Study finds that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant

Discussion in 'Environment & Conservation' started by Josephwalker, Feb 12, 2018.

  1. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    3,672
    Likes Received:
    366
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Exactly....
    Without science, creationists would find it impossible to spread their version of their word of god. Missionaries can’t fly anywhere and satillite communication technology is too “scientific.” The world of creationism is a world filled with hypocracy. Nearly all will seek a cancer cure or biotics or science based help in time of need, after dialing 911 on their smart phones.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2018
  2. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    3,672
    Likes Received:
    366
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2018
  3. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    8,009
    Likes Received:
    3,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We don't deny the science we "deny" the hypothesis. Big difference.
     
  4. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    3,672
    Likes Received:
    366
    Trophy Points:
    83
    That IS the science. No difference.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2018
  5. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    8,009
    Likes Received:
    3,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wrong. The science is additional levels of C02 in a controlled environment raise temperature. AGW is a hypothesis that postulates that science is transferable to Earth's dynamic and far from closed environment and a rise in C02 levels will have the same test tube results. The hypothesis fails test after test but true believers doggedly hang on.


    Works in a jar so it must work in the Earth's atmosphere. LOL


    Global warming in a jar

    "Perhaps you have heard of the greenhouse effect. In a greenhouse, short-wave radiation from
    sunlight passes freely through the glass and is converted to long-wave radiation inside. But the
    long-wave radiation cannot pass back out through the glass. The result is a build-up of heat
    inside the greenhouse from the captured solar energy. Certain gases in Earth’s atmosphere –
    especially water vapor and carbon dioxide – act in much the same way as the glass in a
    greenhouse. We call this situation the greenhouse effect, and we call these gases the
    greenhouse gases, because of their ability to trap energy from sunlight. Most greenhouse gases
    occur naturally, but some are being added to the atmosphere because of human actions.
    Global warming refers to the rise in temperatures at Earth’s surface and lower atmosphere over
    the last century. Most scientists believe that greenhouse gases produced by human activity are
    contributing to global warming. The danger in this warming is that it could disrupt Earth’s climate
    patterns, cause coastal flooding, and force major adjustments in the way people live. The more
    we are able to learn about the causes and effects of global warming, the better prepared we may
    be to deal with the possible consequences of a changing environment.
    In this set of experiments you will use models of Earth’s atmosphere to see how it is warmed by
    sunlight. You will also discover how lakes and seas affect this warming by storing and releasing
    energy from the sun.
    Materials: Large pickle jars, smaller jelly jar, laboratory thermometers, white cardboard, sheets of
    8½” × 11” white paper, transparent tape, clear plastic wrap, rubber bands, water, anti-fog
    solution, timer or clock, activity log sheet, graph sheet, question-and-answer sheet.
    Preparation: This activity requires a location where there is direct sunlight for a sustained period
    of time. The experiments use three different models for Earth’s atmosphere, as shown below.
    Two different experiments are presented, each experiment using a different pair of models:

    Experiment 1: Models A and B, where A is the control, and the cover (B) is the variable.
    Experiment 2: Models B and C, where B is the control, and water (C) is the variable.
    Your teacher will tell you which experiments to do and which models to use. Directions for
    building the models are given on the next page. Note: Prepare each model out of direct sunlight"

    Global Warming in a Jar - Yale Peabody Museum of Natural History
    PDFYale University › peabody › education
     
  6. iamanonman

    iamanonman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    3,595
    Likes Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Which test puts the proverbial nail in the coffin that proves CO2 and other gas species do not warm the surface and atmosphere of a planet? And how does that test explain Earth's +33K deviation and Venus' +500K deviation from an idealized black-body emitter? In other words, if atmospheres do not trap heat then what is it that is trapping the heat?
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2018
  7. iamanonman

    iamanonman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    3,595
    Likes Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Which hypothesis are you denying? That Earth is warming or that our atmospheric composition is the cause? And which lines of evidence are you using to support that position?
     
  8. Beer w/Straw

    Beer w/Straw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2017
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    328
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Female
    What would the global temperature of Mercury be if it didn't have it's atmosphere ripped to shreds?

    https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/space/solar-system/mercury/
    :sun:
     
  9. iamanonman

    iamanonman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    3,595
    Likes Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And here's another interesting fact about Venus. It's surface temperature is warmer than that of Mercury despite it receiving only 25% of the solar radiation. And even more oddly Venus' upper atmosphere is cooler than here on Earth despite it receiving 100% more solar radiation. This is the exact effect you would expect. Namely that atmospheres with greenhouse gas species trap the heat closer to the surface and keep the upper atmosphere relatively cool. This same effect is happening on Earth as well. The lower troposphere is warming while the stratosphere is cooling as we increase the proportion of greenhouse gas species in the atmosphere. This is THE smoking gun evidence that CO2 and other GHGs are responsible because no other process can explain this vertical temperature profile behavior. And this fact comes (in part) from the guys running the UAH satellite dataset project which are well known climate change skeptics. If you deny that this is happening then you are a science denier...err...I mean anti-science ideologue.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2018
    tecoyah and Beer w/Straw like this.
  10. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    8,009
    Likes Received:
    3,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sorry but you'll have to rephrase your question. I won't play your game.
     
  11. iamanonman

    iamanonman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    3,595
    Likes Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Which of the two primary hypothesis of AGW do you "deny". Note that I put deny in quotes because that was exactly the word you used. So if you had an issue with it then I trust you would have used a different word. But, so as to make the question less edgy let me make the final rephrasing this:

    Which of the two primary hypothesis of AGW do you reject? Is it the one about the Earth warming? Or is it the one about humans being primarily responsible?
     
  12. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    8,009
    Likes Received:
    3,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sorry I won't play your game and let you label me a denier by accepting the premise of your question. If you'll notice I put the word in quotes in my previous post to draw attention to the fact that you label anyone who does not accept your hypothesis as a denier. Try again without playing games. Might I suggest asking what I find about your hypothesis to be false unproven and in fact a failure in real world test.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2018
  13. Beer w/Straw

    Beer w/Straw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2017
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    328
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Female
    You know Earth, Venus and Mercury were mentioned.

    Earth and Venus have dense enough atmospheres from gravity whereas Mercury is just to close to the Sun that it got torn apart by solar winds. Hence, Earth and Venus can still be counted as closed systems in this way, just not Mercury. So, your idea is wrong.

    Would you also like to talk about whether the universe, or just the the observable universe as an open or closed system?
     
  14. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    3,672
    Likes Received:
    366
    Trophy Points:
    83
    It’s ooppokk''li
    This is real simple. You mention Yale just to what ? Legitimize your denial.
    Here is a one of many summaries of Yale on climate change.
    https://yibs.yale.edu/climate-change
    Just mention any accredited institute of higher learning and their position will be similar. It’s laughable that deniers think they are smarter then every institute of this type in the world.
    Think of it . There are no people in this entire world who have a degree from an accredited university that sides with deniers. Now just think of that. Even Trump, the biggest laughing stock of deniers, has a degree from an institution that stakes its reputation on the legitimate science of climate change.
    https://www.sustainability.upenn.edu/sites/default/files/downloads/Penn Climate Action Plan 2.0 - Executive Summary.pdf
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2018
  15. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    3,672
    Likes Received:
    366
    Trophy Points:
    83
    The percent of republicans who believe in man made climate change has increased by 19% in the last two years. Conservative deniers at some point will be an embarsssing minority in their own party.
     
  16. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    8,009
    Likes Received:
    3,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you think earths atmosphere and all the things that go on with this planet are comparable to a mason jar experiment your idea is wrong.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2018
  17. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    8,009
    Likes Received:
    3,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So in your opinion the mason jar experiment is conclusive and proves the AGW hypothesis. OK :lol:
     
  18. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    3,672
    Likes Received:
    366
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Wow....the mason jar experiment.They is no reference and no proof of any of your gibberish. It’s unreadable and nonsensical and no one can make any connection between your post and Yale’s official positon on climate change is, which is all that matters.
    What point are you making ?
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2018
  19. Beer w/Straw

    Beer w/Straw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2017
    Messages:
    867
    Likes Received:
    328
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Female
    It can be that simple you know. One kind of molecule, or even just one atom.

    Would the universe exist or be as it is without say, hydrogen?
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2018
  20. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    8,009
    Likes Received:
    3,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The earth is not comparable to a mason jar and no it can't be that simple.
     

Share This Page