NASA says Climate Change exagerated?

[Farbin Kaiber]

It's funny you assume well educated is akin to liberalism. Liberals are smart enough to think, but not smart enough to think for themselves.

[Bill 84 318i]

Liberals are smart enough to think, but not smart enough to think for themselves.

Nothing speaks to one's intellectual ability to digest complex issues more than their incessant need to label them.

[gwb72tii]

different subject herb man

[Eecen]

All of you are whats wrong with humanity.







Can't we just all get along and have a sing along?

here listen to this, it'll help loosen those sticks y'al got up ur asses.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5CcOq8UzkI

[gwb72tii]

no, we can't all just get along when the loons want to wreck to world economy based on junk science

[CorvallisBMW]

no, we can't all just get along when the loons want to wreck to world economy based on junk science

You're right, Germany's carbon tax system has thrown them in to the deepest dark depths of depression

[mrsleeve]

^

There is a little bit of a reason for that.

Program extracted 123b outta heavy industry last year, and added that price to all those consumer and industry goods. The power companies have been exempt and getting their credits for FREE for the last 6 years and until 2013. Report back on the true effect of that program about march of 2014 please.



Ok: I see how this is going. beat on the guy that does not have a degree.


Ok Corvallis, I will concede the 99.99999% is a bit high. But in the case of all state and nearly all Non Religious based schools are subject to the influence and regulation from the federal govt. Thanks to title IX in the late 70's. and Grove City College Vs. Bell. SCOTUS affirmed that Federal grants and loans to students is a form indirect aid to the schools and thus must abide by the terms of the Higher education act (sign the compliance agreement). Grove City as well as where I have been Hillsdale College ( I grew up 12 miles from campus) and a few others told the feds to fuck off and use private loans and scholarships thus exempting them from towing the line with the federal agenda.

Well since there are very few schools that can tell the feds to screw off, they are all beholding to the federal agenda, the same with our k-12 system. Why do you think we have a federally standardized education system, and why they have gotten into all levels of education. What better way to break the fundamental ideals that founded this country and have been passed down for generations. How better to break that cycle to get the lions share of generations of future Americans to think LIKE YOU DO.


Now dont get me too wrong here, Education is a good thing, especially for highly specialized things ( I still think apprenticeships are a far more effective way to train employees). I have lots of it, just not in the form that you do. I dont go around nor would I, touting that the degree I have makes me the best thing since sliced bread, and that since I have a degree I am better than those that dont. College works for some, others not so well. My line of work has allowed me to live a very good life style, and if I want to go get a 4 year degree I can do so, and write them a check for all 4 years off the bat with MY MONEY that I have earned my self. 12 years ago this was not the case, and I dont see the monetary benefit right now to do so. In the long run the degree would cost me nearly 1/2 million dollars in lost wages, interest gained on principal not contributed in my retirements for the next 30 years, and paying for the degree it self. Not a smart move right now, when or if my industry slows and work gets scarce then maybe.

I have always thought that experience makes a man who he is, You guys are proving it to me in spades.

[DTM190]

All of you are whats wrong with humanity.







Can't we just all get along and have a sing along?

here listen to this, it'll help loosen those sticks y'al got up ur asses.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5CcOq8UzkI

I so thought you were going to post this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCP2YV6Jge0

[herbivor]

I so thought you were going to post this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCP2YV6Jge0

Or this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-NOZU2iPA8&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[Eecen]

I so thought you were going to post this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCP2YV6Jge0

Mmmm'mmm, sexy. Time for an old fashioned.

[gstuning]

I also have travelled all over the world visiting the arctic a few times and seeing the impact of climate change first hand.

Bingo.

Climate change is not global warming.

Has there ever been a biodome type situation where CO2 was raised and warming was seen?
I.e no outside interference?

This is clearly the first type of testing I´d do if I was in this field., controlled environment.


Unless there is a closed system analysis done any open system analysis is going to be an assumption. The vast amount of variables related to alterations in localized temparature are without doubt not covered in any open system analysis.

Has anybody thought about the influence of the wast amount of people on global warming?

How much CO2 do we pump out everyday, all almost 7 billion of us?
How about our conversion of food into heat that then rises off us?

What about the 33% of all fuel spent in internal combustion engines is released as heat without any work. Then the next 33% is released as heat out the exhaust system without doing much work. You think all those billions of radiators releasing heat don´t make a bit of difference?

Exhaust is hot you know, very hot.

It´s much more likely that the 66% of fuel directly converted into heat is causing any global warming rather then the CO2 coming out of the exhaust.


Gasoline typically contains 44 Mega Joules per KG. 66% of that is converted into heat.
Thats 30MJ per every spent Kilogram of fuel. 60liter tanks per car say. Thats
1800MJ per every tank of fuel.

It takes about 1000joules to heat up 450grams of water 1°C.

So every tank of fuel can heat up 810.081 Kgs of water 1°C

Now lets imagine this conversion is only 25% of that number(just for kicks, lets imagine that the heat produced doesn´t all warm up it´s surroundings, although it actually does)

Thats still 202.520 Kgs of water heated up by 1°C for every tank of fuel.

And then lets say you fill up every two weeks.

