Bob The Badger Posted December 21, 2019 Share Posted December 21, 2019 1 hour ago, Angry Ram said: No I really didn’t miss the point at all.. I know all about Kato and Fox. Well if you know all about them, why not just post something credible? Probably because you can't find anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Ram Posted December 21, 2019 Share Posted December 21, 2019 24 minutes ago, Bob The Badger said: Well if you know all about them, why not just post something credible? Probably because you can't find anything. It’s not about them.. It’s about the content and whether it is correct or incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob The Badger Posted December 21, 2019 Share Posted December 21, 2019 1 hour ago, Angry Ram said: It’s not about them.. It’s about the content and whether it is correct or incorrect. In that case. 99% of climate scientists think it's incorrect. Fox News thinks it's correct. So it's incorrect. Phew, glad we got that one sorted out because, and I freely admit, I was was starting to feel humiliated by your intellectual prowess, critical thinking skills and overall cerebral dexterity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highgate Posted December 21, 2019 Share Posted December 21, 2019 2 hours ago, Angry Ram said: It’s not about them.. It’s about the content and whether it is correct or incorrect. If it's what he says about the climate models that is causing you doubt the considered opinion of nearly all climate scientists, as well as the now all too obvious effects of global warming as well as the fundamental and basic physics that underpins it, then let the latest research clear it up for you. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-models-got-it-right-on-global-warming/ But i think you are focusing too much on climate models. They are just estimates after all and they will all have a margin of error. Instead just remember this. Naturally occurring greenhouse gases have increased the temperature of the Earth by 30 C or more. Compare the quantity of the naturally occurring GHGs with the quantity of GHGs that we are adding to the atmosphere each year. What do you think the effect of these gases will be over time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highgate Posted December 22, 2019 Share Posted December 22, 2019 2 hours ago, smiths_tavrn said: Only just come in on this topic so apologies if I'm repeating anything that has already been said. There certainly looks to be a link between carbon dioxide in the air and temperature. But does CO2 drive temperature or does temperature drive CO2? The climate alarmists would have you believe the former. I am personally of the opinion that it's the latter. One question I recently asked an alarmist was. If man made CO2 emissions increase CO2 in the atmosphere and this drives global temperature then please explain the medieval warming period. Back then there were no made madeemissions, unless you count breathing. He looked astonished. He'd never heard of it. Are you being serious? Apologies if this a joke that's going over my head. It wouldn't be the first time that happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highgate Posted December 22, 2019 Share Posted December 22, 2019 4 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said: Serious about what? The post I quoted, it was entirely genuine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highgate Posted December 22, 2019 Share Posted December 22, 2019 Just now, smiths_tavrn said: Indeed it was. Even the ardent global warming skeptic being dredged up by @Angry Ram doesn't dispute that CO2 and other greenhouse gases drive warming. If you doubt that just read about the basic physical properties of the various GHGs and their relative transparency to visible light as compared to their transparency to infrared radiation. That's the single most important thing you need to know if you want to understand Global Warming. By virtue of various positive feedback loops temperature can then reinforce greenhouse gas production. It's strange to still come across the 'climate has always been changing' argument such as you made when you referenced the Medieval Warming Period. No climatologist would dispute the fact that climate has always been changing. There are numerous reasons it does so, all over different time periods ranging from the geographical position of the landmasses, orbital eccentricities, solar output cycles, oceanic circulation patterns and volcanic eruptions to mention just a few. All these effects are well known. But just because the climate can and does alter naturally, this does not mean that humans cannot also cause the climate to change and change very rapidly. This is what is occurring now, and it's potentially devastating for our fragile and precarious civilization Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highgate Posted December 22, 2019 Share Posted December 22, 2019 Just now, smiths_tavrn said: Err supposing if CO2 doesn't drive up global warming? Did you know that 95% of greenhouse gas is water vapour? Ah you mentioned that the Sun might have something to do with global warming. Now that I can agree with. If fact sun activity is the main driving force. And CO2 follows later. Why not try watching the documentary? I have watched that notorious and long since out of date documentary. 