Who still takes global warming seriously?

Despite the recent discovery of the e-mails that resulted in "Climate Gate" and the fact this has been one of the coldest and harshest winters in many years, Gov. Full Story
2 manygoats

Albuquerque, NM

#31007 Jan 18, 2013
GOP on the brink of irrelevance.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/23/opinion/sun... ;
2 manygoats

Albuquerque, NM

#31008 Jan 18, 2013
Denial is pretty strange....when facts are exposed.

http://thinkprogress.org/tag/climate-change-d...
PHD

Overton, TX

#31009 Jan 18, 2013
The GOP and Blue Dogs are already there.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#31010 Jan 18, 2013
2 manygoats wrote:
OMG! Denial is more than convenient.....it's easy.
Science can help us .....if we let it......if we deny it, well, the damage is mounting.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/01/11/1...
Help us? Science put us in this climate mess!
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#31011 Jan 18, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
SUX/Gord
You are once again good at screaming & calling people names, but do not understand physics as well as you think you do. As I predicted, you could NOT admit how WRONG you are. I am amused but not surprised.
You said
"...- Have YOU actually READ Dr. Roy Spencer's articles including the RESULTS of his experiment?
- Where has ANY MEASUREMENT, in the HISTORY OF MANKIND, shown that a Cold Object HAS EVER HEATED a Warmer Object, clearly defined in the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics as being NOT POSSIBLE?..."
I haven't read all of Dr Spencer's work, but have read some of it. He is considerably smarter than you are, but no less deceptive. He lies & distorts whenever he can. He is a creationist who is, at his core, PROFOUNDLY anti-scientific. His ideology is that AGW/CC is wrong, then he tries to find data that fit that Weltanschauung. His predictions for the climate have been profoundly wrong in the past.
What measurements support the FACT that a cold atmosphere can help warm the earth? Start with what John Tyndall did in the mid-19th century. He discovered that various gases in the atmosphere absorbed, then re-emitted, infrared radiation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tyndall
You should also try to understand radiative forcing, the mechanism by which a colder atmosphere can help the sun warm the earth. You should also try to read & understand spectroscopy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiative_forcin...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectroscopy
(As always, Wiki is just the starting point. It is clear, though, that you don't understand the simplest ideas in Wiki, let alone the more complex ones found in their listed references. Read before you comment.)
The fact is that the VARIOUS TRANSITIONS measured in spectroscopy are INDEPENDENT OF TEMPERATURE. This is why hydrogen has certain spectroscopic lines of absorption (& re-emission) at ~300º K in the lab. On the sun, where temps are closer to ~6000º K, there are higher energies, so there are lots more lines at higher frequencies. But the LOWER ENERGY FREQUENCIES ARE THE SAME as in the lab. That's why spectroscopy works.
Helium got its name from the Greek word for sun, helios, because its spectrum was discovered by spectroscopy. After helium was discovered on the earth (where it is unusual), its lower energy frequencies could be seen in the lab as well.
The frequencies where molecular magnetic dipole transitions occur do not depend on temperature. Upon being heated by EMR from the sun, especially at visible light frequencies, the earth emits IR EMR. Some of that IR EMR causes molecular magnetic dipole transitions in greenhouse gases. As those nuclei "relax" they re-emit IR EMR in all directions. Some of that is directed toward the earth, further warming it.
This DOES NOT VIOLATE THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS. In fact, molecular motion (heat) is still being transmitted from warmer to colder parts of the earth & atmosphere according to the 2nd law. That heat DOES NOT CHANGE SPECTROSCOPIC TRANSITIONS, including those that happen to GHGs with IR EMR.
Why don't you try reading more before you call me & others "babbling idiots"?
I believe it's them Van Allen belts that are causing all this warming. Has any scientists checked them laytly.

This might be what happened right before Earth became te planet of the apes. As in the eponymous movie.

If we all just shoot off into space, we won't have to worry about all this.

I love listening to two trolls fighting....

ER, not you, laptopicus, but PHuD and SuxObama.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#31012 Jan 18, 2013
I believe it's them Van Allen belts that are causing all this warming. Has any scientists checked them laytly.

This might be what happened right before Earth became te planet of the apes. As in the eponymous movie.

If we all just shoot off into space, we won't have to worry about all this.

I love listening to two trolls fighting....

