Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Environmentalism and Global Warming Thread

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by bill shack View Post
    D you really think that this is not the cause of co2 increase
    Yes. 20% + is likely due to aircraft contrails. This is ignored because it doesn't fit the existing narrative, and would be cheap and easy to fix. It would eliminate the argument that we need to move to useless wind and solar for energy.

    https://earthdata.nasa.gov/user-reso...l-of-contrails

    https://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/200...s_climate.html

    https://www.newscientist.com/article...ion-emissions/

    Water vapor in the form of clouds is exponentially a more effective greenhouse gas than CO2. Contrails have only been an issue since the early 1940's when aircraft first started flying high enough to cause them. Today, most of the northern hemisphere is covered in cloudy haze caused by contrails on an almost daily basis.

    Here's an example of an otherwise cloud free sky that is covered in contrail made haze:



    So, if contrails are a significant contributor to climate change, what else might be that's being ignored by those with a CO2 agenda rather than objective science?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by bill shack View Post
      D you really think that this is not the cause of co2 increase
      B, I really think that it is not due to CO2 levels and driven by other and natural cycles/causes.

      Fortunately the quote function provides a link to the graph you showed to assure proper documentation, even though the source and data are from biased source.

      Notice that even in this graph the ratio of temperature to CO2 is not on a consistent basis and varies such as to show a coincidental association but not a causative one.

      Also, using graphs of such short and limited measures can present a distorted perspective, ones showing a larger range and measure of both CO2 and Temp. provide a better scale of what is happening.

      Consider that minimum optimal for plant/Flora life is 300ppm(dry) and we are barely above level for 99+% of life on this planet.

      Also at 400ppm, that is a ratio of 1 to 2,500 and I have yet to see any laboratory tests of contained simulate atmosphere with varied injections of CO2 levels to demonstrate it's affect upon the heat retention of the other 2,499 parts of the atmosphere.

      More to the point is this chart and text showing ratio of temp to CO2 over millions of years and it's clear that CO2 levels have no direct effect upon temperatures, though it may be other way around given tempurature affect upon amount of plant life/flora on the planet.
      ....
      EXCERPT/QUOTE:
      ...
      In prehistoric times, during the Permian, in the Palaeozoic Era, for example, the concentration of Carbon Dioxide dropped below 210 ppmV. Throughout the Permian Period plant and animal species diverged and diversified as never before. Dinosaurs prospered and predominated over all the other orders of vertebrates. Coniferous plants first appeared in the Permian. The change of atmospheric temperature at the time of the Permian was around 10 °C. By comparison, the current change of global temperature is only 0.52 °C while the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide is 385 ppmV. If the global temperature is dependent on CO2, then the change of temperature at present would be around 10 °C or higher, as it was during the Permian Period.

      From the early Triassic to the middle Cretaceous, the concentration of atmospheric Carbon Dioxide was similar to its current density. From the late cretaceous to the early Miocene, the concentration climbed above 210 ppmV. During the Holocene period, the concentration has oscillated from 210 ppmV to 385 ppmV.

      It is possible that the concentration of atmospheric CO2 will increase normally in the course of the next 50 million years to 1050 ppmV or 2500 ppmV.

      We have also observed that the concentration of atmospheric CO2 increases several centuries after glaciations. Perhaps this is due to the fact that most plants perish at sub-zero temperatures, and plants are organisms that capture Carbon Dioxide from their surroundings to make food.

      Scientists have also observed that the concentration of atmospheric CO2 increases during periods of warming. However, an increase in temperature always precedes an increase in carbon dioxide, which generally occurs decades or centuries after any change of temperature. We have not observed an increase in the concentration of Carbon Dioxide to have preceded a period of warming. This latter phenomenon occurs because when oceans absorb more heat from an increase in the amount of direct solar irradiance incident upon the Earth's surface, they release more Carbon Dioxide molecules into the atmosphere. Nevertheless, most drastic increases in CO2 concentration occur decades or centuries after the oceans have warmed up. For example, the present increase of atmospheric Carbon Dioxide was caused by an extraordinary increase in solar activity in 1998 which warmed up the El Niño South Atlantic Oceanic Oscillation.

      These increases in concentration of atmospheric CO2 offer optimal conditions for the development and evolution of living beings on Earth. Human beings should adapt to these natural changes by means of science and technology.
      ...................
      CHART:


      http://www.biocab.org/Carbon_Dioxide...Timescale.html

      Comment


      • As the graph in post above shows, over the 4.5 billion year history of this planet, it appears that global temperature levels have driven CO2 levels, not the other way around.

        There is another thread with more data and dialogue on this subject;
        Global Warming a Hoax?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
          As the graph in post above shows, over the 4.5 billion year history of this planet, it appears that global temperature levels have driven CO2 levels, not the other way around.
          And the change has happened over tens and hundreds of thousands of years, not dozens or hundreds.
          Wisdom is personal

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Karri View Post

            And the change has happened over tens and hundreds of thousands of years, not dozens or hundreds.
            Yes, which is why this is more informative and instructive.

