Scientists are increasingly recognizing the importance of water vapor in the climate system.
Some, like Wallace Broecker, a geochemist at Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, suggest that it is such an important factor that much of the global warming in the last 10,000 years may be due to the increasing water vapor concentrations in Earth's atmosphere.
His research indicates that air reaching glaciers during the last Ice Age had less than half the water vapor content of today. Such increases in atmospheric moisture during our current interglacial period would have played a far greater role in global warming than carbon dioxide or other minor gases.
" I can only see one element of the climate system capable of generating these fast, global changes, that is, changes in the tropical atmosphere leading to changes in the inventory of the earth's most powerful greenhouse gas-- water vapor. "
"Known causes of global climate change, like cyclical eccentricities in Earth's rotation and orbit, as well as variations in the sun's energy output, are the primary causes of climate cycles measured over the last half million years. However, secondary greenhouse effects stemming from changes in the ability of a warming atmosphere to support greater concentrations of gases like water vapor and carbon dioxide also appear to play a significant role. As demonstrated in the data above, of all Earth's greenhouse gases, water vapor is by far the dominant player."
"The ability of humans to influence greenhouse water vapor is negligible. As such, individuals and groups whose agenda it is to require that human beings are the cause of global warming must discount or ignore the effects of water vapor to preserve their arguments, citing numbers similar to those in Table 4b . If political correctness and staying out of trouble aren't high priorities for you, go ahead and ask them how water vapor was handled in their models or statistics. Chances are, it wasn't!"
Dr. Wallace Broecker, a leading world authority on climate Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University.
Lecture presented at R A Daly Lecture at the American Geophysical Union's spring meeting in Baltimore, Md., May 1996.
"I care about the environment (I grew up in a solar house) and think there are a dozen good reasons why we should burn less fossil fuels, but.global warming is not one of them."
> Scientists are increasingly recognizing the > importance of water vapor in the climate system.
> Some, like Wallace Broecker, a geochemist at > Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, > suggest that it is such an important factor that > much of the global warming in the last 10,000 > years may be due to the increasing water vapor > concentrations in Earth's atmosphere.
> His research indicates that air reaching glaciers > during the last Ice Age had less than half the > water vapor content of today. Such increases in > atmospheric moisture during our current > interglacial period would have played a far > greater role in global warming than carbon dioxide > or other minor gases.
> " I can only see one element of the climate system > capable of generating these fast, global changes, > that is, changes in the tropical atmosphere > leading to changes in the inventory of the earth's > most powerful greenhouse gas-- water vapor. "
> "Known causes of global climate change, like > cyclical eccentricities in Earth's rotation and > orbit, as well as variations in the sun's energy > output, are the primary causes of climate cycles > measured over the last half million years. > However, secondary greenhouse effects stemming > from changes in the ability of a warming > atmosphere to support greater concentrations of > gases like water vapor and carbon dioxide also > appear to play a significant role. As demonstrated > in the data above, of all Earth's greenhouse > gases, water vapor is by far the dominant player."
> "The ability of humans to influence greenhouse > water vapor is negligible. As such, individuals > and groups whose agenda it is to require that > human beings are the cause of global warming must > discount or ignore the effects of water vapor to > preserve their arguments, citing numbers similar > to those in Table 4b . If political correctness > and staying out of trouble aren't high priorities > for you, go ahead and ask them how water vapor was > handled in their models or statistics. Chances > are, it wasn't!"
> Dr. Wallace Broecker, a leading world authority on > climate Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia > University.
> Lecture presented at R A Daly Lecture at the > American Geophysical Union's spring meeting in > Baltimore, Md., May 1996.
> "I care about the environment (I grew up in a > solar house) and think there are a dozen good > reasons why we should burn less fossil fuels, > but.global warming is not one of them."
> Nir Shaviv, Israeli physicist 2009
Your hypothesis might work except for one tiny detail There's this thing called rain. Maybe you've heard of it. It's been in all the papers and on TV.
> Scientists are increasingly recognizing the > importance of water vapor in the climate system.
> Some, like Wallace Broecker, a geochemist at > Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, > suggest that it is such an important factor that > much of the global warming in the last 10,000 > years may be due to the increasing water vapor > concentrations in Earth's atmosphere.
> His research indicates that air reaching glaciers > during the last Ice Age had less than half the > water vapor content of today. Such increases in > atmospheric moisture during our current > interglacial period would have played a far > greater role in global warming than carbon dioxide > or other minor gases.
> " I can only see one element of the climate system > capable of generating these fast, global changes, > that is, changes in the tropical atmosphere > leading to changes in the inventory of the earth's > most powerful greenhouse gas-- water vapor. "
> "Known causes of global climate change, like > cyclical eccentricities in Earth's rotation and > orbit, as well as variations in the sun's energy > output, are the primary causes of climate cycles > measured over the last half million years. > However, secondary greenhouse effects stemming > from changes in the ability of a warming > atmosphere to support greater concentrations of > gases like water vapor and carbon dioxide also > appear to play a significant role. As demonstrated > in the data above, of all Earth's greenhouse > gases, water vapor is by far the dominant player."
> "The ability of humans to influence greenhouse > water vapor is negligible. As such, individuals > and groups whose agenda it is to require that > human beings are the cause of global warming must > discount or ignore the effects of water vapor to > preserve their arguments, citing numbers similar > to those in Table 4b . If political correctness > and staying out of trouble aren't high priorities > for you, go ahead and ask them how water vapor was > handled in their models or statistics. Chances > are, it wasn't!"
> Dr. Wallace Broecker, a leading world authority on > climate Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia > University.
> Lecture presented at R A Daly Lecture at the > American Geophysical Union's spring meeting in > Baltimore, Md., May 1996.
> "I care about the environment (I grew up in a > solar house) and think there are a dozen good > reasons why we should burn less fossil fuels, > but.global warming is not one of them."
> Nir Shaviv, Israeli physicist 2009
Broecker's latest book (coauthored by Robert Kunzig), Fixing Climate: What Past Climate Changes Reveal About the Current Threat - and How to Counter It, was officially released at the event and it's contents figured prominently in the discussion. Broecker said, "a leveling off atmospheric CO2 at between 550 and 650 ppm is within our power." That less than optimistic figure would guarantee a certain amount of serious consequences such as drying the northern latitudes and forcing more moisture into the tropics, and an significant but hard to estimate melting of polar ice with sea levels rising above the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) highest estimates.
