I'm not sure that "only" nuke power can save the planet, but basically I agree.
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.
Not 97% but .3% of Climatologists agree.
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
I'm not sure that "only" nuke power can save the planet, but basically I agree.
you do not even understand science when you see the graphs. Your video showed plain as day that co2 lagged temps up and down.
Now... the video tried to emphasize that this time could be different... but so far in the first 20 minutes... we see no science showing co2 causes change.
we saw speculation that the historical record could be consistent with the idea... co2 amplifies warming after the forcings effect change.
I am not sure I have a problem with that speculation.
Because we really do not know enough about co2 and greenhouse gases.
It is possible... adding greenhouse gases at first create warming but add greenhouse gases later in the cycle block further warming and tip us into cooling.
I am waiting for science on that issue.
Now... the video tried to emphasize that this time could be different... but so far in the first 20 minutes... we see no science showing co2 causes change.
we saw speculation that the historical record could be consistent with the idea... co2 amplifies warming after the forcings effect change.
I am not sure I have a problem with that speculation.
Because we really do not know enough about co2 and greenhouse gases.
It is possible... adding greenhouse gases at first create warming but add greenhouse gases later in the cycle block further warming and tip us into cooling.
I am waiting for science on that issue.
Quote from futurecurrents:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/8nrvrkVBt24" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
they have also shown that co2 rejects heats and cools the atmosphere on earth.
and we therefore we do not really know what happens when you add co2 to our system...
so what system are you talking about...
and we therefore we do not really know what happens when you add co2 to our system...
so what system are you talking about...
Quote from Ricter:
They've also demonstrated that all other things being equal, increasing the CO2 in a system raises the temperature. Thus, CO2 can be a cause as well as an effect.
you either lie like a clinton or you think like a kardashian.
the paper and that abstract... define the standard definition.
That man has caused the majority of the warming the last 50 years.
Cook claimed 97% of the papers supported that claim.
The recently peer reviewed paper reviewed the papers and showed that only .3% of the papers supported that claim.
That is the most recent peer reviewed paper in a respected journal.
Your 97 % claim was shown to be a lie. Its really .3% of the papers say man has been causing the warming the last 50 years.
the paper and that abstract... define the standard definition.
That man has caused the majority of the warming the last 50 years.
Cook claimed 97% of the papers supported that claim.
The recently peer reviewed paper reviewed the papers and showed that only .3% of the papers supported that claim.
That is the most recent peer reviewed paper in a respected journal.
Your 97 % claim was shown to be a lie. Its really .3% of the papers say man has been causing the warming the last 50 years.
Quote from futurecurrents:
" However, inspection of a claim by Cook et al. (Environ Res Lett 8:024024, 2013) of 97.1 % consensus, heavily relied upon by Bedford and Cook, shows just 0.3 % endorsement of the standard definition of consensus:" "
So what do you think this actually means? Because if you think that it means that 97% of climatologists don't agree, you're wrong.
But you don't think that. You are just essentially lying.
Quote from jem:
you do not even understand science when you see the graphs. Your video showed plain as day that co2 lagged temps up and down.
Now... the video tried to emphasize that this time could be different... but so far in the first 20 minutes... we see no science showing co2 causes change.
we saw speculation that the historical record could be consistent with the idea... co2 amplifies warming after the forcings effect change.
I am not sure I have a problem with that speculation.
Because we really do not know enough about co2 and greenhouse gases.
It is possible... adding greenhouse gases at first create warming but add greenhouse gases later in the cycle block further warming and tip us into cooling.
I am waiting for science on that issue.
Ha ha. Of course I understand the science. Number one is because I have a degree in Env. sci.. Number two, it is so simple that a ten year old can understand it. But incredibly, right wing nut jobs like you and gwb can't.
Why is that? Intentional stupidity? Ideological derangement?
LOL
And no, adding greenhouse gasses later will not block further warming.
You are just flailing and embarrassing yourself now.
You're waiting on the science. Why? So it can go in one ear and out the other?
LOL
Quote from jem:
they have also shown that co2 rejects heats and cools the atmosphere on earth.
and we therefore we do not really know what happens when you add co2 to our system...
so what system are you talking about...
No.
YOU don't know.
The climatologists do.
But thanks for admitting your ignorance.
Quote from jem:
you either lie like a clinton or you think like a kardashian.
the paper and that abstract... define the standard definition.
That man has caused the majority of the warming the last 50 years.
Cook claimed 97% of the papers supported that claim.
The recently peer reviewed paper reviewed the papers and showed that only .3% of the papers supported that claim.
That is the most recent peer reviewed paper in a respected journal.
Your 97 % claim was shown to be a lie. Its really .3% of the papers say man has been causing the warming the last 50 years.
Yes, because it was never the intent of most papers to expressly say that, liar. You are a lying piece of shit.
This is what NASA says. Maybe you heard of them?
Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities, and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position.
you lying ass.
just a few pages back I gave you quotes from NASA where they explained they do not know the net effect that the largest greenhouse gases have on the earth.
They said they doing tests on whether more water vapor results in cooling or warming.
Same with aerosols.
CO2 is only a tiny fraction of the greenhouse and science does not know what adding more really does.
If they did your IPCC models would not have failed.
If they did Ricter would be posting links when he makes his proclamations which are pure bullshit.
here is my science. Posted in the next two posts
just a few pages back I gave you quotes from NASA where they explained they do not know the net effect that the largest greenhouse gases have on the earth.
They said they doing tests on whether more water vapor results in cooling or warming.
Same with aerosols.
CO2 is only a tiny fraction of the greenhouse and science does not know what adding more really does.
If they did your IPCC models would not have failed.
If they did Ricter would be posting links when he makes his proclamations which are pure bullshit.
here is my science. Posted in the next two posts
Here is the largest greenhouse gas.
Science does not know if adding more warms or cools.
http://climatekids.nasa.gov/nasa-research/
Water in the atmosphere also acts as a greenhouse gas. The atmosphere contains a lot of water. This water can be in the form of a gasâwater vaporâor in the form of a liquidâclouds. Clouds are water vapor that has cooled and condensed back into tiny droplets of liquid water.
Clouds as seen from space.
Earth's clouds as seen from space.
Water in the clouds holds in some of the heat from Earth's surface. But the bright white tops of clouds also reflect some of the sunlight back to space. So with clouds, some energy from the Sun never even reaches Earth's surface.
How much the clouds affect the warming or cooling of Earth's surface is one of those tricky questions that several NASA missions are aiming to answer.
Science does not know if adding more warms or cools.
http://climatekids.nasa.gov/nasa-research/
Water in the atmosphere also acts as a greenhouse gas. The atmosphere contains a lot of water. This water can be in the form of a gasâwater vaporâor in the form of a liquidâclouds. Clouds are water vapor that has cooled and condensed back into tiny droplets of liquid water.
Clouds as seen from space.
Earth's clouds as seen from space.
Water in the clouds holds in some of the heat from Earth's surface. But the bright white tops of clouds also reflect some of the sunlight back to space. So with clouds, some energy from the Sun never even reaches Earth's surface.
How much the clouds affect the warming or cooling of Earth's surface is one of those tricky questions that several NASA missions are aiming to answer.