Reply With Quote
yes. carbon dioxide is necessary for life.
and also yes, excessive CO2 being pumped back into the atmosphere is warming the earth.
we also need water to live. but if you chug too much water in a short period of time, it can be fatal.
yes. carbon dioxide is necessary for life.
and also yes, excessive CO2 being pumped back into the atmosphere is warming the earth.
we also need water to live. but if you chug too much water in a short period of time, it can be fatal.
Are we back to "global warming" now, or are will still sticking to the infallible "climate change"? I need some clarification on your theories.
they're interchangeable, colloquially. there was never a change from one to the other. there are scientific papers from the late 1800's discussing climate change
glad i could clarify
Are the scientific papers from the late 1800's in the infallible zone, or is this like a Dead Sea Scrolls thing for you?
we're talking about the climate change/global warming terminology right now, not the fallibility or infallibility of the papers.
actually, you had raised this same question before and ran away when confronted on it
https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/sho...=1#post9343313
your claim was: global warming turned to climate change
my rebuttal was: no, it had been called climate change all along, going back to the the 1950's and even further, in some cases in the late 1800's
somehow, you think it's a valid deflection to then ask "yeah but are those papers infallible?"... you're moving the goalpost
Just asking for clarification on your global warming/climate change theory is all.
it was clarified long ago, and you keep coming back to it to try to pull off some zinger instead of addressing the merits
LUL it used to be global warming but they changed it because they were wrong lol libs
I addressed the "merits" with my post about carbon dioxide. It refutes your "doom and gloom" theory, but you come back with: "excessive CO2 being pumped back into the atmosphere is warming the earth" Just repeating the lie ad nauseam does little to help your case imo. I was interested in how you are packaging it these days, not "trying to pull of some zinger." I don't do the troll thing.
Scientific papers from the 1800's tho.
yes, and i responded directly to that post, which took offense to CO2 being called a pollutant despite it being required for life on earth. something can be necessary, and yet harmful in high quan ies. CO2 is among them. the warming effect of CO2 has been known about for quite some time, and has been experimentally observed in the last 100 years. you can call it repeating a lie, but its really just repeating the consistent findings that our temperature is increasing along with CO2 levels. combined with our knowledge that CO2 molecules have qualities that would lead to warming, it fits the puzzle piece quite well.
the theoretical knowledge and the experimental evidence go hand in hand.
again, i only brought those up to demonstrate that the term "climate change" has been used for a long time, and not something that was invented in the 2000's to replace the global warming term.
so i'm really not sure what point you think you're making here.
This is fine, normal weather variation, right?
0.65 mm
how many Superdomes would that fill up?0.65 mm
Would evaporate in minutes.
Last edited by DarrinS; 07-29-2019 at 10:48 PM.
You're aware that that the melt anomaly im Greenland alone is estimated to cause a global sea level rise of that magnitude within 4-5 months, aren't you?
For an engineer.you seem to have trouble putting these figures in context.
0.65 mm? Better move to higher ground.
That's exactly what I meant, thanks for underscoring my point.
Trump’s political guys again not wanting science done.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...-trump-1445271
Definitely not a good way to get current research done.
Science is really tough on many red team members. I thought it was the domain of blue team “go organic” guys not really wanting to understand what organic means. Or the total misunderstanding of some blue team members about the safety of irradiated food.
Red team takes the ignorance points now. Not even close.
Thank Christ! I thought he was caving on this happy horse when I saw your lodgment.
LOL Prager U propaganda.
Not worth watching.
THat is for a few day's melt, moron. It's like you can't extrapolate from incomplete0.65 mm
Well-played.
TheState of the Climate in 2018 study also reported other key findings:
- 2018 was the fourth-warmest year on record. The three other warmest years were 2015, 2016 and 2017, with 2016 as the warmest year since records first began being kept in the mid-1800s.
- Sea levels rose to record levels for a seventh consecutive year.
- Glaciers continue to melt at a concerning rate for the 30th straight year.
"Every year since the start of the 21st Century has been warmer than the 1981-2010 average," the report said.
"In 2018, the dominant greenhouse gases released into Earth's atmosphere -- carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide -- continued to increase and reach new record highs."
In fact, the report found greenhouse gases warming influence on the planet have increased an alarming 43% since 1990.
Global carbon dioxide concentrations, which represent the bulk of the gases warming power, rose during 2018 to a record 407.4 parts per million, the study found.
That is "the highest in the modern instrumental record and in ice core records dating back 800,000 years," the report said.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/12/world/state-of-climate-report-2018/index.html
Man, esp Capitalism, has dumped a load in his bed, and there's no way to stop or reverse it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