With CO2 rising at a rate of 2 ppm a year it will only take 35 years to eclipse all known CO2 records. "We're changing things on a decade time scale", said Broecker, "if we get to 900 ppm we'll change the entire ecology of the planet."
After the panel had been answering questions from the audience that frequently centered on the resistance of governments to act, Broecker erupted angrily, "We have the ability to do it and we damn well better do it!"
> On Sep 27, 10:39 pm, "b0onz" <y...@x.com> wrote:
> > Scientists are increasingly recognizing the > > importance of water vapor in the climate system.
> > Some, like Wallace Broecker, a geochemist at > > Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, > > suggest that it is such an important factor that > > much of the global warming in the last 10,000 > > years may be due to the increasing water vapor > > concentrations in Earth's atmosphere.
> > His research indicates that air reaching glaciers > > during the last Ice Age had less than half the > > water vapor content of today. Such increases in > > atmospheric moisture during our current > > interglacial period would have played a far > > greater role in global warming than carbon dioxide > > or other minor gases.
> > " I can only see one element of the climate system > > capable of generating these fast, global changes, > > that is, changes in the tropical atmosphere > > leading to changes in the inventory of the earth's > > most powerful greenhouse gas-- water vapor. "
> > "Known causes of global climate change, like > > cyclical eccentricities in Earth's rotation and > > orbit, as well as variations in the sun's energy > > output, are the primary causes of climate cycles > > measured over the last half million years. > > However, secondary greenhouse effects stemming > > from changes in the ability of a warming > > atmosphere to support greater concentrations of > > gases like water vapor and carbon dioxide also > > appear to play a significant role. As demonstrated > > in the data above, of all Earth's greenhouse > > gases, water vapor is by far the dominant player."
> > "The ability of humans to influence greenhouse > > water vapor is negligible. As such, individuals > > and groups whose agenda it is to require that > > human beings are the cause of global warming must > > discount or ignore the effects of water vapor to > > preserve their arguments, citing numbers similar > > to those in Table 4b . If political correctness > > and staying out of trouble aren't high priorities > > for you, go ahead and ask them how water vapor was > > handled in their models or statistics. Chances > > are, it wasn't!"
> > Dr. Wallace Broecker, a leading world authority on > > climate Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia > > University.
> > Lecture presented at R A Daly Lecture at the > > American Geophysical Union's spring meeting in > > Baltimore, Md., May 1996.
> Your hypothesis might work except for one tiny detail There's this > thing called rain. Maybe you've heard of it. It's been in all the > papers and on TV.
•• Igor- Tell us whence comes the rain? Yellowstone perhaps? Or Hot Springs AR? Do tell us, boy?
> On Sep 28, 10:02 am, Igor <thoov...@excite.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 27, 10:39 pm, "b0onz" <y...@x.com> wrote:
> > > Scientists are increasingly recognizing the > > > importance of water vapor in the climate system.
> > > Some, like Wallace Broecker, a geochemist at > > > Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, > > > suggest that it is such an important factor that > > > much of the global warming in the last 10,000 > > > years may be due to the increasing water vapor > > > concentrations in Earth's atmosphere.
> > > His research indicates that air reaching glaciers > > > during the last Ice Age had less than half the > > > water vapor content of today. Such increases in > > > atmospheric moisture during our current > > > interglacial period would have played a far > > > greater role in global warming than carbon dioxide > > > or other minor gases.
> > > " I can only see one element of the climate system > > > capable of generating these fast, global changes, > > > that is, changes in the tropical atmosphere > > > leading to changes in the inventory of the earth's > > > most powerful greenhouse gas-- water vapor. "
> > > "Known causes of global climate change, like > > > cyclical eccentricities in Earth's rotation and > > > orbit, as well as variations in the sun's energy > > > output, are the primary causes of climate cycles > > > measured over the last half million years. > > > However, secondary greenhouse effects stemming > > > from changes in the ability of a warming > > > atmosphere to support greater concentrations of > > > gases like water vapor and carbon dioxide also > > > appear to play a significant role. As demonstrated > > > in the data above, of all Earth's greenhouse > > > gases, water vapor is by far the dominant player."
> > > "The ability of humans to influence greenhouse > > > water vapor is negligible. As such, individuals > > > and groups whose agenda it is to require that > > > human beings are the cause of global warming must > > > discount or ignore the effects of water vapor to > > > preserve their arguments, citing numbers similar > > > to those in Table 4b . If political correctness > > > and staying out of trouble aren't high priorities > > > for you, go ahead and ask them how water vapor was > > > handled in their models or statistics. Chances > > > are, it wasn't!"
> > > Dr. Wallace Broecker, a leading world authority on > > > climate Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia > > > University.
> > > Lecture presented at R A Daly Lecture at the > > > American Geophysical Union's spring meeting in > > > Baltimore, Md., May 1996.
> > Your hypothesis might work except for one tiny detail There's this > > thing called rain. Maybe you've heard of it. It's been in all the > > papers and on TV.
> •• Igor- Tell us whence comes the rain? Yellowstone > perhaps? Or Hot Springs AR? Do tell us, boy?
It comes from the clouds, dumbass! But if you can find a way to condense CO2 out of the air like H2O, then all of our problems would be solved.
> > > > Scientists are increasingly recognizing the > > > > importance of water vapor in the climate system.
> > > > Some, like Wallace Broecker, a geochemist at > > > > Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, > > > > suggest that it is such an important factor that > > > > much of the global warming in the last 10,000 > > > > years may be due to the increasing water vapor > > > > concentrations in Earth's atmosphere.
> > > > His research indicates that air reaching glaciers > > > > during the last Ice Age had less than half the > > > > water vapor content of today. Such increases in > > > > atmospheric moisture during our current > > > > interglacial period would have played a far > > > > greater role in global warming than carbon dioxide > > > > or other minor gases.
