New White House Climate Report

[concernedpuma]

Then surely you can provide numerous links that state unequivocally that adding heat to the atmosphere will not increase the temperature of that atmosphere. It's the same as saying that adding heat to your water in the bathtub will not increase the temperature of that same water. Double down on total lack of understanding.
/

I see where you are going, but you have ignored the absolute cold that surrounds our planet and convection. The earth is not a bathtub, though even a hot tube will give up heat to the surrounding colder air, right? They don't stay hot.
Regards,
CP

 

[Threegoofs]

I will counter that with saying liberals love to be authoritarian, therefore they like the idea of punishing people with large carbon footprints.

I agree. Follow the money. Just go and find out how much money the AGW crowd gets vs. the non-AGW guys in the climate science.

Yes... Follow the money.

The fact that you don't know the AGW side gets more than 99% of the finding, is real telling of the ignorance of the warmers.

The pro-gravity side gets more than 99% of the funding in physics.

The pro-evolution side gets more than 99% of the funding in biology.

The pro-electron she’ll side gets more than 99% of chemistry funding.

Know why?

 

[Nickyjo]

I will counter that with saying liberals love to be authoritarian, therefore they like the idea of punishing people with large carbon footprints.

I agree. Follow the money. Just go and find out how much money the AGW crowd gets vs. the non-AGW guys in the climate science.

Yes... Follow the money.

The fact that you don't know the AGW side gets more than 99% of the finding, is real telling of the ignorance of the warmers.

With Trump in the White House, Mr. "I'll do torture worse than waterboarding" and "Let's take out the families of terrorists" and "Saddam Hussein did a great job fighting terrorism" your first sentence is rich.

I imagine scientists who accept the consensus might get funded easier than those who are skeptics. But the Koch Brothers and other skeptics have plenty of dough, let them finance studies. Sen. Inhoff must have contacts, and why hasn't he used his position to mandate studies on the topic? Blow the lid off this fraud!

Look, do your realize how happy we could all be if studies showed there was nothing to worry about? If coal is harmless, whoop-de-do! We got plenty. What's not to like about an all-clear signal? Furthermore, you show us liberals we can drill everywhere, drive everywhere without producing smog, I'll buy a 1960 Lincoln eight-banger. Disconnect cancer from tobacco, and we'll find smoking sexy again.

 

[concernedpuma]

With Trump in the White House, Mr. "I'll do torture worse than waterboarding" and "Let's take out the families of terrorists" and "Saddam Hussein did a great job fighting terrorism" your first sentence is rich.

I imagine scientists who accept the consensus might get funded easier than those who are skeptics. But the Koch Brothers and other skeptics have plenty of dough, let them finance studies. Sen. Inhoff must have contacts, and why hasn't he used his position to mandate studies on the topic? Blow the lid off this fraud!

Look, do your realize how happy we could all be if studies showed there was nothing to worry about? If coal is harmless, whoop-de-do! We got plenty. What's not to like about an all-clear signal? Furthermore, you show us liberals we can drill everywhere, drive everywhere without producing smog, I'll buy a 1960 Lincoln eight-banger. Disconnect cancer from tobacco, and we'll find smoking sexy again.

I admit, I enjoy reading your posts. You have a writing talent, for sure. Now, can you explain to me the Nexus of the President of the United States , and global warming? Just off the cuff, what is the percentage of global warming the United States emits, as opposed to the rest of the world, or is it a matter of us leading the charge? And one other question, please, how do you feel about Nuclear power generation?
Regards,
CP

 

[Nickyjo]

I admit, I enjoy reading your posts. You have a writing talent, for sure. Now, can you explain to me the Nexus of the President of the United States , and global warming? Just off the cuff, what is the percentage of global warming the United States emits, as opposed to the rest of the world, or is it a matter of us leading the charge? And one other question, please, how do you feel about Nuclear power generation?
Regards,
CP

Thanks for the nice thoughts, Puma. I think a US prez can show leadership on the issue of global warming. The Paris agreement seemed to be aspirational, not anything like a binding treaty (correct me if I got it wrong), so Trump's withdrawal was more symbol than substance. But the US has significant moral influence in the world, and presidential comments give signals to other countries. (off topic, but Trump's comments on human rights do harm, more than I assume he imagines). I assume the US is a piker on emissions compared to what we may see from China and India in the future, but us taking bold steps, or at least refraining from making comments about winter's weather disproving the theory would be a start.

