Global Warming Denial: Is there a good argument?

juvenissun · Jan 14, 2019

GlabrousDory4 said:
The Knutti and Hegerl article from 2008 shows how we figure out the actual sensitivity using PALEOENVIRONMENTAL data. They even added in some NEWER data from modern events like volcanic eruptions!

In addtion we know how CO2 absorbs IR. In fact there's a piece of equipment we use in chemistry called an FTIR that uses carbon-bonds tendency to absorb IR wavelengths. Every single time you run a background on the system you see atmospheric CO2 absorbing IR.

Yeah, I can see that. Unless one has training in the sciences at which point the data is pretty convincing. Has been for at least 30-50 years. But if one doesn't have the training necessary to understand it and has a political bias it is easy to think that the data doesn't make sense to scientists who understand it.

Well, considering we are NOT yet at equilibrium CO2 concentration that's unlikely for a long time. And remember CO2 is pulled back out of the atmosphere using the CARBON CYCLE which takes a lot longer to sequester excess CO2.

No idea what that sentence means. Sounds like a mash-up of various scientific sounding words in hopes of hand waving away pretty solid science.

If the earth does not have other greenhouse gases, I would probably be convinced that CO2 is important. The fact is there are other more potent greenhouse gases millions of times more abundant on the earth. Why don't they try the sensitivity of those gases?

Yes, it would still take a lot of time to show the validity of these predictions. Exactly because that, plus the glacial (temperature) history we have already know, I choose not to believe the said role of CO2.

juvenissun · Jan 14, 2019

GlabrousDory4 said:
It would also require you to understand HISTORICAL GEOLOGY and the fact that humans have never really known a dramatically different global climate since we settled in the first cities many thousands of years ago.

Check the temperature of interglacial periods in the Pleistocene. Do you really think the tiny CO2 we released into the air is going to change anything? I think just a few volcanic eruptions would pour ALL CO2 we have ever released into the air.

DogmaHunter · Jan 14, 2019

thecolorsblend said:
Isn't the burden of proof on those who claim global warming is real and man-made?

Yes. And they've more then met their burden of proof.

DogmaHunter · Jan 14, 2019

juvenissun said:
I can not prove it (so can’t anyone else), but I strongly suspect the increase of CO2 is A Consequence of global warming. Challenge anyone who says otherwise.

Sure, sure...

The fact that we've been burning fossil fuels en masse, and as a direct result pumping tons and tons of CO2 (which is a greenhouse gas) into the atmosphere, for over a century, has nothing at all whatsoever to do with it.

DogmaHunter · Jan 14, 2019

juvenissun said:
That is true. But this is a very recent data from atmospheric samples. Was it the same in the previous interglacial periods?

That's rather trivial to find out, using ice cores.

juvenissun · Jan 14, 2019

DogmaHunter said:
That's rather trivial to find out, using ice cores.

So, why don't people use it to promote the critical role of CO2?
I like to see that data before I even consider the rumor.

VirOptimus · Jan 14, 2019

juvenissun said:
We had global warming just 30000 years ago. What was the CO2 content and composition at that time? I would assume it was similar to what we see today.

Arent you a YEC?

DogmaHunter · Jan 14, 2019

juvenissun said:
So, why don't people use it to promote the critical role of CO2?

They do.

I like to see that data before I even consider the rumor.

It's not exactly hard to find. Just google "atmospheric co2 levels in ice cores"

CO2 Ice Core Data

DogmaHunter · Jan 14, 2019

juvenissun said:
We had global warming just 30000 years ago. What was the CO2 content and composition at that time? I would assume it was similar to what we see today.

30k years ago?
Wasn't that about the last time a big ice age started?

DogmaHunter · Jan 14, 2019

juvenissun said:
We are NOT seeing record global temperature. This is a very important point. In fact, we are in a period of time which has the lowest temperature in the earth history. [chart]

Right, right. It's colder now then when there was a glacier of a km thick covering most of north america.

DogmaHunter · Jan 14, 2019

juvenissun said:
Check the temperature of interglacial periods in the Pleistocene. Do you really think the tiny CO2 we released into the air is going to change anything? I think just a few volcanic eruptions would pour ALL CO2 we have ever released into the air.