> > > > " I can only see one element of the climate system > > > > capable of generating these fast, global changes, > > > > that is, changes in the tropical atmosphere > > > > leading to changes in the inventory of the earth's > > > > most powerful greenhouse gas-- water vapor. "
> > > > "Known causes of global climate change, like > > > > cyclical eccentricities in Earth's rotation and > > > > orbit, as well as variations in the sun's energy > > > > output, are the primary causes of climate cycles > > > > measured over the last half million years. > > > > However, secondary greenhouse effects stemming > > > > from changes in the ability of a warming > > > > atmosphere to support greater concentrations of > > > > gases like water vapor and carbon dioxide also > > > > appear to play a significant role. As demonstrated > > > > in the data above, of all Earth's greenhouse > > > > gases, water vapor is by far the dominant player."
> > > > "The ability of humans to influence greenhouse > > > > water vapor is negligible. As such, individuals > > > > and groups whose agenda it is to require that > > > > human beings are the cause of global warming must > > > > discount or ignore the effects of water vapor to > > > > preserve their arguments, citing numbers similar > > > > to those in Table 4b . If political correctness > > > > and staying out of trouble aren't high priorities > > > > for you, go ahead and ask them how water vapor was > > > > handled in their models or statistics. Chances > > > > are, it wasn't!"
> > > > Dr. Wallace Broecker, a leading world authority on > > > > climate Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia > > > > University.
> > > > Lecture presented at R A Daly Lecture at the > > > > American Geophysical Union's spring meeting in > > > > Baltimore, Md., May 1996.
> > > Your hypothesis might work except for one tiny detail There's this > > > thing called rain. Maybe you've heard of it. It's been in all the > > > papers and on TV.
> > •• Igor- Tell us whence comes the rain? Yellowstone > > perhaps? Or Hot Springs AR? Do tell us, boy?
> It comes from the clouds, dumbass! But if you can find a way to > condense CO2 out of the air like H2O, then all of our problems would > be solved.
> > > > Scientists are increasingly recognizing the > > > > importance of water vapor in the climate system.
> > > > Some, like Wallace Broecker, a geochemist at > > > > Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, > > > > suggest that it is such an important factor that > > > > much of the global warming in the last 10,000 > > > > years may be due to the increasing water vapor > > > > concentrations in Earth's atmosphere.
> > > > His research indicates that air reaching glaciers > > > > during the last Ice Age had less than half the > > > > water vapor content of today. Such increases in > > > > atmospheric moisture during our current > > > > interglacial period would have played a far > > > > greater role in global warming than carbon dioxide > > > > or other minor gases.
> > > > " I can only see one element of the climate system > > > > capable of generating these fast, global changes, > > > > that is, changes in the tropical atmosphere > > > > leading to changes in the inventory of the earth's > > > > most powerful greenhouse gas-- water vapor. "
> > > > "Known causes of global climate change, like > > > > cyclical eccentricities in Earth's rotation and > > > > orbit, as well as variations in the sun's energy > > > > output, are the primary causes of climate cycles > > > > measured over the last half million years. > > > > However, secondary greenhouse effects stemming > > > > from changes in the ability of a warming > > > > atmosphere to support greater concentrations of > > > > gases like water vapor and carbon dioxide also > > > > appear to play a significant role. As demonstrated > > > > in the data above, of all Earth's greenhouse > > > > gases, water vapor is by far the dominant player."
> > > > "The ability of humans to influence greenhouse > > > > water vapor is negligible. As such, individuals > > > > and groups whose agenda it is to require that > > > > human beings are the cause of global warming must > > > > discount or ignore the effects of water vapor to > > > > preserve their arguments, citing numbers similar > > > > to those in Table 4b . If political correctness > > > > and staying out of trouble aren't high priorities > > > > for you, go ahead and ask them how water vapor was > > > > handled in their models or statistics. Chances > > > > are, it wasn't!"
> > > > Dr. Wallace Broecker, a leading world authority on > > > > climate Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia > > > > University.
> > > > Lecture presented at R A Daly Lecture at the > > > > American Geophysical Union's spring meeting in > > > > Baltimore, Md., May 1996.
> > > Your hypothesis might work except for one tiny detail There's this > > > thing called rain. Maybe you've heard of it. It's been in all the > > > papers and on TV.
> > •• Igor- Tell us whence comes the rain? Yellowstone > > perhaps? Or Hot Springs AR? Do tell us, boy?
> It comes from the clouds, dumbass! But if you can find a way to > condense CO2 out of the air like H2O, then all of our problems would > be solved.
•• You are the dumbass!! Where is the problem
•• The CO2 and NO2 and a bit of CH4 is dissolved in the raindrops and carried onto the earth. If you are old enough (which I doubt) there was a short lived panic about "acid rain". It was just an abnormal burst of CO2 in the rain, probably from a volcanbic eruption somewhere
> > > > Scientists are increasingly recognizing the > > > > importance of water vapor in the climate system.
> > > > Some, like Wallace Broecker, a geochemist at > > > > Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, > > > > suggest that it is such an important factor that > > > > much of the global warming in the last 10,000 > > > > years may be due to the increasing water vapor > > > > concentrations in Earth's atmosphere.
> > > > His research indicates that air reaching glaciers > > > > during the last Ice Age had less than half the > > > > water vapor content of today. Such increases in > > > > atmospheric moisture during our current > > > > interglacial period would have played a far > > > > greater role in global warming than carbon dioxide > > > > or other minor gases.
> > > > " I can only see one element of the climate system > > > > capable of generating these fast, global changes, > > > > that is, changes in the tropical atmosphere > > > > leading to changes in the inventory of the earth's > > > > most powerful greenhouse gas-- water vapor. "
> > > > "Known causes of global climate change, like > > > > cyclical eccentricities in Earth's rotation and > > > > orbit, as well as variations in the sun's energy > > > > output, are the primary causes of climate cycles > > > > measured over the last half million years. > > > > However, secondary greenhouse effects stemming > > > > from changes in the ability of a warming > > > > atmosphere to support greater concentrations of > > > > gases like water vapor and carbon dioxide also > > > > appear to play a significant role. As demonstrated > > > > in the data above, of all Earth's greenhouse > > > > gases, water vapor is by far the dominant player."
> > > > "The ability of humans to influence greenhouse > > > > water vapor is negligible. As such, individuals > > > > and groups whose agenda it is to require that > > > > human beings are the cause of global warming must > > > > discount or ignore the effects of water vapor to > > > > preserve their arguments, citing numbers similar > > > > to those in Table 4b . If political correctness > > > > and staying out of trouble aren't high priorities > > > > for you, go ahead and ask them how water vapor was > > > > handled in their models or statistics. Chances > > > > are, it wasn't!"
