Global warming hoax fools millions

[bigdavediode]

Quote from jem:

Let me feed this to you slowly....

The ice cores show that temperatures cycle.

Yes. That's correct. Especially during ice ages and massive geological events.

The ice cores show the earth warms and cools.

The ice cores show the earth warms and then C02 accumulates.

That is what we know... that is the science.

You are now arguing we are contributing to CO2 accumulation. Ok. contributing to CO2 accumulation is not the same as saying man caused global warming.

Like I said you do not even know if what we do matters. The CO2 accumulated in the past without man.

Yes, we do know that what we do matters. We know what ratio of CO2 molecules in the air are man-made. We know that CO2 molecules absorb a certain amount of heat (and we know that amount exactly). We know that they re-radiate heat, how, and that this happens in random directions.

Whether CO2 accumulated in the past without man has no bearing on the fact that this CO2 is our CO2, and it's absorbing heat.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from jem:

Recorded history.

Let me pin this down so we can see if you are bullshitting us or not.

When you say temperatures were never higher... how far back in time does your statement extend.

Actually I wrote that temperatures were never higher in recorded history. So my statement extends back to the start of recorded history -- even if you want to include the Holocene.

No, I don't go all the way back to the big bang, because temperatures were likely higher then. Nor do I extend this back millions of years, as certainly there were periods where temperatures were higher -- however, millions of years ago the shorelines were less developed than they are now. There were fewer dikes, and if there were a few more hurricanes it seemed to displace fewer hominids.

 

[jem]

Quote from bigdavediode:

Yes. That's correct. Especially during ice ages and massive geological events.



Yes, we do know that what we do matters. We know what ratio of CO2 molecules in the air are man-made. We know that CO2 molecules absorb a certain amount of heat (and we know that amount exactly). We know that they re-radiate heat, how, and that this happens in random directions.

Whether CO2 accumulated in the past without man has no bearing on the fact that this CO2 is our CO2, and it's absorbing heat.

Your answers are very evasive. Why are you avoiding the truth and fact. I do not even have an axe to grind I wish to protect the environment. I just want facts.

Please tell me how you prove that CO2 accumulation precedes warming. And while you are supporting your statement explain why the ice cores show the contrary.

 

[jem]

More evasion.

Please state - state approximately how far back "recorded history" goes by your definition.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from jem:

Your answers are very evasive. Why are you avoiding the truth and fact. I do not even have an axe to grind I wish to protect the environment. I just want facts.

Please tell me how you prove that CO2 accumulation precedes warming. And while you are supporting your statement explain why the ice cores show the contrary.

Evasive? I can't get more direct: the extra CO2 in the atmosphere is ours. How do we know that CO2 molecules absorb heat? You can simply google energy absorption and co2 molecule to see a graph of it (or do a science experiment yourself to find this out

<img src=http://members.shaw.ca/sch25/FOS/absorbspec.gif>

And before you get all excited and cry "water vapor" -- remember, when water vapor concentrations get too high it falls out of the sky as rain.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from jem:

More evasion.

Please state - state approximately how far back "recorded history" goes by your definition.

I would say that recorded history starts in the fourth millennium, BC, with the advent of writing, as per the definition. Or whenever people started recording temperature, since we're talking about temperature. Eh, use your own definition because it really doesn't matter.

 

[jem]

Quote from bigdavediode:

Evasive? I can't get more direct: the extra CO2 in the atmosphere is ours. How do we know that CO2 molecules absorb heat? You can simply google energy absorption and co2 molecule to see a graph of it (or do a science experiment yourself to find this out

<img src=http://members.shaw.ca/sch25/FOS/absorbspec.gif>

And before you get all excited and cry "water vapor" -- remember, when water vapor concentrations get too high it falls out of the sky as rain.

this is still an evasion of the central issue -

do you agree the ice cores show warming before accumulation?

if yes, then why are you talking to me about accumulation as a cause? Can you back up you speculation with any science?

 

[jem]

so you are going back to a few thousand years B.C.

I think we should consider as much data as we can.

Below ou can see we are actually in the below average temperature region.

Quote from jem:

This one of the longest term charts we can make shows we are still in the cold stages of the earth cycles.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/65_Myr_Climate_Change.png


The intermediate portion of the record is dominated by large fluctuations in the mass of the Antarctic ice sheet, which first nucleates approximately 34 million years ago, then partially dissipates around 25 million years ago, before re-expanding towards its present state 13 million years ago. These fluctuations make it impossible to constrain temperature changes without additional controls.
Significant growth of ice sheets did not begin in Greenland and North America until approximately 3 million years ago, following the formation of the Isthmus of Panama by continental drift. This ushered in an era of rapidly cycling glacials and interglacials (see figure at upper right).


http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:65_Myr_Climate_Change.png

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from jem:

this is still an evasion of the central issue -

do you agree the ice cores show warming before accumulation?

if yes, then why are you talking to me about accumulation as a cause? Can you back up you speculation with any science?

Ice cores show both, actually, depending on the period examined. And whether or not ice cores show warming before or after CO2 doesn't matter either -- since we know that CO2 absorbs heat and this is our CO2 that we've added. Other things do emit CO2, that doesn't mean that we get a free pass.

And a graph of energy absorption of CO2 molecules isn't "speculation," it's just the reality of how CO2 molecules work. As you can see from the graph, CO2 lets light through and absorbs heat. If you like you can research laser absorption spectroscopy and see how these graphs are made, but they're not up for debate, they're just facts.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from jem:

so you are going back to a few thousand years B.C.

I think we should consider as much data as we can.

Below ou can see we are actually in the below average temperature region.

Average for what? An ice-age? A dinosaur die-off? Does this mean we'll get "below average" death rates from increased storms/temperatures, ie, less than the Dinosaurs, but more than homo-erectus?