            Actually the chart above is showing over the course of about 4,000,000,000 (four billion) years versus 200 (two hundred) years which is why that chart is more important to consideration, because;

            1) we see periods when global temps were high but carbon dioxide (CO2) levels were relatively low ....
            2) we see periods where CO2 levels were relative high, but temps were relatively LOW ...
            3) we see a four billion year database that shows NO CLEAR LINKAGE between CO2 levels and Global Temperatures, other than it may be that global temps drive CO2 levels ...

            BTW, one Major Factor constantly neglected is that during the "Industrial Age" while human activity may have caused a slight increase of CO2 via emissions, almost everyone overlooks the significant Flora biomass reductions, such as deforestation and grasslands damaged into deserts by humans.

            Reduction of CO2 absorbers looks to match increase in levels and/or emissions.

            Comment


            • Dunno what papers you are reading but the biomass reduction is a major topic. Still missing your point though; are you saying that since this kind of industrial change has never happened, and thus there is no data of it, there is no point in speculating what might happen?
              Wisdom is personal

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Karri View Post
                Dunno what papers you are reading but the biomass reduction is a major topic. ...
                But it is not a factor or component in the so-called "carbon emission/reduction" thoughts or equations of the PRO-Anthropogenic Climate Change (ACC) ~ Anthropogenic(Human Caused) Global Warming (AGW) Supporters and Agenda which is largely searching for a mechanism to serve their Anti-West/Anti-Capitalist goals while making them also "feel good" about doing "something for" the "Environment/Nature".

                Originally posted by Karri View Post
                Still missing your point though; ...
                Missing, or not wanting to grasp or acknowledge ??? ....

                Originally posted by Karri View Post
                ....are you saying that since this kind of industrial change has never happened, ...
                Get REAL! Of course "IT" happened. I'm questioning the level and effect of it's impact as presented by "Consensus Science" (a.k.a. funding and agenda Driven Science.)

                Originally posted by Karri View Post
                .... and thus there is no data of it, ...
                There's LOT'S of Data. To point of excess perhaps. Issue and POINT is in the assessment and application of impact, or none, regarding the limited Data we have currently ....

                Originally posted by Karri View Post
                ... there is no point in speculating what might happen?
                Never "HURTS" to speculate.
                What "Hurts" and is near unpardonable is to act upon VAGUE Speculation, especially prematurely.
                We Humans have yet to fully grasp and know the workings of Climate and so should be cautious about any sort of GEO-Engineering with design to correct or alter what we have yet to measure, know, and/or understand.

                Comment


                • No one seems to talk about "Global Warming" in the middle of Winter ...

                  Freeze Kills Thousands of Fish
                  weather.com
                  Freezing weather kills thousands of rockfish on Virginia’s Eastern Shore.
                  https://weather.com/news/weather/vid...usands-of-fish

                  Of course the whole planet getting warmer means that Winters are Colder ...

                  Comment


                  • Of course the whole planet getting warmer means that Winters are Colder, not really is used to be 20 degrees below zero in montreal in winter , I have not seen that cold a temperature in 15 years.

                    Comment


                    • And I've seen colder than usual here the last few years - WEATHER varies.
                      Climate trends require scale of 30-50 years or more to determine a flux.
                      Please prove the LINKAGE of CO2 level to Climate Temperature average.

                      Comment


                      • Seems like the liberal conspiracy isn't that new afterall:

                        zsi5uxhuxa2z.jpg
                        Wisdom is personal

                        Comment


                        • The total mass of Earth’s atmosphere is about 5.5 quadrillion tons, or roughly one millionth of Earth’s mass.
                          https://www.britannica.com/story/how...mosphere-weigh

                          Do the math and 7 billion tons isn't much ...

                          Comment


                          • Look at what NOAA is saying

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by bill shack View Post
                              Look at what NOAA is saying
                              And? That doesn't explain a cause. As I keep pointing out, there are very good scientific alternatives to anthropogenic CO2 as the cause of climate change. Our knowledge of how the Earth's climate really works on a long term scale is really rather limited. Up through the 1950's we had no idea what the bottom of our oceans looked like. We didn't discover plate tectonics until the 1960's.
                              Modelling done by climate scientists to date has been nearly 100% wrong on predicting future climate change. The IPCC would do better hiring psychics than they have to date on predicting climate change.

                              Yet, we're to believe that these people know for sure that the change is due to CO2 and not something else, or a bunch of somethings? I don't think so.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                                Yet, we're to believe that these people know for sure that the change is due to CO2 and not something else, or a bunch of somethings? I don't think so.
                                We are to believe a bunch of internet posters know for sure it isn't?
                                Wisdom is personal

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X