> > > > Dr. Wallace Broecker, a leading world authority on > > > > climate Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia > > > > University.
> > > > Lecture presented at R A Daly Lecture at the > > > > American Geophysical Union's spring meeting in > > > > Baltimore, Md., May 1996.
> > > Your hypothesis might work except for one tiny detail There's this > > > thing called rain. Maybe you've heard of it. It's been in all the > > > papers and on TV.
> > •• Igor- Tell us whence comes the rain? Yellowstone > > perhaps? Or Hot Springs AR? Do tell us, boy?
> It comes from the clouds, dumbass! But if you can find a way to > condense CO2 out of the air like H2O, then all of our problems would > be solved.
If need be, we can adjust to 1000 ppm CO2, at least those of us that are sufficiently rich and powerful can adjust because, they'll always make the rest of us village idiots pay for everything (including their higher ground and air conditioning).
The rest of us poor folks and the vast biodiversity of this natural and artificially traumatized planet can just fend for their own survival. That's evolution at its best.
> > > > > Scientists are increasingly recognizing the > > > > > importance of water vapor in the climate system.
> > > > > Some, like Wallace Broecker, a geochemist at > > > > > Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, > > > > > suggest that it is such an important factor that > > > > > much of the global warming in the last 10,000 > > > > > years may be due to the increasing water vapor > > > > > concentrations in Earth's atmosphere.
> > > > > His research indicates that air reaching glaciers > > > > > during the last Ice Age had less than half the > > > > > water vapor content of today. Such increases in > > > > > atmospheric moisture during our current > > > > > interglacial period would have played a far > > > > > greater role in global warming than carbon dioxide > > > > > or other minor gases.
> > > > > " I can only see one element of the climate system > > > > > capable of generating these fast, global changes, > > > > > that is, changes in the tropical atmosphere > > > > > leading to changes in the inventory of the earth's > > > > > most powerful greenhouse gas-- water vapor. "
> > > > > "Known causes of global climate change, like > > > > > cyclical eccentricities in Earth's rotation and > > > > > orbit, as well as variations in the sun's energy > > > > > output, are the primary causes of climate cycles > > > > > measured over the last half million years. > > > > > However, secondary greenhouse effects stemming > > > > > from changes in the ability of a warming > > > > > atmosphere to support greater concentrations of > > > > > gases like water vapor and carbon dioxide also > > > > > appear to play a significant role. As demonstrated > > > > > in the data above, of all Earth's greenhouse > > > > > gases, water vapor is by far the dominant player."
> > > > > "The ability of humans to influence greenhouse > > > > > water vapor is negligible. As such, individuals > > > > > and groups whose agenda it is to require that > > > > > human beings are the cause of global warming must > > > > > discount or ignore the effects of water vapor to > > > > > preserve their arguments, citing numbers similar > > > > > to those in Table 4b . If political correctness > > > > > and staying out of trouble aren't high priorities > > > > > for you, go ahead and ask them how water vapor was > > > > > handled in their models or statistics. Chances > > > > > are, it wasn't!"
> > > > > Dr. Wallace Broecker, a leading world authority on > > > > > climate Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia > > > > > University.
> > > > > Lecture presented at R A Daly Lecture at the > > > > > American Geophysical Union's spring meeting in > > > > > Baltimore, Md., May 1996.
> > > > Your hypothesis might work except for one tiny detail There's this > > > > thing called rain. Maybe you've heard of it. It's been in all the > > > > papers and on TV.
> > > •• Igor- Tell us whence comes the rain? Yellowstone > > > perhaps? Or Hot Springs AR? Do tell us, boy?
> > It comes from the clouds, dumbass! But if you can find a way to > > condense CO2 out of the air like H2O, then all of our problems would > > be solved.
> If need be, we can adjust to 1000 ppm CO2, at least those of us that > are sufficiently rich and powerful can adjust because, they'll always > make the rest of us village idiots pay for everything (including their > higher ground and air conditioning).
> The rest of us poor folks and the vast biodiversity of this natural > and artificially traumatized planet can just fend for their own > survival. That's evolution at its best.
> ~ BG
•• ROTFLMAO You are as stupid as igor and he is a big dumbass.
> > > > > Scientists are increasingly recognizing the > > > > > importance of water vapor in the climate system.
> > > > > Some, like Wallace Broecker, a geochemist at > > > > > Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, > > > > > suggest that it is such an important factor that > > > > > much of the global warming in the last 10,000 > > > > > years may be due to the increasing water vapor > > > > > concentrations in Earth's atmosphere.
> > > > > His research indicates that air reaching glaciers > > > > > during the last Ice Age had less than half the > > > > > water vapor content of today. Such increases in > > > > > atmospheric moisture during our current > > > > > interglacial period would have played a far > > > > > greater role in global warming than carbon dioxide > > > > > or other minor gases.
> > > > > " I can only see one element of the climate system > > > > > capable of generating these fast, global changes, > > > > > that is, changes in the tropical atmosphere > > > > > leading to changes in the inventory of the earth's > > > > > most powerful greenhouse gas-- water vapor. "
> > > > > "Known causes of global climate change, like > > > > > cyclical eccentricities in Earth's rotation and > > > > > orbit, as well as variations in the sun's energy > > > > > output, are the primary causes of climate cycles > > > > > measured over the last half million years. > > > > > However, secondary greenhouse effects stemming > > > > > from changes in the ability of a warming > > > > > atmosphere to support greater concentrations of > > > > > gases like water vapor and carbon dioxide also > > > > > appear to play a significant role. As demonstrated > > > > > in the data above, of all Earth's greenhouse > > > > > gases, water vapor is by far the dominant player."
> > > > > "The ability of humans to influence greenhouse > > > > > water vapor is negligible. As such, individuals > > > > > and groups whose agenda it is to require that > > > > > human beings are the cause of global warming must > > > > > discount or ignore the effects of water vapor to > > > > > preserve their arguments, citing numbers similar > > > > > to those in Table 4b . If political correctness > > > > > and staying out of trouble aren't high priorities > > > > > for you, go ahead and ask them how water vapor was > > > > > handled in their models or statistics. Chances > > > > > are, it wasn't!"
> > > > > Dr. Wallace Broecker, a leading world authority on > > > > > climate Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia > > > > > University.