As to nuclear, I assume if we resolve the waste and safety problems it's fine. It's scary, however, in that a medium-size catastrophe would make even a massive oil spill seem like small potatoes.

 

[concernedpuma]

Thanks for the nice thoughts, Puma. I think a US prez can show leadership on the issue of global warming. The Paris agreement seemed to be aspirational, not anything like a binding treaty (correct me if I got it wrong), so Trump's withdrawal was more symbol than substance. But the US has significant moral influence in the world, and presidential comments give signals to other countries. (off topic, but Trump's comments on human rights do harm, more than I assume he imagines). I assume the US is a piker on emissions compared to what we may see from China and India in the future, but us taking bold steps, or at least refraining from making comments about winter's weather disproving the theory would be a start.

As to nuclear, I assume if we resolve the waste and safety problems it's fine. It's scary, however, in that a medium-size catastrophe would make even a massive oil spill seem like small potatoes.

You are welcome. I mean it. You seem so in control of your thought. We don't seem to agree, but your point's are made without acrimony - Thank you for that,
Personally, I have an abiding faith in the ability of us, all of us, to face and defeat the use of fossil fuel, if for no other reason than it will be gone someday. In a capitalist world, the reward will come to whoever it is that can figure out how to use solar, cold fusion, or geothermal in a cost efficient way. In the short term, I'm afraid we will be forced to use the currently cost efficient fossil fuels. Further, I have a hard time believing the human race can alter the temperature of the Earth. I believe if we were entering a new Ice Age(some postulate that) we couldn't burn enough Carbon based fuels to stop it. Do you?
Regards,
CP

 

[Nickyjo]

You are welcome. I mean it. You seem so in control of your thought. We don't seem to agree, but your point's are made without acrimony - Thank you for that,
Personally, I have an abiding faith in the ability of us, all of us, to face and defeat the use of fossil fuel, if for no other reason than it will be gone someday. In a capitalist world, the reward will come to whoever it is that can figure out how to use solar, cold fusion, or geothermal in a cost efficient way. In the short term, I'm afraid we will be forced to use the currently cost efficient fossil fuels. Further, I have a hard time believing the human race can alter the temperature of the Earth. I believe if we were entering a new Ice Age(some postulate that) we couldn't burn enough Carbon based fuels to stop it. Do you?
Regards,
CP

Agreed. Elegantly put. Self interest is a powerful force in capitalist society. One of my fave quotes is (from Lenin, I think) something like "when the time comes to hang the capitalists, they will bid against one another for the rope contract." What a ghastly compliment he pays to the free market.

As to our abilities to screw up things, on a small scale we seem to have assumed that we can affect the ozone layer and air quality. I really don't know what happened to the former when we banned stuff, but as to the latter, LA's air seems cleaner when I visit, presumably thanks to steps taken. (By the way, one of my great experiences was when a friend I had met on an airplane took me up to Loyola U, I believe, in LA, to check out the view on a hill facing east following a rainfall. What a magnificent, beautiful view of the LA basin that was, with snow on the San Gabriels in the distance. No wonder Hollywood decided to move from Long Island to make movies in, well, Hollywood.) This was 50 years ago and I remember it still.)

I read somewhere that there are a billion cars in the world. Don't know if that is true, but if half that number start up daily, I assume it has some effect. Global, who knows? But I keep returning to capitalism. Tobacco companies lied to us about its danger because it was in their self interest. Now we have oil companies warning us about the climate and bragging about what they are doing. Apples and oranges, I know, but that means they have taken a look and see something written on the wall.

 

[concernedpuma]

Agreed. Elegantly put. Self interest is a powerful force in capitalist society. One of my fave quotes is (from Lenin, I think) something like "when the time comes to hang the capitalists, they will bid against one another for the rope contract." What a ghastly compliment he pays to the free market.

