Because they didn't identify a period on a graph?
Please, get real.
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.
The Global Warming Hoax is falling apart
- Thread starter drjekyllus
- Start date
Because they didn't identify a period on a graph?
Please, get real.
Quote from bigdavediode:
You keep saying "Percent of the greenhouse effect." First you'll have to define what you mean in concrete terms. Percent of heat retention? Percent of temperature?
You really need me to define what the greenhouse effect is?
"The greenhouse effect is the heating of the surface of a planet or moon due to the presence of an atmosphere containing gases that absorb and emit infrared radiation."
So CO2 is responsible for an estimated 3 or 4% of the total warming effect. Water vapor is estimated to contribute 95% of the total warming effect.
Quote from bigdavediode:
You're not reading the report, your reading a short, few page summary for policy makers which tries to summarize the main message of the report.
Please consult the actual report.
You must be ignoring the next post I made because it came directly from the actual reports.
Quote from Eight:
Humans account for one part per 700 of CO2 in the atmosphere per year, nowadays. They didn't do a tiny fraction of that amount at the START of the industrial revolution. If you live in a panic stricken and math free environment [wow, that would be the moronic left would it not?] then Billions of tons sounds horrible... it's tiny even at today's levels and it was absolutely trivial at the beginning of the industrial revolution...
Unfortunately naturally produced CO2 has been naturally absorbed, too, thus an equilibrium was established.
Some man made CO2 was absorbed, but not all of it, and what was absorbed has helped acidify the oceans.
Let's say your numbers were right (and they're not, they're far too low since CO2 has increased at least 20% since 1970 alone) -- take whatever annual numbers you have and multiply them by ten years, then twenty years, then fifty years.
Al Gore is going to cash in on this new taxation bigtime.
Who cares? Lots of people will.
Who is this Dave guy anyhow? Before the elections he posted his irrational stuff constantly, somebody must pay these guys, they aren't in it for the truth, and they never quit... obsessed or paid, which is it? Actually I don't care, I'm hitting the ignore button...
Probably the safest choice for you.
Quote from Matt8200:
You must be ignoring the next post I made because it came directly from the actual reports.
Yes, about the proposals for action.
"The IPCC produces also Special Reports; Methodology Reports; Technical Papers; and Supporting Material, often in response to requests from the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC, or from other environmental Conventions."
Can you figure out which ones might address water vapor? (Hell, I previously even gave you the page numbers.)
Quote from Matt8200:
You really need me to define what the greenhouse effect is?
"The greenhouse effect is the heating of the surface of a planet or moon due to the presence of an atmosphere containing gases that absorb and emit infrared radiation."
So CO2 is responsible for an estimated 3 or 4% of the total warming effect. Water vapor is estimated to contribute 95% of the total warming effect.
What exactly do you mean by "total warming effect"? Total increase in temperature? If not, what then?
You did know that humans are partially responsible for increases in water vapor, in methane, and in other greenhouse gases, right?
Quote from Matt8200:
You really need me to define what the greenhouse effect is?
"The greenhouse effect is the heating of the surface of a planet or moon due to the presence of an atmosphere containing gases that absorb and emit infrared radiation."
So CO2 is responsible for an estimated 3 or 4% of the total warming effect. Water vapor is estimated to contribute 95% of the total warming effect.
Where did you get this nonsense number?
I hope you're not trying to discuss stratospheric water vapor. Here are the actual numbers in W/sq. meters:
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/FAQ/wg1_faq-2.1.html
CO2 has a radiative forcing effect of over 1.5W/sq. meters, while H2O is less than .2W/sq. meter.
Suffice to say, your thought that CO2 only is responsible for 3 or 4% of total radiative forcing is wildly wrong.
Quote from smilingsynic:
What exactly do you mean by "total warming effect"? Total increase in temperature? If not, what then?
You did know that humans are partially responsible for increases in water vapor, in methane, and in other greenhouse gases, right?
Why is this so difficult to understand? The greenhouse effect causes some quantity of energy to be absorbed at the surface of the earth which then increases the surface of the earth. I am talking about the percentage of this total energy that each individual gas contributes.
Yes and my point is if you do the math humans CO2 contribution only increases the greenhouse effect by about 0.2%.