95% by quantity, or by effect on the temperature? It's not 95% in either case though, it's somewhat less than that. But what does it matter, what's your point? We are increasing the quantity of GHGs in the atmosphere and that will warm the planet. That's what they do. That's why the planet is habitable in the first place, because of the warming effect of GHGs. Given their potent effect, it's a bad idea to increase their quantity without considering the consequences. Do you dispute the fact that GHGs warm the Earth by more than 30 degrees Celcius? A significant amount of that heating is due to carbon dioxide and methane. What do you think the result of increasing the quantity of those gases in the atmosphere will be ? I didn't say the Sun has something to do with our current Global Warming, I said variations in solar activity is one of the reasons that the climate always changes naturally. It may has seemed plausible back in 2007 when the documentary you posted was made, but by now variations in solar activity can be ruled out as a potential driver for warming we are currently seeing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highgate Posted December 22, 2019 Share Posted December 22, 2019 Just now, smiths_tavrn said: The Maunder Minimum corresponded with the middle part of the Little Ice Age. The Little ice age followed the Medieval Warm Period. There was lower solar activity during the Maunder Minimum and Europe was a lot colder. It got so cold at times that the Thames froze over and they used to have frost fairs on it. It's not difficult to see why it was colder is it? It's the Sun not carbon dioxide. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum That the Sun effects the temperature on Earth is so obvious it's not worth mentioning. That the cyclical variations in solar output can cause periods of warming and cooling here on Earth is well known, and not disputed by any climatologist. Why would it be? Why do you think that any of that disproves human induced global warming is occurring in this century? Everyone knows there are natural methods of forcing climate change. I've already listed several. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highgate Posted December 22, 2019 Share Posted December 22, 2019 10 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said: What's my point. I've stated it quite clearly. Sun activity is the cause of warming. Just take at the look at the graph from NASA that I posted. 28 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said: As regards GHGs. They don't have a warming effect but are needed as they play a crucial role in trapping the warming effect of the Sun's radiation. If there were no CHGs the Suns rays would bounce back into space and the planet would uninhabitable. Blatant contradiction there. Uninhabitable why? Because it would be too cold maybe? 21 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said: Take too much out by that logic and we're in big trouble from global cooling. So what's an acceptable amount of CO2 / greenhouse gases in the atmosphere before it goes too low and we're all shivering our testicles off? And bearing in mind that water vapour makes up 95% of GHG tell me how you propose controlling water vapour levels. Yes we would be in big trouble, but obviously sea-level rise wouldn't be an issue. I'm not proposing to control water vapour levels, it responds directly to temperature through evaporation and condensation. Keep temperature levels the same...and water vapour levels will take care of itself. 29 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said: We've seen warming of the earth by more than 30 degrees Celsius. You've lost the plot. Not that we've seen warming of 30 degrees Celsius, that would suggest a recent occurrence. The point is the Earth is more than 30 degrees warmer because of the naturally occurring GHGs in the atmosphere including water vapour than it would be otherwise. The Effective Temperature of Earth (the tempm Earth would be without GHGs) is about -18 C. The actual average surface temperature is 15 C. So more than a 30 C difference between the two, even before humans started having an effect on climate. This isn't in dispute, it's common knowledge. 42 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said: No, Sun activity causes warming. It really does. Obviously some greenhouse gases are needed to trap its radiation. During the Maunder Minimum when there was virtually no solar activity the temperatures plummeted. If solar activity can be ruled out as you mentioned in your last sentence then how come the Maunder Minimum corresponded wit the Little Ice Age. You mean there was no sunspot activity during the Maunder Minimum. Variable solar output is a perfectly plausible explanation for the Little Ice Age, I've already said that and for countless other natural periods of warming and cooling. It's not a plausible explanation for our current warming. Again look at the graph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highgate Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 48 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said: In your previous post you said "but by now variations in solar activity can be ruled out as a potential driver for warming we are currently seeing. " Now you're saying "the Sun effects the temperature on Earth is so obvious it's not worth mentioning" Which one is it? It both obviously. The Sun can and does effect the temperature on Earth, but given we are currently experiencing a solar minimum it's not responsible for the warming trend now. It must be something else. 50 minutes ago, smiths_tavrn said: Volcanoes produce 6 times the CO2 that humans produce. Animals and bacteria produce some 20 times more CO2 than humans. Dying leaves and vegetation produce even greater amounts of CO2. But an even greater source are the oceans. Human made CO2 is negligible compared to these sources. Only the volcanoes are relevant here. All the others are in equilibrium, released and absorbed each year in the same quantity. What matters is what's being added to the total atmospheric carbon each year by the release of buried carbon (burning fossil fuels for example). As regards volcanoes, you've overstated the contribution relative to humans by about a factor of 600. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earthtalks-volcanoes-or-humans/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Ram Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 On 21/12/2019 at 23:12, Bob The Badger said: In that case. 99% of climate scientists think it's incorrect. Fox News thinks it's correct. So it's incorrect. Phew, glad we got that one sorted out because, and I freely admit, I was was starting to feel humiliated by your intellectual prowess, critical thinking skills and overall cerebral dexterity. Intellectual prowess of which you have shown absolutely zero.. Way too go Yank. 99% disagree and Fox News agree, that’s it !!. Stunning. Perhaps you should move on at least Highgate contributes and challenges.. He posts some interesting stuff actually and for someone who is on the fence, I like to read that.. You... Meh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Ram Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 On 22/12/2019 at 00:40, Highgate said: If it's what he says about the climate models that is causing you doubt the considered opinion of nearly all climate scientists, as well as the now all too obvious effects of global warming as well as the fundamental and basic physics that underpins it, then let the latest research clear it up for you. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-models-got-it-right-on-global-warming/ But i think you are focusing too much on climate models. They are just estimates after all and they will all have a margin of error. Instead just remember this. Naturally occurring greenhouse gases have increased the temperature of the Earth by 30 C or more. Compare the quantity of the naturally occurring GHGs with the quantity of GHGs that we are adding to the atmosphere each year. What do you think the effect of these gases will be over time? There you go @Bob The Badger. A response as it should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 @Smyth_18 and @Angry Ram... Does it matter if climate change is due to humans or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Ram Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 15 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said: @Smyth_18 and @Angry Ram... Does it matter if climate change is due to humans or not? Nope, not at all.. 'Climate Change' is not the narrative now, climates change all the time. It's 'Climate Emergency'. To be honest, what annoys me more than anything is the people who cloud the facts.. We hear constantly that the world is going to end (pick any year from 2 to 200) and at one point we were entering an ice age, now we are all going to melt. Al Gore and the like.. If it's not down to humans, what can we do? Can we change or alter the force of nature? Is the science available to change anything? I read somewhere that making electric cars was more damaging to the environment than a normal car. What the duck is the truth anymore? That's why I posted that previous link to the Kato Institute guy. Everyone sounds pretty plausible nowadays and we have internet experts coming out of everywhere telling us what to think. Most like me, probably have not got a clue. Single use plastics and all that malarky, defo we need to do something about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob The Badger Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 5 hours ago, Angry Ram said: Intellectual prowess of which you have shown absolutely zero.. Way too go Yank. 99% disagree and Fox News agree, that’s it !!. Stunning. Perhaps you should move on at least Highgate contributes and challenges.. He posts some interesting stuff actually and for someone who is on the fence, I like to read that.. You... Meh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Ram Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 3 minutes ago, Bob The Badger said: Stunning. You're not worthy. That must be Bob and Badger in the same photo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob The Badger Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 33 minutes ago, Angry Ram said: Stunning. You're not worthy. That must be Bob and Badger in the same photo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highgate Posted December 23, 2019 Share Posted December 23, 2019 22 hours ago, smiths_tavrn said: All the others are in equilibrium? Oh really?. How can anyone possibly know that? I'm sorry but your talking complete tosh. Because it's the basics of the carbon cycle. I recommend you look up the carbon cycle before you start formulating strong opinions on Global Warming. There does seem to be alarming gaps in your knowledge on this whole subject to be quite honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boycie Posted December 24, 2019 Share Posted December 24, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.