Official Global Warming thread (merged)

#627
#627
gsvol said:
The most useless thing is to try to have an intelligent
discourse with someone who has been brainwashed all
their young life by radical environmentalists who have
everthing to do with political science and very, very
little to do with physical science.
Click to expand...

Tell me how I was wrong in my statement. Explain to me how I was brainwashed. What does sea level rise have to do with emerging volcanoes?
 
#628
#628
gsvol said:
Say Hello to Cheaper Hydrogen Fuel Cells
Click to expand...

Zelanay is a great guy, and has actually done some of the more important work in the field over the last few years.

It will be very interesting to see how far Zelanay (and I think he is working closely with Shimshon) can take this work. Certainly not platinum efficiency, but certainly not platinum cost either. Problem is, to make an MEA, you need catalysts with a similar morphology to platinum.

However, the greatest mistake ever made in the fuel cell industry is putting too much faith in a press release.
 
Last edited:
#629
#629
IPorange said:
Tell me how I was wrong in my statement. Explain to me how I was brainwashed. What does sea level rise have to do with emerging volcanoes?
Click to expand...

Your statement is beside the point.

Do you honestly think that over 30,000 undersea volcanoes have nothing to do with ocean currents that are a major factor weather patterns??
 
#630
#630
utgibbs said:
Zelanay is a great guy, and has actually done some of the more important work in the field over the last few years.

It will be very interesting to see how far Zelanay (and I think he is working closely with Shimshon) can take this work. Certainly not platinum efficiency, but certainly not platinum cost either. Problem is, to make an MEA, you need catalysts with a similar morphology to platinum.

However, the greatest mistake ever made in the fuel cell industry is putting too much faith in a press release.
Click to expand...

Some guy has designed a car frame made of composite that can store enough hydrogen to run a small sedan for about 300 miles.
 
#631
#631
gsvol said:
Your statement is beside the point.

Do you honestly think that over 30,000 undersea volcanoes have nothing to do with ocean currents that are a major factor weather patterns??
Click to expand...

Well honestly, ocean currents have a ton to do with weather patterns. I have never claimed otherwise, as that would be stupid.

I do not think undersea volcanoes have a lot to do with ocean currents. Because they don't. I think you were trying to make a point about volcanic emissions. I also believe that the impact of volcanic emissions, while significant, are not the drivers of current climate change. The reason I think they are not is because volcanic emissions COOL climate.
 
#632
#632
There you go with another simplistic apples/oranges comparison again.

We know that about 80% of Earth's volcanoes are under the ocean and that about 10% of those are active, about 30,000.

We know that just as the jet streams in our atmosphere vary in directions and altitudes, greatly affecting weather pattterns, we know that oceanic currents do the same, also greatly affecting weather patterns.

Given those facts, is it not only feasable but probable that when those oceanic currents pass over active volcanoes or not, are they not heated or cooled??

I submit that probably most of the Arctic melting has been due to active volcanoes than co2 and also that el nin'o and la nin'a are partially due to current direction and volcanic activity.

The following for your consideration:

Anthropogenic Global Warming is a Big Hoax [Reader Post] | Flopping Aces

Anthropogenic global warming is the biggest hoax since the Cardiff Giant! Anyone with any science back ground at all can see that most climate scientists are not following true scientific processes to reach their conclusions. They use the results of computer models as fact ignoring the garbage in garbage out rules of computing.

Dr. Roy Spencer's new book, The Great Global Warming Blunder: How Mother Nature Fooled the World's Top Climate Scientists reveals new revelations. As a scientist and a citizen who is paying for climate research I was amazed to know that "potential natural explanation for recent warming has never been seriously researched by climate scientists". Dr Spencer describes climate scientists as ignoring natural causes of warming and are totally focused on external causes.

Dr Spencer has been criticizing climate scientists for years for their lack of understanding of cloud cover. Computer climate models all use the same assumptions where they assign an average amount of cloud cover determined through statistics. Their insufficient knowledge caused them to make assumptions that are not valid.

Another mistake that climate scientists have made is to assume the Earth is very sensitive to heating or cooling by external sources.
Click to expand...

