• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does the Greenhouse effect really exist?

Lord of Planar said:
I read several studies a year or two back, They all agree the turbulent air downstream of a wind farm creates warming. I'm not going to search for them. You can find them you you search.
Click to expand...

I think that the tiny fraction of power we get from wind farms could not possibly have a larger impact on climate than CO2, and you've provided no evidence to the contrary.
 
Deuce said:
I think that the tiny fraction of power we get from wind farms could not possibly have a larger impact on climate than CO2, and you've provided no evidence to the contrary.
Click to expand...

Please slow down, and try to understand what I said.............

They are said to have 1/6th the impact of the greenhouse gas emissions they replace.

This is very specific!

Now if CO2 is not as strong at forcing as claimed, we are building these ugly monstrosities in vain. Especially if the 0.5 to 0.6 W/m^2 is correct rather than the 3.71 W/m^2. 1/6th based on the 3.71 would be 0.62 W/m^2, higher than the 0.5 to 0.6 W/m^2 a newer study claims CO2 has for a doubling.,
 
The atmospheric heat rises with presure, but is this really the 'greenhouse' effect at work??
 
Lord of Planar said:
Please slow down, and try to understand what I said.............

They are said to have 1/6th the impact of the greenhouse gas emissions they replace.

This is very specific!

Now if CO2 is not as strong at forcing as claimed, we are building these ugly monstrosities in vain. Especially if the 0.5 to 0.6 W/m^2 is correct rather than the 3.71 W/m^2. 1/6th based on the 3.71 would be 0.62 W/m^2, higher than the 0.5 to 0.6 W/m^2 a newer study claims CO2 has for a doubling.,
Click to expand...

Some people believe everything if you give them some 'specifics'



Hilarious actually
 
Pin dÁr said:
what isn't? the first or the second part and can you explain why it isn't. This is a rather stupid reply this way.
Click to expand...

I'm done with your nonsense. Not wasting any more time trying to explain. You don't want to understand the truth.
 
Lord of Planar said:
I'm done with your nonsense. Not wasting any more time trying to explain. You don't want to understand the truth.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I am asking a very simple question, but instead of answering it, you start ridiculing it and seem to be unable to answer it.

Hmmmm.
 
yes it does, but outsourcing all our industry to china does nothing to stop it.
 
The greenhouse effect has existed for as long as Earth has had an atmosphere. If it had not we would not be here is ask the question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom