Global Warming is so 90's

[CabVet]

I remember a study on a program (I think it was Nova) that showed increase CO2 levels causes the tested plants to grow faster which in turn produce more oxygen. Earth is not a Venus. I would go with no change.

Do you know what plants do at night, you know, when there is no sun light? Do you know how they get their energy at night? Next time you talk about plants producing oxygen, keep in mind that the oxygen that they produce during the day is consumed at night.

 

[Smidlee]

Do you know what plants do at night, you know, when there is no sun light? Do you know how they get their energy at night? Next time you talk about plants producing oxygen, keep in mind that the oxygen that they produce during the day is consumed at night.

So you disagree with this statement "Photosynthesis accounts for 98% of the world's atmospheric oxygen" Obviously plants has to produce more oxygen than they used (yes I knew that) or there wouldn't be any left for us to breathe.

 

[RickG]

CO2 is plant food. The major greenhouse gas on earth is water.

Yes, up to a certain point, however the natural carbon cycle is out of balance. And yes, water vapor is the most dominant GHG. However, water vapor is a feedback, not a forcing. The entire water vapor content turns over in 7 to 10 days.

Aside from that, most of the heating goes into the oceans as well as CO2. So the oceans are not only heating up as well, they are becoming acidified which is already causing stress on coral and foramanifera.

Gleckler et al. 2012, Domingues (2008), Ishii (2009), and Levitus (2009).

 

[Paradoxum]

I remember a study on a program (I think it was Nova) that showed increase CO2 levels causes the tested plants to grow faster which in turn produce more oxygen. Earth is not a Venus. I would go with no change.

Your right, Earth is not Venus!

And maybe plants do grow faster with more CO2. Not sure why that helps your argument. Nor does water vapour being the biggest greenhouse gas. It is CO2 that is increasing.

Just because a fireplace may heat a room up alot doesn't mean that body heat wont increase it some amount too.

 

[Loudmouth]

So you disagree with this statement "Photosynthesis accounts for 98% of the world's atmospheric oxygen" Obviously plants has to produce more oxygen than they used (yes I knew that) or there wouldn't be any left for us to breathe.

What does this have to do with the ability of CO2 to absorb heat in the atmosphere? Producing oxygen does not prevent CO2 from absorbing heat. The concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere continues to climb. The current level of 390 ppm is 30% higher than any previous atmospheric concentration in the 650,000 year old ice cores. Why the red herring about CO2 being plant food?

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Thaumaturgy 1890 ? no no no, that is just a recovery from the LIA and with sun cycle 25

I think you misunderstood him. The point was that the concept of anthropogenic global warming dates back to the 1890's.

we may be having another modern LIA

Umm, yeah! Another Little Ice Age!

Brrrrr!

Our climate is going to change its going to take a downturn in temperature mark my words.

Yes our climate is going to change just naturally. And yes humans can and have had a measurable impact on that climate. One doesn't make the other any less real.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

(delete)

 

[Greatcloud]

Hansen and Schmidt of NASA GISS under fire for climate stance: Engineers, scientists, astronauts ask NASA administration to look at empirical evidence rather than climate models | Watts Up With That?

Temperatures high but static since 2000 no rapid high increase in temps.

 

[Paradoxum]

Temperatures high but static since 2000 no rapid high increase in temps.

Must be false then?

Its not like things like this work on larger time frames or anything.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Hansen and Schmidt of NASA GISS under fire for climate stance: Engineers, scientists, astronauts ask NASA administration to look at empirical evidence rather than climate models | Watts Up With That?

Now all these astronauts and engineers need to do is convince the vast majority of climate scientists all over the world who have no connection whatsoever to NASA.

Temperatures high but static since 2000 no rapid high increase in temps.

Is that you know we're going into another LIA?

 

[Smidlee]

Global Warming is not about heat waves. Every scientist I heard talking about GW is referring to the average global temperatures increase a degree or two. So even if GW is true we wouldn't notice the difference in temperatures. For example here the high was 102 yesterday. 101 feels just as hot as 102 to me. Now something like ice there is a noticeable difference between 32 degrees and 33.

 

[RickG]

Global Warming is not about heat waves. Every scientist I heard talking about GW is referring to the average global temperatures increase a degree or two. So even if GW is true we wouldn't notice the difference in temperatures. For example here the high was 102 yesterday. 101 feels just as hot as 102 to me. Now something like ice there is a noticeable difference between 32 degrees and 33.

Your are quite correct, climate is a long term trend. In fact by definition it is the average of weather over a period of 30 years or more. But is GW true, what do you think?

Source: Comparing all the temperature records

 

[RickG]

Hansen and Schmidt of NASA GISS under fire for climate stance: Engineers, scientists, astronauts ask NASA administration to look at empirical evidence rather than climate models | Watts Up With That?

Temperatures high but static since 2000 no rapid high increase in temps.

Whoopeee! Another "appeal to authority" list.

You an Anthony Watts keep grasping for straws. All signatories on the list are retired from NASA. Not one single one has any connection with climate science, especially with NASA.

 

[Split Rock]

Greenhouse gases are not the cause of glaciers melting it's soot. Politicians are good at steering the public away from the real problem.
The only way to have any kind of affect on GW ( if it's totally man doing) is to destroying most of the world's population.

Actually, soot has been responsible for Global Dimming, which no one talks about. Global Dimming has reduced the amount of sunlight reaching the surface, and has contibuted to reducing Global Warming.

 

[Split Rock]

I already know why the glaciers are melting. It is because we are recovering from the LIA.

You didn't answer my question, did you?

 

[Greatcloud]

You didn't answer my question, did you?

Could you rephrase it because I HAVE answered it.

 

[Smidlee]

Actually, soot has been responsible for Global Dimming, which no one talks about. Global Dimming has reduced the amount of sunlight reaching the surface, and has contibuted to reducing Global Warming.

you are referring to aerosols which produces a haze.

 

[Halossellar]

Why does every layman think they can enlighten us about GW? Anyone want to have a go at disproving Bohr's model of the atom while you're at it? The vast majority of the scientists in the field that covers GW say it's happening. Even if you convince the rubes on this forum, what are we against the masses of scientists who know what they're talking about?

 

[Greatcloud]

Why does every layman think they can enlighten us about GW? Anyone want to have a go at disproving Bohr's model of the atom while you're at it? The vast majority of the scientists in the field that covers GW say it's happening. Even if you convince the rubes on this forum, what are we against the masses of scientists who know what they're talking about?

On the contrary there are a good number of scientist who disbelieve the GW theory , Richard Lindzen among them.

 

[RickG]

On the contrary there are a good number of scientist who disbelieve the GW theory , Richard Lindzen among them.

Richard Lindzen does not disbelieve the GW theory. He only argues about the level of climate sensitivity, as does Pielke Sr., John. Christy and Roy. Spencer.

When are you going to start looking at the "actual" science and what the actual climate scientists are saying instead of immersing yourself in sites and blogs run by people who are not climate scientists? When are you going to take your tin foil hat off.