It would take three Mount St. Helens [like in the 80s] and one Mount Pinatubo [like in 1991] eruption every day to equal the amount that humanity is presently emitting.

How Much CO2 Does A Single Volcano Emit?

And you even said that "just a few" eruption would equal ALL we have EVER released into the air.

Laughable really.

The Barbarian · Jan 14, 2019

juvenissun said:
We are NOT seeing record global temperature.

Well, let's take a look...
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

As you see, the last four years have been hotter than any previously recorded. And yet, given the low activity of the sun, we should be experiencing colder climate. No point in denying the fact.

In fact, we are in a period of time which has the lowest temperature in the earth history. [chart]

Seeing as just a few thousand years ago, much of the Northern Hemisphere was covered in a huge ice sheet, your claim is laughably wrong.

FrumiousBandersnatch · Jan 14, 2019

juvenissun said:
Those are not trustable. The earth is too big.

A simple thing like the CO2 cycle took many scientists in many disciplines decades of effort but not able to reach a conclusion, you want me to trust just a few equations and observations? You are too simple and naive.

Common sense is more important. PPM amount of gas is not going to do anything to the earth.

Reminds me of Chico Marx's line, "Who you gonna trust, me or your lying eyes?"

I call POE for this. You're trolling.

GlabrousDory4 · Jan 14, 2019

juvenissun said:
If the earth does not have other greenhouse gases, I would probably be convinced that CO2 is important. The fact is there are other more potent greenhouse gases millions of times more abundant on the earth. Why don't they try the sensitivity of those gases?

They have. The equation utilizes the radiative forcing, so you can look at other greenhouse gases like methane for instance.

Also remember H2O is a greenhouse gas, but the key here is that water concentration in the atmosphere can easily be shifted through the hydrologic cycle (you may have heard the word "precipitation", things like rain and snow). So when excess H2O is in the atmosphere it can re-equilibrate very quickly. UNLIKE excess CO2 or even excess methane.

Normally scientists characterize water as a "feedback" rather than a forcing because it can and does respond to changes in the system quickly.

Yes, it would still take a lot of time to show the validity of these predictions. Exactly because that, plus the glacial (temperature) history we have already know, I choose not to believe the said role of CO2.

It is understandable if one doesn't have experience as a scientist to be overwhelmed by the information. You can choose whatever you like, but it won't make you correct. It doesn't really sound like you are particularly familiar with the details of this topic, not everyone is. So go ahead and have your opinion as you like, but remember you should probably be familiar with the actual science before you form an opinion on it.

juvenissun · Jan 14, 2019

VirOptimus said:
Arent you a YEC?

Define YEC.

VirOptimus · Jan 14, 2019

juvenissun said:
Define YEC.

Im not interested in games.

juvenissun · Jan 14, 2019

The Barbarian said:
Well, let's take a look...
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

As you see, the last four years have been hotter than any previously recorded. And yet, given the low activity of the sun, we should be experiencing colder climate. No point in denying the fact.

No problem with global warming. But I don't think CO2 is the cause.

juvenissun · Jan 14, 2019

VirOptimus said:
Im not interested in games.

No game. There are various YEC definitions.

VirOptimus · Jan 14, 2019

juvenissun said:
No game. There are various YEC definitions.

Well, I dont care.

juvenissun · Jan 14, 2019

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
Reminds me of Chico Marx's line, "Who you gonna trust, me or your lying eyes?"

I call POE for this. You're trolling.

OK. You win.

Global Warming Denial: Is there a good argument?

... and God saw that it was good.

... and God saw that it was good.

Code Monkey

Code Monkey

Code Monkey

... and God saw that it was good.

A nihilist who cares.

Code Monkey

Code Monkey

Code Monkey

Code Monkey

Crabby Old White Guy

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

... and God saw that it was good.

A nihilist who cares.

... and God saw that it was good.

... and God saw that it was good.

A nihilist who cares.

... and God saw that it was good.

Similar threads