> > > > > Lecture presented at R A Daly Lecture at the > > > > > American Geophysical Union's spring meeting in > > > > > Baltimore, Md., May 1996.
> > > > Your hypothesis might work except for one tiny detail There's this > > > > thing called rain. Maybe you've heard of it. It's been in all the > > > > papers and on TV.
> > > •• Igor- Tell us whence comes the rain? Yellowstone > > > perhaps? Or Hot Springs AR? Do tell us, boy?
> > It comes from the clouds, dumbass! But if you can find a way to > > condense CO2 out of the air like H2O, then all of our problems would > > be solved.
> •• You are the dumbass!! Where is the problem
> •• The CO2 and NO2 and a bit of CH4 is dissolved > in the raindrops and carried onto the earth. If you > are old enough (which I doubt) there was a short > lived panic about "acid rain". It was just an > abnormal burst of CO2 in the rain, probably from > a volcanbic eruption somewhere
BULLSHIT, but thanks for the doh for the real scientists
> On Sep 29, 1:19 pm, "leonard7...@gmail.com" <leonard7...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Sep 29, 1:01 pm, Igor <thoov...@excite.com> wrote:
> > > > •• Igor- Tell us whence comes the rain? Yellowstone > > > > perhaps? Or Hot Springs AR? Do tell us, boy?
> > > It comes from the clouds, dumbass! But if you can find a way to > > > condense CO2 out of the air like H2O, then all of our problems would > > > be solved.
> > •• You are the dumbass!! Where is the problem
> > •• The CO2 and NO2 and a bit of CH4 is dissolved > > in the raindrops and carried onto the earth. If you > > are old enough (which I doubt) there was a short > > lived panic about "acid rain". It was just an > > abnormal burst of CO2 in the rain, probably from > > a volcanbic eruption somewhere
> BULLSHIT, but thanks for the doh for the real scientists
•• Poor, poor BooBoo just another dumbass.without a clue
–– –– Either way short term or long term the data doesn't support man made global warming?
On 9/29/09 3:51 PM, in article 7747ce0b-89aa-4356-a467-885aa8bc7...@d15g2000prc.googlegroups.com,
"BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sep 29, 10:01 am, Igor <thoov...@excite.com> wrote: >> On Sep 28, 10:12 am, "leonard7...@gmail.com" <leonard7...@gmail.com> >>> €€ Igor- Tell us whence comes the rain? Yellowstone >>> perhaps? Or Hot Springs AR? Do tell us, boy?
>> It comes from the clouds, dumbass! But if you can find a way to >> condense CO2 out of the air like H2O, then all of our problems would >> be solved.
** How do they get into the clouds?
** Our planet Earth and the entire solar system works in cycles and what goes around comes around.
** The world's oceans are being heated by underwater tectonic activity - underwater volcanic eruptions and blisteringly hot magma seeping up from cracks in the sea floor. With the magma comes CO2.
The heated ocean water has high levels of CO2 that it sends aloft along with huge amounts of moisture. That moisture becomes precipitation ‹ rain in the spring, summer, and fall, and snow in the winter. Increased amounts of moisture in the upper atmosphere equals increased amounts of precipitation.
The hotter the oceans, the more water vapor sent heavenward and the heavier the precipitation, and in the water vapour is CO2 which is absorbed by the plant life and by photosynthesis produces carbohydrates and O2 the oxygen we need to breathe.
Can you understand that? CO2 is vital for life on this planet. The delivery system is mainly rain or snow.
In real science the burden of proof is always on the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one iota of valid data for global warming nor have they provided data that climate change is being effected by commerce and industry, and not by natural phenomena.
On 9/29/09 4:54 PM, in article 1a8e7955-713b-4270-ba9e-b94908652...@z24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com,
"boo-radley" <mpmul...@gmail.com> wrote: >> €€ You are the dumbass!! Where is the problem
>> €€ The CO2 and NO2 and a bit of CH4 is dissolved >> in the raindrops and carried onto the earth. If you >> are old enough (which I doubt) there was a short >> lived panic about "acid rain". It was just an >> abnormal burst of CO2 in the rain, probably from >> a volcanbic eruption somewhere
> BULLSHIT, but thanks for the doh for the real scientists
€€ I suspect you are to dumb to get in out of the rain
In real science the burden of proof is always on the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one iota of valid data for global warming nor have they provided data that climate change is being effected by commerce and industry, and not by natural phenomena.
> On 9/29/09 4:54 PM, in article > 1a8e7955-713b-4270-ba9e-b94908652...@z24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com, > "boo-radley" <mpmul...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> ?? You are the dumbass!! Where is the problem
>>> ?? The CO2 and NO2 and a bit of CH4 is dissolved >>> in the raindrops and carried onto the earth. If you >>> are old enough (which I doubt) there was a short >>> lived panic about "acid rain". It was just an >>> abnormal burst of CO2 in the rain, probably from >>> a volcanbic eruption somewhere
>> BULLSHIT, but thanks for the doh for the real scientists
> ?? I suspect you are to dumb to get in out of the rain
> > In real science the burden of proof is always on > the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far > neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one > iota of valid data for global warming nor have > they provided data that climate change is being > effected by commerce and industry, and not by > natural phenomena.
Yep.
Some simple facts about climate.
Negative feedback: 1) Sun heats ocean. 2) Ocean evaporates. 3) Clouds reflect sunlight into space, reduce evaporation. 4) Less cloud forms, more heat is absorbed, more cloud forms, less heat is absorbed; Earth's temperature remains constant. If it gets warmer, it will cool. If it gets cooler, it will warm.
Positive feedback: 5) Snow falls on land and polar ice fields. 6) Snow/ice reflects sunlight into space, reduces heat absorption. Water absorbs sunlight, increases energy intake. 7) Earth cools as it radiates heat to space, more snow falls, more sunlight is reflected, result is an Ice Age. The colder it is, the colder it will get. The warmer it is, the warmer it will get.
