Man made global warming is a hoax

[watsup]

Corrected:

Since every highschooler has been indoctrinated with lies about climate change, I can only assume that climate change skeptics are immune to indoctrination.

Conspiracy chat.

 

[watsup]

You didn't quote any relevant material for any of them. To me that means you are too lazy to make a valid case, and should be ignored. I refuse to waste my time on information overload, as apparently you are not willing to take the time to convince me.

I suspect your links are more misinformation.

Psychological projection.

 

[Glitch]

Birds were used in mines, because they were more susceptible than humans of the gasses found in mine. Unless there is reasearch that counters my opinion, I will contend that CO2 is higher levels of CO2 would be harmful to birds. For this reason, I would be wary of allowing CO2 past 600 ppm.

I don't think birds are nearly as susceptible as you think. Even if they were more susceptible than humans, that is still quite a range between 600 and 30,000 ppmV.

Humans experience 600 ppmV CO2 all the time. Just about every office building exceeds 600 ppmV. Packed conference rooms can exceed 900 ppmV CO2.

I know of nothing, not plant or animal, that is harmed from CO2 levels below 1,000 ppmV. As I previously posted the first sign of CO2 causing a problem with any other life is when oxygen was kept at 20.9% and CO2 levels gradually increased to levels above 1,800 ppmV. Wheat yields continued to increase while CO2 levels remained below 1,500 ppmV, and started declining when CO2 levels exceeded 1,800 ppmV. This is how they explained it:

In particular, the decrease in grain protein concentration and changes in protein composition may have serious economic and health implications. Additionally, CO2 enrichment affects amino acid composition and the concentrations of macro- and micro-elements.

Source:
Yield vs. Quality trade‐offs for wheat in response to carbon dioxide and ozone - Global Change Biology, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp. 596-605, 2012

 

[Glitch]

Corrected:

Since every highschooler has been indoctrinated with lies about climate change, I can only assume that climate change skeptics are immune to indoctrination.

The problem with indoctrination is that it only works on those who refuse to think for themselves. Those who accept all their information unquestioningly are easily indoctrinated. Those who ask questions are not so easily indoctrinated because the propaganda being pushed rarely stands up to scrutiny.

 

[Glitch]

“Nothing but benefit”. *L*

What you are actually saying is that you are unable to cite any problems with CO2 levels below 1,251 ppmV. I am not in the least bit surprised, but you do need to work on your communication skills.

 

[watsup]

The problem with indoctrination is that it only works on those who refuse to think for themselves. Those who accept all their information unquestioningly are easily indoctrinated. Those who ask questions are not so easily indoctrinated because the propaganda being pushed rarely stands up to scrutiny.

Psychological projection.

 

[watsup]

What you are actually saying is that you are unable to cite any problems with CO2 levels below 1,251 ppmV.

Of course I, we can. But what good would it do to a thoroughly indoctrinated denier such as yourself. Why waste my breath?

 

[Masterhawk]

Research shows that there is 35 billion tons of CO2 produced my man every year.

The total weight of the Atmosphere is 5.5 quadrillion tons.

Dividing 35 billion by 5.5 quadrillion come out to .000006

So made made CO2 compared to the whole earths atmosphere is 6 parts in a million. That is such a small amount that it is meaningless.

So lets stop the BS about man made global warming.

The whole weight of the atmosphere is a red herring. The issue is that the climate is very sensitive to the change in CO2 levels.

 

[Glitch]

The whole weight of the atmosphere is a red herring. The issue is that the climate is very sensitive to the change in CO2 levels.

No, it is not. As has already been demonstrated.

Atmospheric CO2 levels have been between 1,000 and 2,300 ppmV and the mean global temperature still dropped by between 8°C to 10°C. Atmospheric CO2 levels have also been between 250 and 350 ppmV (below current levels) and the mean global temperature increased by between 13°C and 18°C.

Proving that there is absolutely no correlation between atmospheric CO2 and the climate.

 

[Masterhawk]

No, it is not. As has already been demonstrated.

Atmospheric CO2 levels have been between 1,000 and 2,300 ppmV and the mean global temperature still dropped by between 8°C to 10°C. Atmospheric CO2 levels have also been between 250 and 350 ppmV (below current levels) and the mean global temperature increased by between 13°C and 18°C.

Proving that there is absolutely no correlation between atmospheric CO2 and the climate.

When did it drop between 8-10 degrees? Nobody is saying that the earth is the warmest it has ever been (at least the scientist aren't). The problem is that the earth is warming so quickly that life will have a difficult time adjusting. A lot of people live close to the coastline, so rising sea levels will be problematic. You also have droughts which will make it harder for crops to grow.

 

[watsup]

No, it is not. As has already been demonstrated.

Atmospheric CO2 levels have been between 1,000 and 2,300 ppmV and the mean global temperature still dropped by between 8°C to 10°C. Atmospheric CO2 levels have also been between 250 and 350 ppmV (below current levels) and the mean global temperature increased by between 13°C and 18°C.

Proving that there is absolutely no correlation between atmospheric CO2 and the climate.

“Proving that”. *L*

 

[Lord of Planar]

The problem with indoctrination is that it only works on those who refuse to think for themselves. Those who accept all their information unquestioningly are easily indoctrinated. Those who ask questions are not so easily indoctrinated because the propaganda being pushed rarely stands up to scrutiny.

Well, just look at how many "who accept all their information unquestioningly" there are.

 

[Lord of Planar]

The whole weight of the atmosphere is a red herring. The issue is that the climate is very sensitive to the change in CO2 levels.

Many of us disagree, as there are both positive and negative responses to CO2. I believe CO2 matters little in the temperture, and only causes more precipitation.

