Is Carbon Dioxide Just a Normal Part of the Atmosphere?

[JesusFollowerForever]

I agree I wanted to see people's reaction. I have seen very different data that is completely different than that fake AI. basically there is no correlation between co2 and sea levels.

It is just a good tool sometimes, I use it for grammar and text formatting mostly.

Blessings

 

[eclipsenow]

basically there is no correlation between co2 and sea levels.

Incorrect.
Try actual peer-reviewed science, not alt-right echo-chambers.

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

Incorrect.
Try actual peer-reviewed science, not alt-right echo-chambers.

I did already

 

[Aaron112]

Why would I believe that you know more than the scientists at MIT, for starters?

Jumping in without authorization: Some people know more than any scientists because the people are honest, truthful, listening to Jesus, and will not take a bribe, nor tell a lie.

 

[eclipsenow]

I did already

References please?

 

[dagothdecker]

You explained???

May I point out that I have cited four sources of information with links in this thread. You haven't cited any. Why would I believe that you know more than the scientists at MIT, for starters?

Followers of the false prophet. Their books full of lies written with money earned deceitfully.

 

[eclipsenow]

Followers of the false prophet. Their books full of lies written with money earned deceitfully.

Not at all! Many Climatologists are Christians like Catharine Hayhoe. She is an amazing witness in her work - and many environmental crusaders think of her as a hero. The UN gave her one of their highest awards - “United Nations Champion of the Earth!” https://www.amazon.com.au/Saving-Us-Climate-Scientists-Healing/dp/1982143835

She says there are solid biblical reasons to GET STUCK INTO climate activism even as a Christian longs for the new world. One day. We don’t know when. So we have a responsibility to hand over the world to our kids better than the way we inherited it. My friend Dr John Dickson interviews Catharine Hayhoe here. I hope American evangelicals can really listen to this message. Good Earth

Activist Bill McKibben is also a Christian. The former head of the IPCC was a Christian. Where they receive money from is quite open. You've got this back to front!

It's Big Oil that are sponsoring climate denial, or firing their own climate scientists and burying the truth they uncovered for decades.

For example - From a Shell climate paper from 1989. (These climate scientists were then shushed up and fired.)

EG: "Africans would push into Europe, Chinese into the Soviet Union, Latins into the United States, Indonesians into Australia. Boundaries would count for little - overwhelmed by the numbers. Conflicts would abound. Civilisation could prove a fragile thing."​

Shell: Page 5, Confidential Group Planning PL89 SO1 - October 1989.​

'Bombshell' 1989 Shell Memo Features in New Court Filing Alleging Climate Deception​

 

[Dale]

Followers of the false prophet. Their books full of lies written with money earned deceitfully.

Then who is the false prophet they are following?

 

[dagothdecker]

Then who is the false prophet they are following?

A chain is built upon the information gathered. Everly link must have NO FAULT for the chain to be unbreakable. There is faith involved.

 

[eclipsenow]

A chain is built upon the information gathered. Everly link must have NO FAULT for the chain to be unbreakable. There is faith involved.

In a sense no - because we are discussing empirical science.
We can test some parts of this in any decent physics lab on the planet.

In a sense yes - because I'm not a scientist and have a social sciences background. But when I read the same interpretation of the data from every single National Academy of Science on the planet - and even see demonstrations from backyard physics like the "Mythbusters" - I can feel permission to 'believe' the evidence. Kind of like I feel permission to 'believe' the bible, given how many times liberal, sceptical historical types make certain claims of the bible - then archaeology justifies the bible again. (Like the Pool of Siloam laying unknown for 2000 years and then being discovered in my own daughter's lifetime!)

But back to climate.

What CO2 does is old science. Joseph Fourier figured out something in the atmosphere kept the earth warmer than the moon 200 years ago - Eunice Foote then narrowed it down to CO2 in 1856. you look up in a text book, like the boiling point of water at sea-level. Good luck to any conspiracy theorists trying to debunk this!

Variations of this next test can be replicated in any decent physics lab on the planet.

Mythbusters even ran a backyard test that confirmed it.

Do a little maths - and the CO2 is trapping 4 Hiroshima bombs worth of heat every second - but spread out across the entire planet. The basic physics of how CO2 traps heat is known. Where that extra heat goes and what it does to our atmosphere and oceans has been modelled and looks pretty dire.

We see glaciers melting, ice caps shrinking, seasons arriving earlier, record planetary temperatures that KEEP being broken by even higher temperatures, and the atmosphere ‘wetter’. (It carries 7% more water vapour for every degree C of warming.) Dry areas dry faster, and rainy areas dump deluges.

We see increasing famines and floods.

It also moves weather patterns, with some rain systems moving out to sea and missing the land.

It interacts with ENSO weirdly - sometimes throwing Australia into a freak drought like the 2019 fires, and other times throwing us into years of La Nina - with freak floods. Sydney had more rain in one weekend than all the other capital cities get in a YEAR!

