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/c...cenarratives/its-water-vapor-not-the-co2.html
There is also a possibility that adding more water vapor to the atmosphere could produce a negative feedback effect. This could happen if more water vapor leads to more cloud formation. Clouds reflect sunlight and reduce the amount of energy that reaches the Earth’s surface to warm it. If the amount of solar warming decreases, then the temperature of the Earth would decrease. In that case, the effect of adding more water vapor would be cooling rather than warming. But cloud cover does mean more condensed water in the atmosphere, making for a stronger greenhouse effect than non-condensed water vapor alone – it is warmer on a cloudy winter day than on a clear one. Thus the possible positive and negative feedbacks associated with increased water vapor and cloud formation can cancel one another out and complicate matters. The actual balance between them is an active area of climate science research.
Look jerm. Why don't you just put a sign on your head that says "I don't think CO2 acts predominantly as a greenhouse gas. I am a right wing asshole without a clue."
Last edited:
That article states increasing CO2 warms the atmosphere.hey lying moron I have told you that by definition it is a greenhouse gas and that by science greenhouse gases warm... and cool.
after writing an article shilling for co2 being the culprit in the end... your beloved american chemical society tells the truth...
http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/c...cenarratives/its-water-vapor-not-the-co2.html
There is also a possibility that adding more water vapor to the atmosphere could produce a negative feedback effect. This could happen if more water vapor leads to more cloud formation. Clouds reflect sunlight and reduce the amount of energy that reaches the Earth’s surface to warm it. If the amount of solar warming decreases, then the temperature of the Earth would decrease. In that case, the effect of adding more water vapor would be cooling rather than warming. But cloud cover does mean more condensed water in the atmosphere, making for a stronger greenhouse effect than non-condensed water vapor alone – it is warmer on a cloudy winter day than on a clear one. Thus the possible positive and negative feedbacks associated with increased water vapor and cloud formation can cancel one another out and complicate matters. The actual balance between them is an active area of climate science research.