I would expect the thirty five percent rise in CO2(a greenhouse gas), due to fossil fuel burning, would raise temps. How can you cannot understand this, or refuse to, is interesting. I think you're just troll.
Global Warming Exposed Yet Again
- Thread starter Maverick74
- Start date
I would expect the thirty five percent rise in CO2(a greenhouse gas), due to fossil fuel burning, would raise temps. How can you cannot understand this, or refuse to, is interesting. I think you're just troll.
fc is a brainless clown - I showed you to be a monkey and instead of getting smarter you now lie about my arguments...
I never said co2 was not a greenhouse gas. I stated by definition it is.
2. Warming is not the issue... the earth warms in cycles.
the question is... regardless of what man is doing, would we be warming anyway.
I never said co2 was not a greenhouse gas. I stated by definition it is.
2. Warming is not the issue... the earth warms in cycles.
the question is... regardless of what man is doing, would we be warming anyway.
Quote from futurecurrents:
What the hell are you babbling about now idiot?
Still trying to say that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas?
The fact is, is that the hockey stick chart is still correct and this recent study does nothing to change that, moron.
In related news......
"Now, weâve known this for a while. Study after study has shown that the Earth is warming, that the past decade has been the hottest on record, and that the rise in temperature has been about a degree. So whatâs the big deal here?
The big deal is that this was an independent team of researchers who conducted the study (including, interestingly, Saul Perlmutter, who just won the Nobel Prize for co-discovering the acceleration of the expansion of the Universe, and knows a thing or two about data analysis), and whose funding was overwhelmingly donated by the private sector and not from any government. The study was initiated by Berkeley physicist Richard Muller, who was concerned that government researchers werenât being as open as possible with their methods. He gathered together a team of scientists, and they used data from 39,000 temperature stations around the world, far more than the previous studies. They have put all their data and methodology online for anyone to investigate.
And if youâre wondering who these private groups were, theyâre listed on the BEP website. The largest single donor? Why, itâs the Koch brothers, über-conservatives who have pumped millions of dollars into climate change denial. I find that⦠interesting.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/b...limate-study-confirms-global-warming-is-real/
You didn't show shit. I did nothing to the chart. Check your meds.
No we would not. The long term trend has been down up until the industrial revolution.
If CO2 is a greenhouse gas and the levels are thirty five % higher, how would that NOT cause temps to rise ?
These numbnuts "science" morons are something else.. People that work on trading systems know that it takes a lot of data to expose the truth about a system. Science numbnuts have measurements from the last century or two and they have computer models that extrapolate that to a model of the entire globe's temperature over eons! Then they claim that their computer models should be taken far more seriously than weather models!
We've gone from panic about global cooling to panic about global warming, now it seems like it might swing back to global cooling.. what can they do for an encore? Throw a tantrum and threaten to hold their breath till they die maybe?
I don't set my hair on fire and run in circles telling everybody to panic for any science numbnuts...
We've gone from panic about global cooling to panic about global warming, now it seems like it might swing back to global cooling.. what can they do for an encore? Throw a tantrum and threaten to hold their breath till they die maybe?
I don't set my hair on fire and run in circles telling everybody to panic for any science numbnuts...
One of the arguments against Mann's "hockey stick" graph was concerned his data derived from tree ring studies. Critics deemed it unreliable. Why is the same method reliable now?
There was never a "panic" about global cooling. This is only stated by those that have been brainwashed by the fossil fuel GW denial propaganda campaign. It was a minority opinion. Nothing like the vast scientific consensus about GW today. There is virtually no disagreement about the basics of GW among scientists and every science organization in the world also agree. And there is no indication of any swing back to global cooling.
Again, the basic principles of GW are simple. CO2 is a greenhouse gas and levels have gone up 35% since we started burning fossil fuels. So of course along with them so have temps.
If we keep burning them as we've been doing we face certain catastrophe within a few hundred years.
i have answered your question a dozen fricken times.
arguendo... lets go with your assumption.
so the heck what.
lets call CO2 a blanket.
you got a blanket on the floor
the earth is your wife
your wife can through the blanket in a blanket sink
or she can throw it on you.
if she throws the blanket on you... was it the blanket that caused the warming or your wife.