As to our abilities to screw up things, on a small scale we seem to have assumed that we can affect the ozone layer and air quality. I really don't know what happened to the former when we banned stuff, but as to the latter, LA's air seems cleaner when I visit, presumably thanks to steps taken. (By the way, one of my great experiences was when a friend I had met on an airplane took me up to Loyola U, I believe, in LA, to check out the view on a hill facing east following a rainfall. What a magnificent, beautiful view of the LA basin that was, with snow on the San Gabriels in the distance. No wonder Hollywood decided to move from Long Island to make movies in, well, Hollywood.) This was 50 years ago and I remember it still.)

I read somewhere that there are a billion cars in the world. Don't know if that is true, but if half that number start up daily, I assume it has some effect. Global, who knows? But I keep returning to capitalism. Tobacco companies lied to us about its danger because it was in their self interest. Now we have oil companies warning us about the climate and bragging about what they are doing. Apples and oranges, I know, but that means they have taken a look and see something written on the wall.

Thank you for your reply. I read and considered it, just because you seem to want a conversation about how to make things better, but aren't in search of an argument or interested in one-upmanship. Very rare and refreshing on these type board. I will watch and respect what you write on other topics going forward.
Regards,
CP

 

[DaveFagan]

I see where you are going, but you have ignored the absolute cold that surrounds our planet and convection. The earth is not a bathtub, though even a hot tube will give up heat to the surrounding colder air, right? They don't stay hot.
Regards,
CP

There are no molecules in the vacuum to conduct the infra red. Convection is about heat moving in air, nitrogen, any gas that has density caused by presence of molecules/atoms. In a vacuum you only have radiation.
/

 

[concernedpuma]

There are no molecules in the vacuum to conduct the infra red. Convection is about heat moving in air, nitrogen, any gas that has density caused by presence of molecules/atoms. In a vacuum you only have radiation.
/

I am not conceding the point of convection, nor do I accept that the upper regions of the atmosphere are a vacuum. But, I note that you recognize radiation. Does that make my point less valid? No matter how you select the transfer of heat, it happens, yes? You surely aren't suggesting all heat that has ever been generated on this planet, is still here, are you?

Regards,
CP

 

[DaveFagan]

I am not conceding the point of convection, nor do I accept that the upper regions of the atmosphere are a vacuum. But, I note that you recognize radiation. Does that make my point less valid? No matter how you select the transfer of heat, it happens, yes? You surely aren't suggesting all heat that has ever been generated on this planet, is still here, are you?

Regards,
CP

CO2 impedes radiation and that is the secondary impact of AGW known as the Greenhouse Effect and proven in the 1800s.. More positive feedback cycles are Icemelt. Methane hydrates. Albedo. I don't care what altitude you suggest the atmoshere ends, it abuts a vacuum. Only radiation escapes in the form of infrared radiation.

"You surely aren't suggesting all heat that has ever been generated on this planet, is still here, are you?" That nonsense has come from your mind, not mine.
/
/

 

[concernedpuma]

CO2 impedes radiation and that is the secondary impact of AGW known as the Greenhouse Effect and proven in the 1800s.. More positive feedback cycles are Icemelt. Methane hydrates. Albedo. I don't care what altitude you suggest the atmoshere ends, it abuts a vacuum. Only radiation escapes in the form of infrared radiation.

"You surely aren't suggesting all heat that has ever been generated on this planet, is still here, are you?" That nonsense has come from your mind, not mine.
/
/

Did I suggest the atmosphere is somehow infinite? No. I didn't. Nonsense? You seem to suggest that the greenhouse effect is one dimensional and permanent. I am very aware of the greenhouse effect. I challenge you to show the practical, negative effect of it. You do understand that the greenhouse effect made our planet habitable, right? Really, it comes to this, you now have a faith based idea formulated by the very folks who got us here to begin with and on this very day, right?
Regards,
CP

 

[Tim the plumber]

I see. Then just write that fraction. A fraction is a specific number that you clain to know. Flaunt it, don't ya' know?
/

Previously I have worked it out to be about a 1/100000 I think. Can't be bothered to do it again though.