So for every single car that fills up every two weeks thats going to be

5.265.526 Kgs of water heated up per year per car.

In the UK alone there are about 30million cars.

Which is then

157.965.796.579.657 Kgs (157 Tera Kgs) of water that are raised 1°C every year by the UK alone.

You can play with the numbers to get a global scale and even in previous years.

this little math example has no real meaning as I just used a bunch of assumptions.
but it will show you the scale of any warming done by wasted fuel directly. What is the potential warming done by the CO2 coming out of 60liters?

[dkbmxer002]

lolz, been trying to explain this to people for a while...

[gwb72tii]

man is <4% annually, all sources

its been calculated as naseum

[herbivor]

Bingo.

Climate change is not global warming.

Has there ever been a biodome type situation where CO2 was raised and warming was seen?
I.e no outside interference?

I appreciate the mathematical effort. I see there has been an evolution amongst GW skeptics starting from complete deniers that global warming is occurring, to accepting that it is occurring but it's not anthropogenic, You seem to make up the latest batch of accepting it's occurring and it's anthropogenic, but not because of CO2, but rather other human factors. The effects that you are describing such as waste heat from automobiles and airconditioners are contributing factors to the "heat island" effects, it is not a primary driver of the overall problem. Hopefully the following education in "Greenhouse Effect 101" should help you understand the difference:

An enhanced greenhouse effect from CO2 has been confirmed by multiple lines of empirical evidence. Satellite measurements of infrared spectra over the past 40 years observe less energy escaping to space at the wavelengths associated with CO2. Surface measurements find more downward infrared radiation warming the planet's surface. This provides a direct, empirical causal link between CO2 and global warming. The greenhouse gas qualities of carbon dioxide have been known for over a century. In 1861, John Tyndal published laboratory results identifying carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas that absorbed heat rays (longwave radiation). Since then, the absorptive qualities of carbon dioxide have been more precisely quantified by decades of laboratory measurements (Herzberg 1953, Burch 1962, Burch 1970, etc).
The greenhouse effect occurs because greenhouse gases let sunlight (shortwave radiation) pass through the atmosphere. The earth absorbs sunlight, warms then reradiates heat (infrared or longwave radiation). The outgoing longwave radiation is absorbed by greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This heats the atmosphere which in turn re-radiates longwave radiation in all directions. Some of it makes its way back to the surface of the earth. So with more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, we expect to see less longwave radiation escaping to space at the wavelengths that carbon dioxide absorb. We also expect to see more infrared radiation returning back to Earth at these same wavelengths.


In 1970, NASA launched the IRIS satellite that measured infrared spectra between 400 cm-1 to 1600 cm-1. In 1996, the Japanese Space Agency launched the IMG satellite which recorded similar observations. Both sets of data were compared to discern any changes in outgoing radiation over the 26 year period (Harries 2001). The resultant change in outgoing radiation was as follows:

Figure 1: Change in spectrum from 1970 to 1996 due to trace gases. 'Brightness temperature' indicates equivalent blackbody temperature (Harries 2001).
What they found was a drop in outgoing radiation at the wavelength bands that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) absorb energy. The change in outgoing radiation is consistent with theoretical expectations. Thus the paper found "direct experimental evidence for a significant increase in the Earth's greenhouse effect".
This result has been confirmed by subsequent papers using more recent satellite data. The 1970 and 1997 spectra were compared with additional satellite data from the NASA AIRS satellite launched in 2003 (Griggs 2004). This analysis was extended to 2006 using data from the AURA satellite launched in 2004 (Chen 2007). Both papers found the observed differences in CO2 bands matching the expected changes from rising carbon dioxide levels. Thus we have empirical evidence that increased CO2 is causing an enhanced greenhouse effect.


A compilation of surface measurements of downward longwave radiation from 1973 to 2008 find an increasing trend of more longwave radiation returning to earth, attributed to increases in air temperature, humidity and atmospheric carbon dioxide (Wang 2009). More regional studies such as an examination of downward longwave radiation over the central Alps find that downward longwave radiation is increasing due to an enhanced greenhouse effect (Philipona 2004).
Taking this a step further, an analysis of high resolution spectral data allows scientists to quantitatively attribute the increase in downward radiation to each of several greenhouse gases (Evans 2006). The results lead the authors to conclude that "this experimental data should effectively end the argument by skeptics that no experimental evidence exists for the connection between greenhouse gas increases in the atmosphere and global warming."

Figure 2: Spectrum of the greenhouse radiation measured at the surface. Greenhouse effect from water vapor is filtered out, showing the contributions of other greenhouse gases (Evans 2006).
There are multiple lines of empirical evidence that increasing carbon dioxide causes an enhanced greenhouse effect. Laboratory tests show carbon dioxide absorbs longwave radiation. Satellite measurements confirm less longwave radiation is escaping to space at carbon dioxide absorptive wavelengths. Surface measurements find more longwave radiation returning back to Earth at these same wavelengths. The result of this energy imbalance is the accumulation of heat over the last 40 years.

[mrsleeve]

Well when people are turning on you and facts of the matter with some common sense are used against your radical movement. Call all those people Racists!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That will get them.


Al equates those of us that think hes full of shit to Racists. Nice going Al that will win us over. Standard Progressive/Lib move call them names when your not getting your way.