Changing the balance: 8) Earth's orbit is elliptical. 9) Sunlight obeys the inverse square law. 10) Earth is tilted. 11) More sunlight reaches Earth at perihelion than at aphelion. 12) Earth's Great White Spot, Antarctica, reflects sunlight at aphelion (Southern summer). Result, positive feedback predominates, Ice Age. 13) Earth precesses. Earth's Great White Spot reflects sunlight at perihelion (Northern summer). But Earth's Great White Spot has no sunlight to reflect and the Northern Wet Spot (the Arctic Ocean) has even more sunlight to melt its ice cap than it had when it faced the Sun at aphelion. Water absorbs far more heat than ice. Result: more sunlight absorbed, positive feedback, global warming.
14) But it is offset by more cloud, see negative feedback above. Overall result - a small change in temperature as a function of precession.
15) CO2 levels rise as a consequence of a warmer planet, not as the cause. Far more strange gases are vented to atmosphere by volcanoes than by man.
It's been that way for at least 3 billion years; homo neanderthalensis is alive and well and arrogant enough to say he causes it. He is, of course, an idiot who thinks he can "combat" the quite natural temperature cycle.
> > In real science the burden of proof is always on > the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far > neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one > iota of valid data for global warming nor have > they provided data that climate change is being > effected by commerce and industry, and not by > natural phenomena.
Yarrow Axforda,1, Jason P. Brinerb, Colin A. Cookec, Donna R. Francisd, Neal Micheluttie, Gifford H. Millera,f, John P. Smole, Elizabeth K. Thomasb, Cheryl R. Wilsone and Alexander P. Wolfec
Abstract
The Arctic is currently undergoing dramatic environmental transformations, but it remains largely unknown how these changes compare with long-term natural variability. Here we present a lake sediment sequence from the Canadian Arctic that records warm periods of the past 200,000 years, including the 20th century. This record provides a perspective on recent changes in the Arctic and predates by approximately 80,000 years the oldest stratigraphically intact ice core recovered from the Greenland Ice Sheet. The early Holocene and the warmest part of the Last Interglacial (Marine Isotope Stage or MIS 5e) were the only periods of the past 200,000 years with summer temperatures comparable to or exceeding today's at this site. Paleoecological and geochemical data indicate that the past three interglacial periods were characterized by similar trajectories in temperature, lake biology, and lakewater pH, all of which tracked orbitally-driven solar insolation. In recent decades, however, the study site has deviated from this recurring natural pattern and has entered an environmental regime that is unique within the past 200 millennia.
"There are periods of time reflected in this sediment core that demonstrate that the climate was as warm as today," said Briner, "but that was due to natural causes, having to do with well-understood patterns of the Earth's orbit around the sun. The whole ecosystem has now shifted and the ecosystem we see during just the last few decades is different from those seen during any of the past warm intervals."
> > > > > > Scientists are increasingly recognizing the > > > > > > importance of water vapor in the climate system.
> > > > > > Some, like Wallace Broecker, a geochemist at > > > > > > Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, > > > > > > suggest that it is such an important factor that > > > > > > much of the global warming in the last 10,000 > > > > > > years may be due to the increasing water vapor > > > > > > concentrations in Earth's atmosphere.
> > > > > > His research indicates that air reaching glaciers > > > > > > during the last Ice Age had less than half the > > > > > > water vapor content of today. Such increases in > > > > > > atmospheric moisture during our current > > > > > > interglacial period would have played a far > > > > > > greater role in global warming than carbon dioxide > > > > > > or other minor gases.
> > > > > > " I can only see one element of the climate system > > > > > > capable of generating these fast, global changes, > > > > > > that is, changes in the tropical atmosphere > > > > > > leading to changes in the inventory of the earth's > > > > > > most powerful greenhouse gas-- water vapor. "
> > > > > > "Known causes of global climate change, like > > > > > > cyclical eccentricities in Earth's rotation and > > > > > > orbit, as well as variations in the sun's energy > > > > > > output, are the primary causes of climate cycles > > > > > > measured over the last half million years. > > > > > > However, secondary greenhouse effects stemming > > > > > > from changes in the ability of a warming > > > > > > atmosphere to support greater concentrations of > > > > > > gases like water vapor and carbon dioxide also > > > > > > appear to play a significant role. As demonstrated > > > > > > in the data above, of all Earth's greenhouse > > > > > > gases, water vapor is by far the dominant player."
> > > > > > "The ability of humans to influence greenhouse > > > > > > water vapor is negligible. As such, individuals > > > > > > and groups whose agenda it is to require that > > > > > > human beings are the cause of global warming must > > > > > > discount or ignore the effects of water vapor to > > > > > > preserve their arguments, citing numbers similar > > > > > > to those in Table 4b . If political correctness > > > > > > and staying out of trouble aren't high priorities > > > > > > for you, go ahead and ask them how water vapor was > > > > > > handled in their models or statistics. Chances > > > > > > are, it wasn't!"
> > > > > > Dr. Wallace Broecker, a leading world authority on > > > > > > climate Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia > > > > > > University.
> > > > > > Lecture presented at R A Daly Lecture at the > > > > > > American Geophysical Union's spring meeting in > > > > > > Baltimore, Md., May 1996.
> > > > > Your hypothesis might work except for one tiny detail There's this > > > > > thing called rain. Maybe you've heard of it. It's been in all the > > > > > papers and on TV.
> > > > •• Igor- Tell us whence comes the rain? Yellowstone > > > > perhaps? Or Hot Springs AR? Do tell us, boy?
> > > It comes from the clouds, dumbass! But if you can find a way to > > > condense CO2 out of the air like H2O, then all of our problems would > > > be solved.
> > If need be, we can adjust to 1000 ppm CO2, at least those of us that > > are sufficiently rich and powerful can adjust because, they'll always > > make the rest of us village idiots pay for everything (including their > > higher ground and air conditioning).
> > The rest of us poor folks and the vast biodiversity of this natural > > and artificially traumatized planet can just fend for their own > > survival. That's evolution at its best.
> > ~ BG
> •• ROTFLMAO You are as stupid as igor and he is a big dumbass.
As long as you're rich enough, there's nothing of GW to worry about.
On Oct 25, 6:58 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote:
> Leonard wrote:
> > > > In real science the burden of proof is always on > > the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far > > neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one > > iota of valid data for global warming nor have > > they provided data that climate change is being > > effected by commerce and industry, and not by > > natural phenomena.
