President Signs Climate Change Bill

[FireDragon76]

Well at least you have admitted it has an atmosphere now.

In spite of the fact that it is farther from the sun, it still warmed at the same rate as earth. And this with an atmosphere that is 94% carbon dioxide. By comparing the two we can see that a planet with an atmosphere almost totally comprised of a so called greenhouse gas did not warm at a higher rate than earth, though it did warm. If carbon dioxide was a factor in warming, mars would have burned up before our eyes. The earth has just .040% carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. that's less than one half of one tenth of a percent of the total atmosphere and that amount represents a one hundredth of a percent increase in recent history of the total amount of our atmosphere. Had this truly had the effect that is claimed, mars would have been a fireball given the amount of C02 in its atnosphere. C02 has absolutely nothing to do with the earth's temperature. There isn't enough of it to cause a temperature increase.

Mars is farther from the Sun than the Earth, getting less solar radiation, and has a thinner atmosphere due to lower gravity, so your comparison is not valid.

 

[keith99]

By definition, if the climate changes regardless of what humans do, then there is nothing to deal with. Carbon makes up less than on one hundredth of one percent of the atmosphere and that is even after we've pumped carbon into the atmosphere through industrial means and there is a marked increase by volume.

The amount of carbon in the atmosphere is statistically insignificant by all scientific standards.

You are of by a factor of 4 (at least) and clearly have no idea o what statistical significance entails.

 

[keith99]

Well at least you have admitted it has an atmosphere now.

In spite of the fact that it is farther from the sun, it still warmed at the same rate as earth. And this with an atmosphere that is 94% carbon dioxide. By comparing the two we can see that a planet with an atmosphere almost totally comprised of a so called greenhouse gas did not warm at a higher rate than earth, though it did warm. If carbon dioxide was a factor in warming, mars would have burned up before our eyes. The earth has just .040% carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. that's less than one half of one tenth of a percent of the total atmosphere and that amount represents a one hundredth of a percent increase in recent history of the total amount of our atmosphere. Had this truly had the effect that is claimed, mars would have been a fireball given the amount of C02 in its atnosphere. C02 has absolutely nothing to do with the earth's temperature. There isn't enough of it to cause a temperature increase.

And just how is Mars supposed to be warmed at the same rate as Earth?

BTW it is not percentage of CO2 that matters but the partial pressure of CO2. That it is not the percentage should be obvious as if there was only one molecule of CO2 making up the atmosphere of Mars or some other planet then the percentage would be 100% but the impact of that 'atmosphere' would effectively be teh same as hard vacuum.

 

[keith99]

it's nearly impossible to prove that it's the .05% of Co2 in the atmosphere causing the 1.8% warming, over the 75% water vapor in the atmosphere. It's all just about funding environomental policy not about facts.

Source for water vapor making up 75% of the atmosphere?

 

[keith99]

In terms of percentages it sure does. If a thing is so small that it has no possibility of affecting the outcome, it is statistically insignificant.

That is NOT what the term statistically insignificant means. You are not Tweedledumb who was allowed to decide on the meanings of words.

 

[Nithavela]

It's not just a small part of the atmosphere, it is so small as to be statistically insignificant. And it isn't a powerful green house gas even if it were a significant part of the atmosphere. In experiments, an atmosphere of 100% C02 does not increase the temperature of a heated enclosure by more than 4 degrees celsius. Yet scientists want to claim that the difference between .039% percent and .040% percent could raise the temperature of the entire atmosphere by 1 degree Celsius. That math is impossible. It cannot be.

Though this experiment is demonstrative that C02 retains more heat than normal air, the real experiment would be to increase the C02 level of the plain air enclosure at tiny increments to see just how much of an increase would cause the first significant sign of temperature increase.

I'll take that as a no.

 

[GOD Shines Forth!]

It should actually bother you that are making things up - you are effectively bearing false witness.

False witness = opinions you do not like. You have ZERO proof that I am wrong, only your own opinion of others' opinions.

You have no evidence - at least no credible evidence for this claim.

You have no evidence for yours, only their say-so and your faith in it.

And it seems to bother you not one whit that you are offering no actual evidence to support this claim.

I don't play the internet factoid game. It is futile. Pre-digested claptrap meant to shut up the opposition. I do post Scripture sometimes and even that isn't enough for some. Scripture is how I make sense of the demonic nonsense in the world. A few here resonate with my posts, and that is enough. Can't please em all.

Unsupported speculation.

Otherwise known as an opinion. Mine, not some factoid mill's.

 

[dufrianord]

The president signed a bill acknowledging climate change. Good for him. As the climate changes we will need to develope programs and things to deal with it. I've been saying this for a long time. We can't change it. It's inevitable because the climate always changes. And we as humans have to adjust to it. Instead of wringing our hands and trying to create drastic changes in order to stop it, we should be working towards finding ways to deal with it.

https://www.architectmagazine.com/p...dges-the-negative-effects-of-climate-change_o

Trump is betraying the Americans on point after point!! They must be the less believer in man made climate change and he signs what exactly? Blaming the American people for the climate is changing?

He did it 2017 sorry I heave to read more before replying won’t happen again

 

[Skreeper]

Do 97% of Climate Scientists Really Agree? - YouTube

Here's a little trivia for you science deniers:

PragerU is funded by the Koch brothers. And these guys are investing heavily to spin the narritive about fossil fuels since their business is threatened by the rise of the renewable energy sector.

Now please never post anything ever again by PragerU when it comes to climate science.

