World Leaders Producing 300,000 Tons of Carbon By Traveling To Climate Summit In Paris

[Max E.]

Obama Fights to Save Planet That Hasn’t Warmed in Nearly 19 Years


Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/427823/paris-climate-conference-no-warming

 

[Ricter]

I agree with you that adding a few hundred more ppm CO2 to the earth's atmosphere is not going to cool the planet nor warm it.

We're not agreeing when you tack on "nor warm it". All other variables held constant, the addition will warm it.

 

[futurecurrents]

I simply took you to mean what you wrote. You wrote " solar input' and I foolishly took you at your word. (I should know better) Now I find that what you were really referring to was something else. Let me say it for you. When light in the uv and visible region strikes matter and is absorbed, the energy (E=hv) equivalent of this light is converted into heat and emitted as infrared radiation. This emitted light is the longer wavelength, lower frequency light that greenhouse gases partially absorb. Is that what you meant? But of course this emitted light falls within the spectral region supplied by the solar input. That is something you may not be understanding.

Regardless. your statement was incorrect the "solar input" is what comes from the sun, And that is nicely described by the solar irradience spectrum I posted. You will note from that that the solar input is approximately that that would be emitted by a black body. It ranges from the uv region through the infrared region, with the majority of energy in the "solar input" lying in the infrared region.

The incoming solar energy is on average at a higher frequency than the reradiated energy. Thus atmospheric CO2 acts like a one way mirror since it doesn't interact with the higher frequencies but does absorb the lower ones. If you don't understand this basic climate science it will be very difficult to speak with you intelligently on the subject.

Please tell me that you understand this basic climate science 101 before we move on.

 

[futurecurrents]

Obama Fights to Save Planet That Hasn’t Warmed in Nearly 19 Years


Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/427823/paris-climate-conference-no-warming

Wrong moron.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/

 

[gwb-trading]

Wrong moron.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/

Of course the British Met data shows no increase for 19 years. The British Met data has less "adjustments".

 

[piezoe]

We're not agreeing when you tack on "nor warm it". All other variables held constant, the addition will warm it.

If you want to get down to tenths of degrees C or less, then yes it will warm it, all other factors unchanged. But of course all other factors won't be the same. I am concerned only with significant change. Since we have no evidence whatsoever that changing CO2 by 4 molecules in 10,000 compared to other factors has had any effect on temperature and climate, I wouldn't be much concerned about these small changes in CO2. We should be far more concerned with air quality and air pollution than we are with small changes in CO2. One of the good things that will come from these climate lunatics is a reduction in coal fired powered generation, and hopefully a resurgence in nuclear plant building. That should be a great help in cleaning up the air, particularly in countries where they don't scrub the stack emissions.

Does the constant temperature over the past 17 years while CO2 has continued to rise worry you?

 

[piezoe]

The incoming solar energy is on average at a higher frequency than the reradiated energy. Thus atmospheric CO2 acts like a one way mirror since it doesn't interact with the higher frequencies but does absorb the lower ones. If you don't understand this basic climate science it will be very difficult to speak with you intelligently on the subject.

Please tell me that you understand this basic climate science 101 before we move on.

Don't bother yourself, we won't be moving on.

 

[CaptainObvious]

Don't bother yourself, we won't be moving on.

You'd have better luck trying to convince Pat Robertson that God is dead. FC is a true believer, 100% zealot.

 

[jem]

the oceans have been warming since the last ice age.
How is it that man made co2 has been causing that warming?
what part of that warming is man made co2 responsible.
the answer is that science has not shown any of it to be man made co2.


by the way... what might this do to temperature records independent of any other variable.

this is a proxy for ocean temps right?
how much of that is man made.

Wrong moron.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/

 

[piezoe]

the oceans have been warming since the last ice age.
How is it that man made co2 has been causing that warming?
what part of that warming is man made co2 responsible.
the answer is that science has not shown any of it to be man made co2.


by the way... what might this do to temperature records independent of any other variable.

this is a proxy for ocean temps right?
how much of that is man made.

Jem, thanks for posting the population graph! I think birth control is the single most effective thing we could do world wide to slow our human impact on the environment. The obvious conclusion, we must get rid of the Pope! A mini neutron bomb detonated at the Vatican would do it and preserve all the beautiful artifacts and buildings. It would only make a small part of the rest of Rome radioactive. A small price to pay for liquidation of His Holiness. (Just kidding, in case the NSA is listening) [To bad Richard Nixon's dream weapon isn't available off the DOD shelf. We'll have to get Pantex ginned up with a big Contract. The Republicans are gonna love this.]