> Yarrow Axforda,1, Jason P. Brinerb, Colin A. Cookec, Donna R. Francisd, Neal Micheluttie, > Gifford H. Millera,f, John P. Smole, Elizabeth K. Thomasb, Cheryl R. Wilsone and Alexander > P. Wolfec
> Abstract
> The Arctic is currently undergoing dramatic environmental transformations, but it remains > largely unknown how these changes compare with long-term natural variability. Here we > present a lake sediment sequence from the Canadian Arctic that records warm periods of the > past 200,000 years, including the 20th century. This record provides a perspective on > recent changes in the Arctic and predates by approximately 80,000 years the oldest > stratigraphically intact ice core recovered from the Greenland Ice Sheet. The early > Holocene and the warmest part of the Last Interglacial (Marine Isotope Stage or MIS 5e) > were the only periods of the past 200,000 years with summer temperatures comparable to or > exceeding today's at this site. Paleoecological and geochemical data indicate that the > past three interglacial periods were characterized by similar trajectories in temperature, > lake biology, and lakewater pH, all of which tracked orbitally-driven solar insolation. In > recent decades, however, the study site has deviated from this recurring natural pattern > and has entered an environmental regime that is unique within the past 200 millennia.
> "There are periods of time reflected in this sediment core that demonstrate that the > climate was as warm as today," said Briner, "but that was due to natural causes, having to > do with well-understood patterns of the Earth's orbit around the sun. The whole ecosystem > has now shifted and the ecosystem we see during just the last few decades is different > from those seen during any of the past warm intervals."
>< 15) CO2 levels rise as a consequence of a warmer planet, not
as the cause. Far more strange gases are vented to atmosphere by volcanoes than by man.
It's been that way for at least 3 billion years; homo neanderthalensis is alive and well and arrogant enough to say he causes it. >
Perhaps he DOES! There are quite a few nuclear reactors already in use 365.25 days/year; most of which are cooled by ocean-water. As a result, the water temperature goes up, as manatees know and love. However, as the ocean gets warmer - even though very slightly so far - the ice slowly melts more than it would if neandethalensis did't exist, or was slightly more or less ignorant. (If "more ignorant" he woldn't know how to build nuclear reactors. If "less ignoraant" perhaps he might understnad that heat is far more than just the inerital motion of atoms and molecules, and that in addition to emitting heat-energy, every time atomic nuclei merge or split there is some continuous matter emitted; the same kind of matter of which atoms are made. If he gew a trifle smarter than that, he might read "Forgive them. O Lord, for they know not what they do", by G. Lebau, 1970ish.
> ( Some excellent stuff snipped)>< 15) CO2 levels rise as a consequence of a warmer planet, not
> as the cause. Far more strange gases are vented to atmosphere by > volcanoes than by man.
> It's been that way for at least 3 billion years; homo > neanderthalensis is alive and well and arrogant enough to say he > causes it. >
> Perhaps he DOES! There are quite a few nuclear reactors already in > use 365.25 days/year; most of which are cooled by ocean-water. As a > result, the water temperature goes up, as manatees know and love. > However, as the ocean gets warmer - even though very slightly so far > - the ice slowly melts more than it would if neandethalensis did't > exist, or was slightly more or less ignorant. > (If "more ignorant" he woldn't know how to build nuclear reactors. If > "less ignoraant" perhaps he might understnad that heat is far more > than just the inerital motion of atoms and molecules, and that in > addition to emitting heat-energy, every time atomic nuclei merge or > split there is some continuous matter emitted; the same kind of matter > of which atoms are made. > If he gew a trifle smarter than that, he might read "Forgive them. O > Lord, for they know not what they do", by G. Lebau, 1970ish.
•• ROTFLMAO Proof that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing!!!
— — . In real science the burden of proof is always . on the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far . neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one . iota of valid data for global warming nor have . they provided data that climate change is being . effected by commerce and industry, and not by . natural phenomena.
> > ( Some excellent stuff snipped)>< 15) CO2 levels rise as a consequence of a warmer planet, not
> > as the cause. Far more strange gases are vented to atmosphere by > > volcanoes than by man.
> > It's been that way for at least 3 billion years; homo > > neanderthalensis is alive and well and arrogant enough to say he > > causes it. >
> > Perhaps he DOES! There are quite a few nuclear reactors already in > > use 365.25 days/year; most of which are cooled by ocean-water. As a > > result, the water temperature goes up, as manatees know and love. > > However, as the ocean gets warmer - even though very slightly so far > > - the ice slowly melts more than it would if neandethalensis did't > > exist, or was slightly more or less ignorant. > > (If "more ignorant" he woldn't know how to build nuclear reactors. If > > "less ignoraant" perhaps he might understnad that heat is far more > > than just the inerital motion of atoms and molecules, and that in > > addition to emitting heat-energy, every time atomic nuclei merge or > > split there is some continuous matter emitted; the same kind of matter > > of which atoms are made. > > If he gew a trifle smarter than that, he might read "Forgive them. O > > Lord, for they know not what they do", by G. Lebau, 1970ish.
> •• ROTFLMAO
>> Proof that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing!!!
The correct quote is
"A little LEARNING is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again."- Alexander Pope
They're right. Plug in the numbers, and you'll see that a doubling of CO2 can only have a minor effect on climate- A. McIntire
> > ( Some excellent stuff snipped)>< 15) CO2 levels rise as a consequence > > of a warmer planet, not
> > as the cause. Far more strange gases are vented to atmosphere by > > volcanoes than by man.
> > It's been that way for at least 3 billion years; homo > > neanderthalensis is alive and well and arrogant enough to say he > > causes it. >
> > Perhaps he DOES! There are quite a few nuclear reactors already in > > use 365.25 days/year; most of which are cooled by ocean-water. As a > > result, the water temperature goes up, as manatees know and love. > > However, as the ocean gets warmer - even though very slightly so far > > - the ice slowly melts more than it would if neandethalensis did't > > exist, or was slightly more or less ignorant. > > (If "more ignorant" he woldn't know how to build nuclear reactors. If > > "less ignoraant" perhaps he might understnad that heat is far more > > than just the inerital motion of atoms and molecules, and that in > > addition to emitting heat-energy, every time atomic nuclei merge or > > split there is some continuous matter emitted; the same kind of matter > > of which atoms are made. > > If he gew a trifle smarter than that, he might read "Forgive them. O > > Lord, for they know not what they do", by G. Lebau, 1970ish.