 

[DaveFagan]

Previously I have worked it out to be about a 1/100000 I think. Can't be bothered to do it again though.

On a per second basis that would be runaway Global Warming.
/

 

[Tim the plumber]

On a per second basis that would be runaway Global Warming.
/

No it adds 1/100000th of the temperature. That is above absolute zero so about 300/100000 of a degree. The earth radiates the heat away in proportion to the temperature of the earth.

 

[wellwisher]

CO2 impedes radiation and that is the secondary impact of AGW known as the Greenhouse Effect and proven in the 1800s.. More positive feedback cycles are Icemelt. Methane hydrates. Albedo. I don't care what altitude you suggest the atmoshere ends, it abuts a vacuum. Only radiation escapes in the form of infrared radiation.

"You surely aren't suggesting all heat that has ever been generated on this planet, is still here, are you?" That nonsense has come from your mind, not mine.
/
/

The greenhouse affect is a two way street and not a one way street. The CO2 not only traps heat to the earth but it is also prevents heat from the sun from reaching the surface of the earth. If you buy thermal windows they keep you warm in the winter by trapping the heat in your house. They also keep you cool in the summer by trapping the heat outside. CO2 will tie up IR radiation, but this occurs in both directions, often at the same time.

There is also a thing called heat capacity, which is the amount of heat the CO2 can absorb, in all its energy levels, before it becomes saturated and can't absorb anymore. After it saturates, any further heat can't be stored, so it drips out the other side like water from a saturated sponge. The sun helps saturates the CO2 sponge during the day.

The melting of the polar ice and glaciers is accelerating due to an affect every northern city sees in the spring. As the ice and snow melts, the ice and snow gets dirtier and dirtier, due to the sand and dirt that is mixed with the snow, concentrating. The dirty snow accelerates the melting of the snow in the spring. Southern cities amy never see this and could be led to believe that glaciers are always made of clean snow and ice.

In 1815 there was a major volcano that caused what is known as the year without a summer. During that year the global temperatures fell 0.7 degrees celsius in one year. This was due to a lot of dust in the atmosphere, that now contributes to the dirty snow affect.

 

[DaveFagan]

No it adds 1/100000th of the temperature. That is above absolute zero so about 300/100000 of a degree. The earth radiates the heat away in proportion to the temperature of the earth.

What Earth temperature are you talking about? The core at thousands of degrees, the surface at an average of 54 degrees or the atmosphere varying from around a hundred degrees to 50 below zero or worse. What does absolute zero have to do wtih this? Any additional heat adds to the status quo.
/

 

[DaveFagan]

The greenhouse affect is a two way street and not a one way street. The CO2 not only traps heat to the earth but it is also prevents heat from the sun from reaching the surface of the earth. If you buy thermal windows they keep you warm in the winter by trapping the heat in your house. They also keep you cool in the summer by trapping the heat outside. CO2 will tie up IR radiation, but this occurs in both directions, often at the same time.

There is also a thing called heat capacity, which is the amount of heat the CO2 can absorb, in all its energy levels, before it becomes saturated and can't absorb anymore. After it saturates, any further heat can't be stored, so it drips out the other side like water from a saturated sponge. The sun helps saturates the CO2 sponge during the day.

The melting of the polar ice and glaciers is accelerating due to an affect every northern city sees in the spring. As the ice and snow melts, the ice and snow gets dirtier and dirtier, due to the sand and dirt that is mixed with the snow, concentrating. The dirty snow accelerates the melting of the snow in the spring. Southern cities amy never see this and could be led to believe that glaciers are always made of clean snow and ice.

In 1815 there was a major volcano that caused what is known as the year without a summer. During that year the global temperatures fell 0.7 degrees celsius in one year. This was due to a lot of dust in the atmosphere, that now contributes to the dirty snow affect.

