Climate Change... its the sun... again.

jem said:
you know you see no citation to any science in that article.
its pure speculation based on failed not science.
the speculation did not prove out.

plus you left out the point... and the concluding paragraph...

Remark: “The Earth has certainly been warming since we have added so much CO2 to the atmosphere from fossil fuel burning.”

Reply: “Forget the CO2. Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas. It controls the Earth’s temperature.”


Read the final paragraph the one where they admit water vapor and clouds might really be the driver and they have no idea about clouds.
I can tell you why.


Low clouds around the equator reflect a good deal of warming rays from the sun back up while high clouds trap heat.

and the scientists are really not sure what if any impact greenhouse gases have on the formation of clouds near the equator... however there is some evidence they may create more. So the agw nutters say they need to do more studies.

I have linked to these recent studies and findings in the past.
the NASA website says they need to do more studies on clouds.

\
More...
Cherry picking from the same source. A source comprised of scientists.
 
did you see a link to the science?
when scientists / academics say something serious they back it with citations and proof.

that was speculation so I linked to the part of the speculation that gave away the truth.

science knows clouds are important but they have no idea how co2 interacts with clouds or even model them well.

read my previous threads... its all there.
even from NASA...
 
Last edited:
Ricter said:
To be fair, other factors could in theory mitigate the effects of rising CO2. It is not enough to merely say it's a GHG, but maybe you're just saying that in lieu of posting cartoon counter-punches. : )
More...


True. If volcano activity suddenly increases spewing ash it could cool us for a while. If the sun suddenly lowers it's output lower than it ever has before, it would counter the GHG effect of CO2 increase. If there is a nuclear exchange that sends particulates into the stratosphere. If we geoengineer and send sulfur dioxide aerosols into the stratosphere.

Of course, even if these things happened the CO2 level would still be causing ocean acidification.


But of course I keep repeating that CO2 is an important GHG, because the deniers don't seem to know it or forgot or just refuse to assimilate the knowledge or purposefully ignore it or pretend it's not there.
 
absent science you could also say man made snow is a factor... as is plowing the rain forest or paving roads or creating cows or congregating in cities or selling air conditioners with 2000 times more powerful than co2 gases.

what we need is the science showing man made co2 causes warming. otherwise its just a guess since we know the earth has been a lot warmer and experience much higher co2 in the past.

futurecurrents said:
True. If volcano activity suddenly increases spewing ash it could cool us for a while. If the sun suddenly lowers it's output lower than it ever has before, it would counter the GHG effect of CO2 increase. If there is a nuclear exchange that sends particulates into the stratosphere. If we geoengineer and send sulfur dioxide aerosols into the stratosphere.

Of course, even if these things happened the CO2 level would still be causing ocean acidification.


But of course I keep repeating that CO2 is an important GHG, because the deniers don't seem to know it or forgot or just refuse to assimilate the knowledge or purposefully ignore it or pretend it's not there.
More...
 
jem said:
absent science you could also say man made snow is a factor... as is plowing the rain forest or paving roads or creating cows or congregating in cities or selling air conditioners with 2000 times more powerful than co2 gases.

what we need is the science showing man made co2 causes warming. otherwise its just a guess since we know the earth has been a lot warmer and experience much higher co2 in the past.
More...


Why oh why can't you tell us why you think that CO2 is not a GHG?
 
jem said:
absent science you could also say man made snow is a factor... as is plowing the rain forest or paving roads or creating cows or congregating in cities or selling air conditioners with 2000 times more powerful than co2 gases.

what we need is the science showing man made co2 causes warming. otherwise its just a guess since we know the earth has been a lot warmer and experience much higher co2 in the past.
More...
Why do you now say "man made" CO2, are you acknowledging that natural CO2 causes warming?
 
futurecurrents said:
Hey jerm. Find us one scientist in the whole world that denies CO2 is a GHG. One. Maybe then we stop calling you a complete fool. Maybe.
More...

So FC if the level of a GHG increases in the atmosphere - according to scientific studies does a) the temperature go up. b) the temperature go down. c) the temperature can go either up or down depending on a host of other factors.

Please give us your answer.
 
I realize fc is trolling as no one denies its a greenhouse gas by defintion... but since he has no science he acts like a loser....

but you?

how man times have I stated from what I have read in the scientific literature greenhouse gases can warm and cool. about 200? more? many times I have said even NASA says it also cools because there are negative feedback mechanisms.

the question is on... on net... what is it doing... a little positive. a little negative or nothing... relative to the sun and the tides and other natural "forcings". Science has not answer for that besides failed models.

so neither do you, do I nor does trollcurrents.
that is why you guys don't post to all these scientists scientific papers showing man made co2 causes warming...

there are none. correct?



Ricter said:
Why do you now say "man made" CO2, are you acknowledging that natural CO2 causes warming?
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top