 

[Al Touthentop]

That is NOT what the term statistically insignificant means. You are not Tweedledumb who was allowed to decide on the meanings of words.

It's exactly what it means. You have to factor out possibilities in your analysis. The sun provides 99% of all the heat that enters the earth's atmosphere. You're trying to defend the idea that an element so small within the atmosphere as to be classified a trace gas, can have more effect on the warming of the earth than the sun itself. It's not possible. The idea is absurd. C02 is statistically insignificant when all of the other elements are factored in. Even water vapor, known to have more significant effects at any scale dwarfs C02 in significance.

The earth might be warming, though even those numbers have been fudged including the alleged colder periods during the turn of the 20th century, so as to make the increase look more extreme. The temperatures during the warmer periods have been fudged also. The top three organizations that report these numbers have been recently busted. I've provided a link to the original study up the thread so that nobody has to visit Breitbart.

But I'll concede that there could have been warming since 1915 or so and it still wouldn't speak as to the cause of that warming. C02 cannot cause warming even if we all breathed the stuff and like mars our planet was 94% of the stuff.

And guess what? Does NASA conclude that because of the huge amount of C02 in mars' atmosphere that it's own warming was caused by this evil and dangerous gas which threatens our very lives? NO! Crazy! It's the wind and dust which causes the planet to reflect or absorb more heat from.....wait for it.....the SUN! In spite of all that C02, the sun is STILL the only source of heat on mars! Crazy talk!

"To determine the extent of surface changes on Mars, scientists took images from the Viking (launched 1975) and Mars Global Surveyor (1996) satellite missions and mapped them into a climate model developed at NASA Ames Research Center. They discovered that a wind-whipped, dusty surface has a measurable effect on the amount of sunlight that is reflected by the planet."

“We know that warmer temperatures and increased wind strengths are near the darkened areas where less sunlight is reflected by the surface, and cooler temperatures and weakened winds generally correspond to brightened areas” explained Lori Fenton, the experiment’s principal investigator at NASA Ames Research Center, in California's Silicon Valley. “What we don’t understand is how these changes in the planet’s brightness affect the martian climate.”

NASA - A Gloomy Mars Warms Up

Quick! Somebody attack the source!

 

[Al Touthentop]

And just how is Mars supposed to be warmed at the same rate as Earth?

BTW it is not percentage of CO2 that matters but the partial pressure of CO2.

Well...gee...how would mars warm up at the same rate as the earth.....maybe it's that giant gas ball belching radiation at all of the planets in the solar system?

Partial pressure? Is that even a thing? I have not read a single paper on climate change even mentioning the "partial pressure" of C02. What sort of pressure are you talking about? Barometric pressure?

That it is not the percentage should be obvious as if there was only one molecule of CO2 making up the atmosphere of Mars or some other planet then the percentage would be 100% but the impact of that 'atmosphere' would effectively be teh same as hard vacuum.

Listen. Could you try this again in English? This sentence is not even comprehensible.

 

[Al Touthentop]

You are of by a factor of 4 (at least) and clearly have no idea o what statistical significance entails.

English is your second language? How am I off by a factor of four?

 

[Al Touthentop]

I'll take that as a no.

I'll take that as a you didn't understand a word of that post.

 

[Nithavela]

I'll take that as a you didn't understand a word of that post.

You do that.

 

[sesquiterpene]

Well...gee...how would mars warm up at the same rate as the earth.....maybe it's that giant gas ball belching radiation at all of the planets in the solar system?

Partial pressure? Is that even a thing?

Seriously, do you not realize that Mars is farther than the Earth from the Sun, and thus receives less sunlight?

Your knowledge of science seems to be statistically insignificant.

 

[Nithavela]

Seriously, do you not realize that Mars is farther than the Earth from the Sun, and thus receives less sunlight?

Your knowledge of science seems to be statistically insignificant.

I'll have to remember this insult.

 

[Skreeper]

Your knowledge of science seems to be statistically insignificant.

 

[expos4ever]

Partial pressure? Is that even a thing?

Ah, American (I presume) high schools.....

Partial pressure should have been taught to you at the high school level. In fairness, perhaps for you, like me, high school was a long time ago.

 

[expos4ever]

False witness = opinions you do not like. You have ZERO proof that I am wrong, only your own opinion of others' opinions.

Wow.

Let's review. You posted this:

The push behind "climate crisis" is enormous and well funded.

You made this up - it is an invention of your own imagination. Or, you heard it from someone and uncritically accepted it as truth. Either way, it is an untruth, a falsehood, a lie.

So how do you respond? Knowing, of course, that you have no evidence for your assertion, you dress it up as an "opinion" and turn the tables, suggesting I am intolerant of other people's opinion.

This is, in keeping with this thread, deeply misleading and here is why: when discussing matters of fact - questions of what is really going on in the world - "opinions" are useless. What matters are claims that can be substantiated with evidence.

There is a tacit social contract in a "discussion and debate" thread about climate change - facts are what matter, not "opinions".

Imagine a scientific conference where Professor Jones gets up and claims "bananas cause lung cancer". When challenged to support this claim, the good professor claims that he is just stating his "opinion".

He would be, rightly, laughed off the stage.

And finally, you made the claim about the climate crisis being essentially a well-funded hoax, it is up to you to defend this claim. It is not up to me to find evidence that you are mistaken.

Burden of proof is with the claimant.

 

[GOD Shines Forth!]

Wow.

That’s what I thought when reading your charge. I don’t work pro bono. Legal briefs are going to cost you...a LOT. Opinions are free!