Blunder-cover-medium.jpg


The Great Global Warming Blunder: How Mother Nature Fooled the World?s Top Climate Scientists Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

About one-half of Blunder is a non-technical description of our new peer reviewed and soon-to-be-published research which supports the opinion that a majority of Americans already hold: that warming in recent decades is mostly due to a natural cycle in the climate system — not to an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide from fossil fuel burning.
---------

You see, climate researchers are rather myopic. They think that the only way for global-average temperatures to change is for the climate system to be forced ‘externally’…by a change in the output of the sun, or by a large volcanic eruption. These are events which occur external to the normal, internal operation of the climate system.

But what they have ignored is the potential for the climate system to cause its own climate change. Climate change is simply what the system does, owing to its complex, dynamic, chaotic internal behavior.
--------------------------

How could the experts have missed such a simple explanation? Because they have convinced themselves that only a temperature change can cause a cloud cover change, and not the other way around. The issue is one of causation. They have not accounted for cloud changes causing temperature changes.

The experts have simply mixed up cause and effect when observing how clouds and temperature vary. The book reveals a simple way to determine the direction of causation from satellite observations of global average temperature and cloud variations. And that new tool should fundamentally change how we view the climate system.

Blunder also addresses a second major mistake that results from ignoring the effect of natural cloud variations on temperature: it results in the illusion that the climate system is very sensitive. The experts claim that, since our climate system is very sensitive, then our carbon dioxide emissions are all that is needed to explain global warming. There is no need to look for alternative explanations.

But I show that the experts have merely reasoned themselves in a circle on this subject. When properly interpreted, our satellite observations actually reveal that the system is quite IN-sensitive. And an insensitive climate system means that nature does not really care whether you travel by jet, or how many hamburgers or steaks you eat.
------------------------------

And I predict that the proposed cure for global warming – reducing greenhouse gas emissions – will someday seem as outdated as using leeches to cure human illnesses.

Nevertheless, despite the fact that scientific knowledge is continually changing, it is increasingly apparent that the politicians are not going to let little things like facts get in their way. For instance, a new draft climate change report was released by the U.S. yesterday (April 19) which, in part, says: “Global warming is unequivocal and primarily human-induced … Global temperature has increased over the past 50 years. This observed increase is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases.”

You see, the legislative train left the station many years ago, and no amount of new science will slow it down as it accelerates toward its final destination: forcibly reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

But in Blunder I address what other scientists should have the courage to admit: that maybe putting more CO2 in the atmosphere is a good thing. Given that it is necessary for life on Earth, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is surprisingly small. We already know that nature is gobbling up 50% of what humanity produces, no matter how fast we produce it. So, it is only logical to address the possibility that nature — that life on Earth — has actually been starved for carbon dioxide.
Click to expand...

warming.jpg


A couple of questions;

1. How is it that the Earth was warming long before the industrial revolution came along?

2. How is it that the Earth was a good deal warmer 900 years ago than it is today?
 
#633
#633
gsvol said:
A couple of questions;

1. How is it that the Earth was warming long before the industrial revolution came along?

2. How is it that the Earth was a good deal warmer 900 years ago than it is today?
Click to expand...

1. Milankovitch cycles.

2. I'm not sure that's accurate.
 
#634
#634
utgibbs said:
1. Milankovitch cycles.
Click to expand...

So Milankovitchnik has died???

230574_209525142402707_141508095871079_648114_8223631_n.jpg


And he seemed like such a healthy young man!




utgibbs said:
2. I'm not sure that's accurate.
Click to expand...

Tottaly accurate, a can't miss situation.

zl50rt.jpg


When the Vikings had vegetable gardens, vinyards and pastures for their flocks and herds in Greenland it had to be 3 to 4 degrees C warmer than now!

PS; I'm waiting for you to weigh in on ISI?

Why the hesitation, avoiding ridicule?
 
#636
#636
It was 93 degrees on Tuesday. Four degrees over the 100 year old record high.

I can play that game, too...
 
#638
#638
VOLatile said:
It was 93 degrees on Tuesday. Four degrees over the 100 year old record high.

I can play that game, too...
Click to expand...

Point is we are also getting record low temps across the world too., along with record highs.

I personally think GW is just a scam.

I would like to stop cutting down trees though in mass quantity. But that is a different thread.
 
#640
#640
VOLatile said:
Yeah...

