How can you really take the alarmists seriously? Surely by this time you are in danger of too much heat? Comeon. What is ill informed is to tell me it was fine at 200 ppm and dangerous at 400. As I proved in the money example, it is so tiny as to really do nothing at all. The best climate scientists keep saying this.
Doubling the amount of CO2, no matter how small the initial amount, will raise global average surface temperatures by about 2 degrees.
Look, you listen to the Democratic party politicians. I listen to scientists. I offered for you to study deserts with me. But you refuse. I know why too. I am correct.
We can see if doubling the Carbon Dioxide raises temperatures by studying all the global deserts. Join me.
Well, "pretending" I'm right consists of simply acknowledging physics, but okay. Yes, summer is warmer than winter. No, that really doesn't address the problem.
Or you can do the same experiments that we've done since the 1800s and see it for yourself. I'll link you to a kit if you'd like.
I have decided to sign up at the Dr. Judith Curry site so I can contact her. A man that worked for NOAA .... best to read his introduction https://judithcurry.com/2017/02/04/climate-scientists-versus-climate-data/ So, we are not dealing with some amateur. I will give you part and you can check him out.
Feel free to give me the physics since I studied Physics (top grades) in both high school and in college.
Which was how long ago?? Mate - remember me trying to explain diffusion?? Same difference here - you really have to expand your basic understanding of the primary principles of physics as it applies to CO2 before wading in with even pathetic straw man arguments like the OP Do you know what a strawman argument is? It is a logical fallacy where someone sets up an argument surrounding a point that really has nothing to do with the actual topic they then attack that point claiming victory
Because that 2 degrees is AVERAGE Now let me explain AVERAGE - means you add up all the individual temperatures and divide by the number of temperatures that you measured How does that affect global temps - well more energy in the system = more extreme weather Longer droughts, harder rainfalls, bigger floods more intense jet streams leading to colder artic winters which will be shorter but more intense It will also lead to heat waves (which Australia has just suffered) that will kill hundreds Oh! And we are losing our coral reefs - world wide
You can start here if you are interested in learning about it: You are still trying to change the subject to regional weather? The straw is getting moldy at this point.
sorry mate but that straw is long past mouldy and into decomposed I keep thinking of the term "flailing around"
CO2 is the main greenhouse gas, as H2O is constantly evaporating and condensing on a regular basis. CO2 is much more static as its not changing states.
That cracks me up. I have studied this topic starting in 1980. I took a full course mandated by FAA and was not concerned at all until Democrats started bringing this up. That was when Clinton was president. They had their hair on fire even 20 years ago. I expected the planet to be burned to a crisp by this time. I notice you refuse to study the deserts and report back your personal findings on the deserts hottest day of record. I don't blame you for ducking that one. It does not prove man made global warming. I can suggest also you study China and India since they have extremes of CO2.
CO2 happens to be a heavier than air gas. I realize objects do move and thus disperse the heavier than air gas, but when you toss up a ball into the air, does it disperse with the gas or fall back to Earth?
And is still a report which has **** all to do with climate change because a submarine is a climate controlled environment.