Not 97% but .3% of Climatologists agree.

[jem]

I could just as easily say its the sun... because venus is closer to sun.

if you added more co2 to venus... would it make it warmer or cooler or both.
how do you know?

you do not.

what if you added more sun? that is pretty obvious is it not.
the only question is how much sun before it would burn up.

so why on earth would you say it is co2 instead of the sun when even nasa says more research is need about the sun, water vapor and aerosols.

the truth is we do not know.
which in and of itself is reason for conservation...
it just is not the reason for larger govt and wealth theft and transfer.

Quote from Ricter:

It's true, look at Venus. Atmospheric, "thermostatic" CO2 there is holding temps at a pretty steady 460^o C.

 

[Ricter]

Quote from jem:

I could just as easily say its the sun... because venus is closer to sun.

False. We discussed this long ago. The reason it's false is found on Mercury.

 

[jem]

Quote from Ricter:

False. We discussed this long ago. The reason it's false is found on Mercury.

explain...

you just presented venus and implied must be the co2 making it warm.

but from what I read the sunny side of Mercury gets hotter than venus....

I also read venus may have or has many active volcanoes.

 

[stu]

On Venus, because of co2 greenhouse gas molecules continuously colliding , they transfer heat within the atmosphere rather than losing it to outer space.
It doesn't matter where the co2 comes from. Co2 emanating from any source, volcanoes or whatever , not escaping the atmosphere, will trap heat and affect the climate.

The fundamental physics of thermodynamics explains the relationship of co2 in the trapping of heat (radiation) within the atmosphere and how more co2 causes more heat to be trapped. That's the science.

Those laws of physics apply on Earth as well as Venus. Irrespective of where the co2 comes from, though it is known on Earth to be from increased human burning of fossil fuels due to a distinctive carbon signature left in the atmosphere, more co2 trapped in lower atmosphere cannot escape into outer space either, which means an anthropic warming of Earth and resultant climate change.

Exactly how much change, where and when, is the question. But to deny the basic facts and the science is playing a game of chicken with nature and the existence of future generations. What a great legacy AGW refuseniks leave their descendants.

Though needless to say , loadmouth evangelical AGW deniers will no doubt be the first to cower into a corner whenever the consequences of their peculiar self-imposed ignorance of reality eventually hits home .

 

[gwb-trading]

Quote from stu:

Exactly how much change, where and when, is the question. But to deny the basic facts and the science is playing a game of chicken with nature and the existence of future generations. What a great legacy AGW refuseniks leave their descendants.

Though needless to say , loadmouth evangelical AGW deniers will no doubt be the first to cower into a corner whenever the consequences of their peculiar self-imposed ignorance of reality eventually hits home .

I'm just waiting for 2040 to roll-around when the climate alarmists will be pushing that global cooling is a huge threat to mankind and the next ice age is coming shortly -- just like they did in the 1970s.

The earth's temperature goes in natural cycles - man has very little impact on it.

 

[Ricter]

Quote from gwb-trading:

I'm just waiting for 2040 to roll-around ...

Think you're going to make it to then?

 

[stu]

Quote from gwb-trading:

The earth's temperature goes in natural cycles - man has very little impact on it.

...a sentence whose second part flies in the face of fact and scientific evidence.

 

[jem]

you seem to ignorantly imply greenhouse gases only warm.
Then you make some sort of straw argument about evangelicals denying the greenhouse moderates a planets temperature.

What a steaming pile of shit that was.

Simply question to test whether you are going to be a troll on this issue.

Do greenhouse gases in the earths atmosphere also work so as to prevent warming?

And now the real question...

Does adding greenhouse gases to our atmosphere on earth right now create more warming all cooling.
Please.. provide science not opinion.

If you can't do that... shut up. Because our argument is not that we should keep polluting... it is that you agw nutters are just making shit up while real scientists are waiting for more info before they makes conclusions.

Quote from stu:

On Venus, because of co2 greenhouse gas molecules continuously colliding , they transfer heat within the atmosphere rather than losing it to outer space.
It doesn't matter where the co2 comes from. Co2 emanating from any source, volcanoes or whatever , not escaping the atmosphere, will trap heat and affect the climate.

The fundamental physics of thermodynamics explains the relationship of co2 in the trapping of heat (radiation) within the atmosphere and how more co2 causes more heat to be trapped. That's the science.

Those laws of physics apply on Earth as well as Venus. Irrespective of where the co2 comes from, though it is known on Earth to be from increased human burning of fossil fuels due to a distinctive carbon signature left in the atmosphere, more co2 trapped in lower atmosphere cannot escape into outer space either, which means an anthropic warming of Earth and resultant climate change.

Exactly how much change, where and when, is the question. But to deny the basic facts and the science is playing a game of chicken with nature and the existence of future generations. What a great legacy AGW refuseniks leave their descendants.

Though needless to say , loadmouth evangelical AGW deniers will no doubt be the first to cower into a corner whenever the consequences of their peculiar self-imposed ignorance of reality eventually hits home .

 

[Ricter]

Quote from jem:



Do greenhouse gases in the earths atmosphere also work so as to prevent warming?

Perhaps, but to a lesser degree than they cause warming.

 

[jem]

how do you know... that is what nasa says they are studying right now.

I just presented proof of that a few pages back.

Quote from Ricter:

Perhaps, but to a lesser degree than they cause warming.