The usage of "global warming" to chop at climate change is stupid, though.
Click to expand...
If the climate is changing, does that mean temperatures are increasing or decreasing? Or is it too early to determine?

Be careful with your reply. I'm setting a trap...
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#641
#641
Rasputin_Vol said:
If the climate is changing, does that mean temperatures are increasing or decreasing? Or is it too early to determine?

Be careful with your reply. I'm setting a trap...
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

It's too early to determine, but I'm all for preventative measures. And I'll leave it at that.
 
#643
#643
Ras still doesn't know what the words "climate or "global climate" means. It's sad, at this point.
 
#644
#644
Rasputin_Vol said:
If the climate is changing, does that mean temperatures are increasing or decreasing? Or is it too early to determine?

Be careful with your reply. I'm setting a trap...
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Global temperature has been increasing, and will continue to increase. That doesn't mean there will never be winters or that there won't be the occasional cold event. That's weather and seasons, not climate.

I'm starting to suspect you're retarded. You want to talk about climate change, let's talk about it. Let me know where the facts don't hold up to you. But first you'll have to know the facts to discuss them. I encourage you to seek them out.

Spring your *****-ass trap. Let's go.
 
#645
#645
IPorange said:
Global temperature has been increasing, and will continue to increase. That doesn't mean there will never be winters or that there won't be the occasional cold event. That's weather and seasons, not climate.

I'm starting to suspect you're retarded. You want to talk about climate change, let's talk about it. Let me know where the facts don't hold up to you. But first you'll have to know the facts to discuss them. I encourage you to seek them out.

Spring your *****-ass trap. Let's go.
Click to expand...

there you go again, belittling anybody who doesn't agree with you that "global climate change" is caused by man. I understand that you have educational and professional credentials to back up what you're saying, but that's no reason to go gsvol on anybody who doesn't believe what you do.
 
#646
#646
MG1968 said:
there you go again, belittling anybody who doesn't agree with you that "global climate change" is caused by man. I understand that you have educational and professional credentials to back up what you're saying, but that's no reason to go gsvol on anybody who doesn't believe what you do.
Click to expand...

Dude, there's an inherent difference between global warming and global climate change. If a serious discussion is to be made, then the difference needs to be acknowledged. If Ras chooses not to differentiate, then he deserves to be ridiculed. Just like you guys do to LG when he says that all TPers are racist.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#647
#647
VOLatile said:
Dude, there's an inherent difference between global warming and global climate change. If a serious discussion is to be made, then the difference needs to be acknowledged. If Ras chooses not to differentiate, then he deserves to be ridiculed. Just like you guys do to LG when he says that all TPers are racist.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I personally don't find that big of a distinction given the current forcing on climate.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#648
#648
MG1968 said:
there you go again, belittling anybody who doesn't agree with you that "global climate change" is caused by man. I understand that you have educational and professional credentials to back up what you're saying, but that's no reason to go gsvol on anybody who doesn't believe what you do.
Click to expand...

If one talks about how great of a season a sub .500 MLB team is having after one win, are they not an idiot? That is exactly the sort of idiocy of one pointing to a couple days of cool weather at his house in the scope of the average global temperature trend. I've probably posted this a couple dozen of times on this forum, but weather is not the same as global climate. Not even close.
 
#649
#649
VOLatile said:
Dude, there's an inherent difference between global warming and global climate change. If a serious discussion is to be made, then the difference needs to be acknowledged. If Ras chooses not to differentiate, then he deserves to be ridiculed. Just like you guys do to LG when he says that all TPers are racist.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

They're the same thing, actually. Global climate change is used because while global temperature is warming, people take it to mean everywhere will be hotter than normal. That isn't so, as the term global climate is referring to a net total temperature of the planet, not the individual conditions of regions.
 
#650
#650
MG1968 said:
there you go again, belittling anybody who doesn't agree with you that "global climate change" is caused by man. I understand that you have educational and professional credentials to back up what you're saying, but that's no reason to go gsvol on anybody who doesn't believe what you do.
Click to expand...

Kids been cooped up in a classroom since age 6 and is almost 30 now. I'm suprised he hasn't snapped. I bet whenever he is out and hears a bell ring he subconsciously grabs all his stuff and moves to another room.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top