|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Global Warming is a Scam | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 583 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
Here is a paper that confirms what I have said previously. Less lower level cloud cover is the cause of warmer temperatures. Global cloud cover as decreased by an average of 1.56% from 1971 to 2009. Letting in 1.56% more sunlight is more than enough to cause the temperature increase seen during that period of time.
The paper can be found here: http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~rmeast/Full_Text_D1.pdf After reading this I can just hear the AGW crowd already saying but that paper just confirms what we have said! ...."Global warming is causing the decrease in cloud cover". Actually, it doesn't. All it says is "it may cause" or "our models predict", "warming should cause". They never prove their case. They have the wagon pushing the horse when in reality, it is the horse pulling the wagon. The point is that this is strong evidence for low level cloud cover amount being a strong force in temperature increases. Edited by foreveryoung, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 583 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
Here is another example of how it is the Sun that is responsible for changes in climate. On mars, the changes in ice and dust accumulation is driven by changes in solar insolation according to the following article in icarus:
Redirecting
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 583 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
Would someone with either a background in physics or chemistry please analyze the following paper; It makes the case that carbon dioxide has a cooling effect rather than a warming effect on the atmosphere.
Just a moment...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 583 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
Not being reviewed in a professional journal nor being a climate scientist doesn't bother me at all when it comes to climate science. These people are so convinced that carbon dioxide is the culprit for recent warming and for all past warming that it is impossible for them to consider otherwise. Right now, the total greenhouse effect accounts for 57 degrees F of the earths temperature. The other sources of heat come from within the earth and from the sun. If you were to pull enough carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere to where it was just 270 ppm, what would the temperature of the earth be. Once you give me that figure, can you tell me how you arrived at it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 583 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
Any climate research that does not automatically jump on the carbon dioxide bandwagon or that only includes both positive and negative feedbacks and considers the influence of low level clouds.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 583 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
taq writes: It shoud bother you as much as going to an unlicensed doctor who has never gone to medical school. It doesn't because doctors who have gone to medical school are not pushing an agenda. Climate scientists who have graduated college, do have an agenda or already had their mind made up before they went to college, otherwise any paper they published that severely contradicted current CO2 dogma would be denied. Only climate scientists who have been in the field long before the carbon dioxide caused global warming scam took hold in the nineties actually disagree with the consensus and still hold onto their positions like lindzen from MIT and Roy Spencer from UAH.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 583 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
Why should I believe in anthropomorphic climate change? The only evidence for it is circumstantial. When there is another valid mechanism for the current warming trend and for past warming trends other than CO2, there is no reason for me to believe in AGW.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 583 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
Not only will we survive it; we will thrive in it. There will be greater food production and a greater diversity of new species.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 583 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
What I mean is that nobody can point to the evidence and show that every warming period was preceded by an increase in carbon dioxide. They also cannot show that increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is not the result of warmer ocean temperatures. Until someone can show there are no periods of increased carbon dioxide that are not accompanied by an increase in temperatures, all evidence is merely circumstantial.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 583 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
Why would billions of people necessarily die? Plants thrive on CO2. More carbon dioxide, more plants, more plants, more food.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 583 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
No, I don't. It temporarily absorbs long wave radiation then re -releases it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 583 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
All plants need CO2 to live. That is my evidence.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024