Whistle blowing on Global Warming

[Anaxogoras]

if i'm thinking correctly, the earth's atmosphere will radiate heat out into space. for something to prevent this, it needs to insulate in the upper atmosphere. co2 is heavier than air, so this isn't gonna do that.

This was brought up much, much earlier in the thread.  By your reasoning, the atmosphere should consist of layers of gases, with the heaviest gasses on the surface.  Clearly, this is not the case.

The masses of molecules like O2 and CO2 are so negligibly small that the ideal gas law doesn't even take them into account.

[CAP1]

This was brought up much, much earlier in the thread.  By your reasoning, the atmosphere should consist of layers of gases, with the heaviest gasses on the surface.  Clearly, this is not the case.

The masses of molecules like O2 and CO2 are so negligibly small that the ideal gas law doesn't even take them into account.

you're right. i think it might even have been me that brought this up before.

 when thedifferent gases are dissolved together, they float somewhat the same in the atmosphere.

 when we put out gases in excess, which is what is claimed(now) to be the cause of the (so called) warming, they aren't dissolved.
 as in the co2 that is suddenly a pollutant. they say the co2 rises up into the upper atmosphere and "insulates" the planet, preventing the heat within the atmosphere from radiationg out into space.
 that's where i was headed......co2 as put out by us, will simply settle in low, plankton, and plants will breath well(they like co2), and in return, give us more 02. 

[MORAY37]

Kiddo, you really need to learn physics beyond individual component weights.

Seriously?  Exactly where do you think you can refer to me in that way?  Kiddo?

[Bodhi]

See Rule #4

[Masherbrum]

Page 75 is just around the corner!

[MORAY37]

spin away moray....

How is a weight going to fall away on a well supported structure that has a large amount of counter for it to fall as well as support underneath in the form of a melting barrier?


Back to the question spinmaster.... why are you supporting the man-made global warming theory when it is backed by a show of hands following junk science?

Spinmaster?  Seriously...either act like an adult or just cease posting.  I've treated you with respect... either do the same or LEAVE.

 Look up exactly what you're trying to prove (planes sinking through 300 feet of ice) and THEN tell me why it, pardon the pun, "holds no weight".  Please at least attempt to find something scientific.  

As for your question....It isn't a show of hands, BTW.  It's multiple independent, reproducible studies from multiple disciplines that support the general theory.

That isn't a show of hands.... that's objective experimental result.  

[CAP1]

Page 75 is just around the corner!

if these guys keep going at each other personally like htis, we may not make 75

[MORAY37]

if these guys keep going at each other personally like htis, we may not make 75

I've been warned by "the boss" not to reply in kind to personal attacks.

Which is why I'm not.  

This is all one-sided. 

[MORAY37]

NASA/HADCRUT Temp anomalies.



Discuss.

[cpxxx]

They are nice graphs. I might frame them and hang them on the wall because quite frankly without commentary they are mostly meaningless and in any case simply represent the weather last year.
This I came across elsewhere and is interesting on a number or levels in that it addresses many of the skeptic points, although described here as 'denialists' in the usual perjorative style. It's an almost tacit acceptence that there are massive holes in the science. That it's far from settled. It is self justifying of course

"But this climate of suspicion we're working in is insane. It's really drowning our ability to soberly communicate gaps in our science when some people cry 'fraud' and 'misconduct' for the slightest reasons."

The 'slightest of reasons' that's a laugh. Either science stands or falls on it's own merits or it doesn't. If a scientist cannot soberly communicate the gaps in the science then maybe they should consider another career. The problem is that they are not communicating the gaps. Worse as we found they are covering them up.

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100120/full/463284a.html

Hopefully this is the start of a new more sober debate about the subject.

[E25280]

(Image removed from quote.)

NASA/HADCRUT Temp anomalies.



Discuss.

Are these the variations before or after they threw out measurements they didn't like?

[bozon]

quote:"But this climate of suspicion we're working in is insane. It's really drowning our ability to soberly communicate gaps in our science when some people cry 'fraud' and 'misconduct' for the slightest reasons."
http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100120/full/463284a.html

Hopefully this is the start of a new more sober debate about the subject.

The climate of suspicion that is drowning their ability to communicate gaps their science, is a result of their own doing.

Other branches of science tend to be much more cautious with their results and emphasize the uncertainties. In particular, one does not go out with sensational press releases about the world's end before you are sure of it. An incredible amount of bad science or good science but with sensationalism of the results has been released into our lives, to the point that this branch of science is loosing its credibility. A great part of the uproar from scientists that oppose man-made global something theories is not that the theories are wrong, but that they are so uncertain and weak that aggressively marketing them to the public is irresponsible and will discredit science as a whole.

They have set wheels into motion that have so much momentum they are going to be hard to stop or even redirect if needed. Billions are spent on reducing CO2 emission that will have the same effect on the environment as preventing the public at the beach from peeing into the ocean. Sure it is cleaner, but is it worth the effort? Products are sold with "reduced CO2" labels and sold to concerned public. Politicians build careers over these issues. This is not something you can one day come and say "OK, we have better models/measurements now and you don't have to do this anymore - CO2 is not that bad / climate is not drastically changing / climate change is not man made", the public will nod and say "thank you" and everything will go back to what it used to be.

[cpxxx]

Exactly Bozon, no other branch of science generates so much skepticism. Not least because of the way it's publicised. They only have themselves to blame with their end of the world as we know it 'conclusions'. Even if I wasn't skeptical. I would be frustrated with the sensationalist way this has been rolled out to the public.

All we really know now is that Earth may or may not be warming and it may or may not be causing by human emissions. On that basis we are all supposed to change our lives. Sometimes drastically.

Science, what science. It's more like religion.

[Casca]

But...but...but scientists are members of an apolitical high priesthood dedicated only to the truth.  The idea that a group of them with a vested interest would promulgate tendentious results is rediculous.

[Bodhi]

Spinmaster?  Seriously...either act like an adult or just cease posting.  I've treated you with respect... either do the same or LEAVE.

 Look up exactly what you're trying to prove (planes sinking through 300 feet of ice) and THEN tell me why it, pardon the pun, "holds no weight".  Please at least attempt to find something scientific.  

As for your question....It isn't a show of hands, BTW.  It's multiple independent, reproducible studies from multiple disciplines that support the general theory.

That isn't a show of hands.... that's objective experimental result.  

You are spinning and refusing to answer the question, because you know you are wrong.  Talk about whining?  You're the king of it, and every one here knows it.  As for those '38's sinking in ice....  take a block of ice, place a nut on it and watch.  You might be amazed.

Back to the issue that you refuse to address...  Man made global warming is not happening.  Proof of that is in the fact that the CRU (whose data supports UN studies and US amongst other countries data) was modifying their numbers to support climate change that was not actually happening.  Those following along and colluding to cover this up are all perpetrators of one the biggest attempts to scam the public in history.  It is all about money and control.  Plain and simply another way to extort more money from the populace and another way to control them.  Your support is just another hand raised up without any facts to back it up other than citing differences in the natural heating and cooling of the planet.