Weather fluctuates - much like a young toddler playing in the bath water and making waves. Measure the waves and they go up and down, equalising over time. Climate is the fact that someone left the tap on. The last few decades have not been normal. We’re breaking all the records. People that deny this are … well, deniers. But they’re gradually getting older and dying out. Younger minds in school have the time to see CO2 trap heat - and learn how this works. Older minds are … older. Oh well. It’s always been the way.

 

[Dale]

A chain is built upon the information gathered. Everly link must have NO FAULT for the chain to be unbreakable. There is faith involved.

You didn't answer the question. If scientists are following a "false prophet," who is the false prophet?
Science is based on observation, not faith. As I said in the OP:
<< Carbon dioxide is O=C=O, oxygen double bond carbon, double bond oxygen. The carbon-oxygen double bond absorbs infrared rays on a wavelength crucial to the earth’s climate. Machines are in use every day that make use of this fact, namely infrared spectrometers. >>

 

[dagothdecker]

You are clearly a very intelligent person.

 

[The Barbarian]

How dangerous is Dihydrogen Oxide by comparison? It is also known as Dihydrogen Monoxide and as Hydric Acid.

It kills tens of thousands of people every year.

 

[The Barbarian]

It's all about balance. Carbon dioxide is not the most efficient greenhouse gas. It's just the one that's increasing rapidly in the atmosphere now. It has a disproportionate effect because of that, and because it absorbs infrared radiation at wavelengths that other greenhouse gases do not.

 

[eclipsenow]

How dangerous is Dihydrogen Oxide by comparison? It is also known as Dihydrogen Monoxide and as Hydric Acid.

You're using that example out of context. It's used to show how a science-y sounding name can scare people so they don't think about the old correlation vs causation. "Did you know Dihydrogen Monoxide is in most cases of breast cancer?" They shouldn't be worried about the chemical-sounding name - but the fact that the question uses the vague 'is in'.

But we KNOW what CO2's effective properties are. We've known since Eunice Foote discovered it in 1856. It's something you look up in an old physics textbook - and to use the Dihydrogen Monoxide meme to try and cast doubt on this is to reveal ignorance. And I say all this as someone with a Social Sciences background who is only vaguely aware of what all this means. Basically - if even I know this - then anyone interested in the subject should know it!

 

[chevyontheriver]

You're using that example out of context.

It is entirely WITHIN the context.

It's used to show how a science-y sounding name can scare people so they don't think about the old correlation vs causation.

It has nothing to do with correlation vs causation. It is an illustration of how science-y stuff can scare people into not acting rationally. Dihydrogen monoxide is of course just water. It is responsible for damage in floods and monsoons, and people drown in it, and people get steam burns and all kinds of things. But try to live without it ....

In the same way Carbon Dioxide is necessary to life. Without sufficient CO2 in your lungs your body doesn't get the signal to breathe. Plants die without it. It puts out fires. It's necessary. Just not too much of it. Which is typical of many things. We need some of it but not too much.

But we KNOW what CO2's effective properties are. We've known since Eunice Foote discovered it in 1856. It's something you look up in an old physics textbook - and to use the Dihydrogen Monoxide meme to try and cast doubt on this is to reveal ignorance.

The only ignorance revealed is that people who panic over CO2 can also panic over H2O when H2O is given an accurate but uncommon name.

And I say all this as someone with a Social Sciences background who is only vaguely aware of what all this means. Basically - if even I know this - then anyone interested in the subject should know it!

As an educated biologist who can diagram out carbon cycles in my sleep I don't expect everybody to know all about it, but most do anyway. And yet there are people who get over-hyped about Carbon Dioxide, even to the point of panic. It is a real greenhouse gas, as is by the way Dihydrogen Monoxide, and it's levels have risen since the Industrial Revolution. While we cannot control the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere we can have some small effect in reducing the burning of fossil fuels until the deep ocean can sequester some of that CO2.

 

[eclipsenow]

In the same way Carbon Dioxide is necessary to life. Without sufficient CO2 in your lungs your body doesn't get the signal to breathe. Plants die without it. It puts out fires. It's necessary. Just not too much of it. Which is typical of many things. We need some of it but not too much.

Apologies - I completely missed your tone.
I hear you!

The only ignorance revealed is that people who panic over CO2 can also panic over H2O when H2O is given an accurate but uncommon name.

As an educated biologist who can diagram out carbon cycles in my sleep I don't expect everybody to know all about it, but most do anyway. And yet there are people who get over-hyped about Carbon Dioxide, even to the point of panic. It is a real greenhouse gas, as is by the way Dihydrogen Monoxide, and it's levels have risen since the Industrial Revolution. While we cannot control the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere we can have some small effect in reducing the burning of fossil fuels until the deep ocean can sequester some of that CO2.