The electromagnetic radiation from the Sun is not just infrared, but heat released from the Planet Earth is infrared. That is why incoming radiation is different from outgoing radiation. I did not say CO2 absorbs infra red, but reflects infra red. Saturation is not the problem. I know about 1815 and the mini ice age of 1600s and the dark ages starting 565 AD. Changes in color of snow/ice is what the term albedo refers to and also is affected by volcanic ash and airborne sulfites among other factors.
/

 

[Tim the plumber]

What Earth temperature are you talking about? The core at thousands of degrees, the surface at an average of 54 degrees or the atmosphere varying from around a hundred degrees to 50 below zero or worse. What does absolute zero have to do wtih this? Any additional heat adds to the status quo.
/

The surface.

Additional heat energy adds to the temperature which increases the outgoing radiation of heat energy. This happens in proportion to the temperature above absolute zero. That is the temperature in degrees Kelvin. About 300K for a general figure of the surface of the earth.

 

[DaveFagan]

The surface.

Additional heat energy adds to the temperature which increases the outgoing radiation of heat energy. This happens in proportion to the temperature above absolute zero. That is the temperature in degrees Kelvin. About 300K for a general figure of the surface of the earth.

Red: The additional heat energy radiation is reflected back proportionally by CO2 causing Greenhouse Effect temperature rise. The wavelengths of incoming radiation from the sun are not impeded until they become infra red upon attempting to radiate back into space.
/

 

[Lord of Planar]

Back to that conspiracy - that thousands and thousands of Climatologists around the world are living a lie. There's a flat-earth conspiracy group. Maybe you'd be interested in that.

No, I see you are too ignorant to understand my words. If you actually read the papers, nearly all the papers don't claim what the lying pundits say they mean.

Words have meaning. Try reading the actual papers some day instead of what the pundits tell you they say.

 

[Lord of Planar]

The pro-gravity side gets more than 99% of the funding in physics.

The pro-evolution side gets more than 99% of the funding in biology.

The pro-electron she’ll side gets more than 99% of chemistry funding.

Know why?

I see...

Haven't you learned yet that facts make statistics. Statistics do not make facts.

Once again, you present us with your ignorance.

 

[Lord of Planar]

With Trump in the White House, Mr. "I'll do torture worse than waterboarding" and "Let's take out the families of terrorists" and "Saddam Hussein did a great job fighting terrorism" your first sentence is rich.

I imagine scientists who accept the consensus might get funded easier than those who are skeptics. But the Koch Brothers and other skeptics have plenty of dough, let them finance studies. Sen. Inhoff must have contacts, and why hasn't he used his position to mandate studies on the topic? Blow the lid off this fraud!

Look, do your realize how happy we could all be if studies showed there was nothing to worry about? If coal is harmless, whoop-de-do! We got plenty. What's not to like about an all-clear signal? Furthermore, you show us liberals we can drill everywhere, drive everywhere without producing smog, I'll buy a 1960 Lincoln eight-banger. Disconnect cancer from tobacco, and we'll find smoking sexy again.

Politics should be 100% out of this, but sadly the UN and other governments fund in unbiased ways.

I'm not sure what you are saying when you say that about coal. I have a hard time comprehending, why you guys have such limited comprehension skills. I have never claimed any extreme point to my arguments. Just because I'm not worried about CO2, doesn't mean I think it has zero warming for example. Just because I show other variables have more impact than you guys wish to accept, doean't mean I am saying they account for all...

Why are you alarmists so damn unreasonable?

Who here, ever claimed tobacco doesn't cause cancer? You lefties go to extremes when there is talk of moderation. There is no educating you guys to facts and compromise. It's your way or the highway.

So many logical fallacies from the left.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Did I suggest the atmosphere is somehow infinite? No. I didn't. Nonsense? You seem to suggest that the greenhouse effect is one dimensional and permanent. I am very aware of the greenhouse effect. I challenge you to show the practical, negative effect of it. You do understand that the greenhouse effect made our planet habitable, right? Really, it comes to this, you now have a faith based idea formulated by the very folks who got us here to begin with and on this very day, right?
Regards,
CP

Then I have a question.

Do you acknowledge that the greenhouse effect gets stronger and weaker as the sun gets stronger and weaker? In a near linear way?

 

[Lord of Planar]

No it adds 1/100000th of the temperature. That is above absolute zero so about 300/100000 of a degree. The earth radiates the heat away in proportion to the temperature of the earth.

Actually, there's a fourth power function involved.