> •• ROTFLMAO
>> Proof that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing!!!
The correct quote is
"A little LEARNING is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again."- Alexander Pope
They're right. Plug in the numbers, and you'll see that a doubling of CO2 can only have a minor effect on climate- A. McIntire
============================================= Insolation has only a major effect on climate. If Earth's mean temperature were not close to 273 degrees kelvin, mammals with a blood heat of 300 degrees kelvin would not have evolved.
Global warming is clearly cyclic. Yet the balance point, freezing point of water, has dramatic consequences on sea levels. Neanderthals cry "disaster" when land is flooded, but fails to holler "joy" when the reverse occurs.
> On Nov 7, 11:29 pm, "leonard7...@gmail.com" <leonard7...@gmail.com> > wrote:
> > On Nov 7, 6:09 pm, glird <gl...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > On Oct 25, 5:57 pm, "Androcles" wrote:
> > > > Some simple facts about climate.
> > > ( Some excellent stuff snipped)>< 15) CO2 levels rise as a consequence of a warmer planet, not
> > > as the cause. Far more strange gases are vented to atmosphere by > > > volcanoes than by man.
> > > It's been that way for at least 3 billion years; homo > > > neanderthalensis is alive and well and arrogant enough to say he > > > causes it. >
> > > Perhaps he DOES! There are quite a few nuclear reactors already in > > > use 365.25 days/year; most of which are cooled by ocean-water. As a > > > result, the water temperature goes up, as manatees know and love. > > > However, as the ocean gets warmer - even though very slightly so far > > > - the ice slowly melts more than it would if neandethalensis did't > > > exist, or was slightly more or less ignorant. > > > (If "more ignorant" he woldn't know how to build nuclear reactors. If > > > "less ignoraant" perhaps he might understnad that heat is far more > > > than just the inerital motion of atoms and molecules, and that in > > > addition to emitting heat-energy, every time atomic nuclei merge or > > > split there is some continuous matter emitted; the same kind of matter > > > of which atoms are made. > > > If he gew a trifle smarter than that, he might read "Forgive them. O > > > Lord, for they know not what they do", by G. Lebau, 1970ish.
> > •• ROTFLMAO
> >> Proof that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing!!!
> The correct quote is
> "A little LEARNING is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the > Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and > drinking largely sobers us again."- Alexander Pope
> They're right. Plug in the numbers, and you'll see that a > doubling of CO2 can only have a minor effect on climate
>> > ( Some excellent stuff snipped)>< 15) CO2 levels rise as a consequence >> > of a warmer planet, not
>> > as the cause. Far more strange gases are vented to atmosphere by >> > volcanoes than by man.
>> > It's been that way for at least 3 billion years; homo >> > neanderthalensis is alive and well and arrogant enough to say he >> > causes it. >
>> > Perhaps he DOES! There are quite a few nuclear reactors already in >> > use 365.25 days/year; most of which are cooled by ocean-water. As a >> > result, the water temperature goes up, as manatees know and love. >> > However, as the ocean gets warmer - even though very slightly so far >> > - the ice slowly melts more than it would if neandethalensis did't >> > exist, or was slightly more or less ignorant. >> > (If "more ignorant" he woldn't know how to build nuclear reactors. If >> > "less ignoraant" perhaps he might understnad that heat is far more >> > than just the inerital motion of atoms and molecules, and that in >> > addition to emitting heat-energy, every time atomic nuclei merge or >> > split there is some continuous matter emitted; the same kind of matter >> > of which atoms are made. >> > If he gew a trifle smarter than that, he might read "Forgive them. O >> > Lord, for they know not what they do", by G. Lebau, 1970ish.
>> ? ROTFLMAO > >> Proof that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing!!!
> The correct quote is
>"A little LEARNING is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the >Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and >drinking largely sobers us again."- Alexander Pope
> They're right. Plug in the numbers, and you'll see that a >doubling of CO2 can only have a minor effect on climate- A. McIntire
>============================================= >Insolation has only a major effect on climate. If Earth's mean > temperature were not close to 273 degrees kelvin, mammals >with a blood heat of 300 degrees kelvin would not have evolved.
>Global warming is clearly cyclic. >Yet the balance point, freezing point of water, has dramatic >consequences on sea levels. Neanderthals cry "disaster" when >land is flooded, but fails to holler "joy" when the reverse occurs.
<leonard7...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Nov 8, 5:23 pm, "alanmc95...@yahoo.com" <alanmc95...@yahoo.com> >wrote: >> On Nov 7, 11:29 pm, "leonard7...@gmail.com" <leonard7...@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>> > On Nov 7, 6:09 pm, glird <gl...@aol.com> wrote:
>> > > On Oct 25, 5:57 pm, "Androcles" wrote:
>> > > > Some simple facts about climate.
>> > > ( Some excellent stuff snipped)>< 15) CO2 levels rise as a consequence of a warmer planet, not
>> > > as the cause. Far more strange gases are vented to atmosphere by >> > > volcanoes than by man.
>> > > It's been that way for at least 3 billion years; homo >> > > neanderthalensis is alive and well and arrogant enough to say he >> > > causes it. >
>> > > Perhaps he DOES! There are quite a few nuclear reactors already in >> > > use 365.25 days/year; most of which are cooled by ocean-water. As a >> > > result, the water temperature goes up, as manatees know and love. >> > > However, as the ocean gets warmer - even though very slightly so far >> > > - the ice slowly melts more than it would if neandethalensis did't >> > > exist, or was slightly more or less ignorant. >> > > (If "more ignorant" he woldn't know how to build nuclear reactors. If >> > > "less ignoraant" perhaps he might understnad that heat is far more >> > > than just the inerital motion of atoms and molecules, and that in >> > > addition to emitting heat-energy, every time atomic nuclei merge or >> > > split there is some continuous matter emitted; the same kind of matter >> > > of which atoms are made. >> > > If he gew a trifle smarter than that, he might read "Forgive them. O >> > > Lord, for they know not what they do", by G. Lebau, 1970ish.
>> > •• ROTFLMAO
>> >> Proof that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing!!!
>> The correct quote is
>> "A little LEARNING is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the >> Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and >> drinking largely sobers us again."- Alexander Pope
>> They're right. Plug in the numbers, and you'll see that a >> doubling of CO2 can only have a minor effect on climate
|