 

[Masterhawk]

Many of us disagree, as there are both positive and negative responses to CO2. I believe CO2 matters little in the temperature, and only causes more precipitation.

Have you ever heard of the greenhouse effect? It dates back to the 19th century.

 

[Integrityrespec]

Research shows that there is 35 billion tons of CO2 produced my man every year.

The total weight of the Atmosphere is 5.5 quadrillion tons.

Dividing 35 billion by 5.5 quadrillion come out to .000006

So made made CO2 compared to the whole earths atmosphere is 6 parts in a million. That is such a small amount that it is meaningless.

So lets stop the BS about man made global warming.

And climate (clown) Czar, John Kerry told us as much a couple of weeks ago. The elitist left wing socialist stuck his foot in his mouth.

Kerry admits zero emissions in US wouldn’t make difference in climate change

WASHINGTON — President Biden’s climate czar, John Kerry, admitted Wednesday that the US reducing its emissions to zero wouldn’t make much of a difference in the global climate cha…

nypost.com

 

[longview]

When did it drop between 8-10 degrees? Nobody is saying that the earth is the warmest it has ever been (at least the scientist aren't). The problem is that the earth is warming so quickly that life will have a difficult time adjusting. A lot of people live close to the coastline, so rising sea levels will be problematic. You also have droughts which will make it harder for crops to grow.

Is Earth warming so quickly that life will have a difficult time adjusting?
We have warmed between 1 and 1.1C since the pre 1900 average,
HadCrut4 Decade Smoothed
with roughly 75% of that average warming
happening to daily lows, not the highs. (called Diurnal asymmetry).
Some of that warming is for Human added CO2, but how sensitive is the climate to added CO2?
We know that all of the CO2 up to about 1900, added roughly 6.6C of the 33C of total greenhouse effect.
It looks like the warming we can expect from added CO2, is about the same as the forcing warming, or about 1.1C per doubling.
Since is it unlikely we would ever hit a second doubling of CO2, the warming from CO2 is confined to about 1 doubling, of about 1.1C
total from CO2, and most of that has already happened.
It is time we grew up, and addresses the real problems facing Humanity, a sustainable energy path forward!

 

[watsup]

Well, just look at how many "who accept all their information unquestioningly" there are.

Says one denier to another. Such irony!

 

[watsup]

Many of us disagree, as there are both positive and negative responses to CO2. I believe CO2 matters little in the temperture, and only causes more precipitation.

“Only”, as if more precipitation that results in floods and larger hurricanes is just no big deal. Except, of course, for this who are victims of the problems.

 

[longview]

“Only”, as if more precipitation that results in floods and larger hurricanes is just no big deal. Except, of course, for this who are victims of the problems.

But the Hurricanes are dropping the same amount of rain they always have.
The day before Hurricane Harvey got to Houston, the news meteorologists who know what they are doing,
predicted that the storm would drop 50 inches of rain, based on the same formula used for several decades.
100/speed=rainfall, a Hurricane moving at 2 mph, will drop about 50 inches of rain.
I got 48 inches at my home, but my gauge overflowed some, so my record is too low.
Rainfall rule of thumb

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Research shows that there is 35 billion tons of CO2 produced my man every year.

The total weight of the Atmosphere is 5.5 quadrillion tons.

Dividing 35 billion by 5.5 quadrillion come out to .000006

So made made CO2 compared to the whole earths atmosphere is 6 parts in a million. That is such a small amount that it is meaningless.

So lets stop the BS about man made global warming.

By the same idiotic reasoning botulism must be a hoax, because only one nanogram per kilogram of bodyweight is supposed to be fatal.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

I believe CO2 matters little in the temperture, and only causes more precipitation.

These two don't agree. You can't say that CO2 matters little in terms of temperature but causes more precipitation. By causing more precipitation, you have to impact temperatures as well. Furthermore, you can't cause more precipitation overall, without warming somewhere.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Have you ever heard of the greenhouse effect? It dates back to the 19th century.

Yes. Just asking me that, shows you have no clue how active I've been over the years in these forums regarding this topic. I will affirm the greenhouse effect is real.

Water is very active to the forcing changes of CO2. As CO2 increases, so does ocean evaporation. This causes more cloud cover globally. This greater cloud cover reduces the surface insulation from the sun. It results in a negative feedback, reducing the IR energy that drives the greenhouse effect. We also end up with more precipitation.

There is also what some call the iris effect in the tropics. It works a little different by allowing more IR to escape.

 

[Lord of Planar]

These two don't agree. You can't say that CO2 matters little in terms of temperature but causes more precipitation. By causing more precipitation, you have to impact temperatures as well. Furthermore, you can't cause more precipitation overall, without warming somewhere.

I have explained this several times over the years. Funny how you guys conveniently forget. Why do you guys deny science?

I explained it again in post 197.

 

[watsup]

Yes. Just asking me that, shows you have no clue how active I've been over the years in these forums regarding this topic. I will affirm the greenhouse effect is real.

Water is very active to the forcing changes of CO2. As CO2 increases, so does ocean evaporation. This causes more cloud cover globally. This greater cloud cover reduces the surface insulation from the sun. It results in a negative feedback, reducing the IR energy that drives the greenhouse effect. We also end up with more precipitation.

There is also what some call the iris effect in the tropics. It works a little different by allowing more IR to escape.

“How active I’ve been voer the years in these forums”.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

I have explained this several times over the years. Funny how you guys conveniently forget. Why do you guys deny science?

I explained it again in post 197.

Please explain the mechanism that increased CO2 results in greater ocean evaporation.