Not you, laptopicus, but those two idiots, GORED and PHuD.
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31013 Jan 18, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
SUX/Gord
You are once again good at screaming & calling people names, but do not understand physics as well as you think you do. As I predicted, you could NOT admit how WRONG you are. I am amused but not surprised.
You said
"...- Have YOU actually READ Dr. Roy Spencer's articles including the RESULTS of his experiment?
- Where has ANY MEASUREMENT, in the HISTORY OF MANKIND, shown that a Cold Object HAS EVER HEATED a Warmer Object, clearly defined in the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics as being NOT POSSIBLE?..."
I haven't read all of Dr Spencer's work, but have read some of it. He is considerably smarter than you are, but no less deceptive. He lies & distorts whenever he can. He is a creationist who is, at his core, PROFOUNDLY anti-scientific. His ideology is that AGW/CC is wrong, then he tries to find data that fit that Weltanschauung. His predictions for the climate have been profoundly wrong in the past.
What measurements support the FACT that a cold atmosphere can help warm the earth? Start with what John Tyndall did in the mid-19th century. He discovered that various gases in the atmosphere absorbed, then re-emitted, infrared radiation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tyndall
You should also try to understand radiative forcing, the mechanism by which a colder atmosphere can help the sun warm the earth. You should also try to read & understand spectroscopy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiative_forcin...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectroscopy
(As always, Wiki is just the starting point. It is clear, though, that you don't understand the simplest ideas in Wiki, let alone the more complex ones found in their listed references. Read before you comment.)
The fact is that the VARIOUS TRANSITIONS measured in spectroscopy are INDEPENDENT OF TEMPERATURE. This is why hydrogen has certain spectroscopic lines of absorption (& re-emission) at ~300º K in the lab. On the sun, where temps are closer to ~6000º K, there are higher energies, so there are lots more lines at higher frequencies. But the LOWER ENERGY FREQUENCIES ARE THE SAME as in the lab. That's why spectroscopy works.
Helium got its name from the Greek word for sun, helios, because its spectrum was discovered by spectroscopy. After helium was discovered on the earth (where it is unusual), its lower energy frequencies could be seen in the lab as well.
The frequencies where molecular magnetic dipole transitions occur do not depend on temperature. Upon being heated by EMR from the sun, especially at blah blah
Once again, all you can do is RUN FOR THE HILLS and BABBLE more CULT-SPEAK.

Look I will explain it ONCE MORE for you and your Delusional AGW Cult.

You SAID:

"That is, THE ATMOSPHERE HELPS THE SUN WARM THE EARTH, even though it's significantly cooler than the surface. This is a scientific fact. There are not just thousands, but many millions, perhaps billions, of measurements that support this."

NOW, CAN YOU POST:

- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT, EVER DONE DONE, IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND WHERE ANY COLD OBJECT HAS EVER "HEATED-UP" A WARMER OBJECT ?
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT WHERE THE COLDER ATMOSPHERE HAS "HEATED-UP" A WARMER EARTH ?

I say these Measurements DO NOT EXIST and that YOU ARE A JUST ANOTHER AGW CULT LIAR.

So, Either POST THEM or ADMIT that YOU ARE A LIAR and these PHANTOM MEASUREMENTS DO NOT EXIST.

It's THAT SIMPLE, DUMBASS.

----------
Watch as Homo-ody has another Panic Attack and RUNS FOR THE HILLS because he was CONFRONTED with the TRUTH again.

Homo-ody and the rest of the AGW CULT can't post the Measurements they LIE ABOUT because THEY DO NOT EXIST.

So, they will call me every name under the Sun, post more CULT BABBLE but NONE OF THESE CULT IDIOTS will be able to POST those PHANTOM MEASUREMENTS.

Like ALL CULTS, the AGW CULT cannot stand it when their LIES are EXPOSED BY THE TRUTH.

For the Normal People reading this, WATCH and LEARN about the AGW CULT.
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31014 Jan 18, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
SUX/Gord
You are once again good at screaming & calling people names, but do not understand physics as well as you think you do. As I predicted, you could NOT admit how WRONG you are. I am amused but not surprised.
You said
"...- Have YOU actually READ Dr. Roy Spencer's articles including the RESULTS of his experiment?
- Where has ANY MEASUREMENT, in the HISTORY OF MANKIND, shown that a Cold Object HAS EVER HEATED a Warmer Object, clearly defined in the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics as being NOT POSSIBLE?..."
I haven't read all of Dr Spencer's work, but have read some of it. He is considerably smarter than you are, but no less deceptive. He lies & distorts whenever he can. He is a creationist who is, at his core, PROFOUNDLY anti-scientific. His ideology is that AGW/CC is wrong, then he tries to find data that fit that Weltanschauung. His predictions for the climate have been profoundly wrong in the past.
What measurements support the FACT that a cold atmosphere can help warm the earth? Start with what John Tyndall did in the mid-19th century. He discovered that various gases in the atmosphere absorbed, then re-emitted, infrared radiation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tyndall
You should also try to understand radiative forcing, the mechanism by which a colder atmosphere can help the sun warm the earth. You should also try to read & understand spectroscopy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiative_forcin...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectroscopy
(As always, Wiki is just the starting point. It is clear, though, that you don't understand the simplest ideas in Wiki, let alone the more complex ones found in their listed references. Read before you comment.)
The fact is that the VARIOUS TRANSITIONS measured in spectroscopy are INDEPENDENT OF TEMPERATURE. This is why hydrogen has certain spectroscopic lines of absorption (& re-emission) at ~300º K in the lab. On the sun, where temps are closer to ~6000º K, there are higher energies, so there are lots more lines at higher frequencies. But the LOWER ENERGY FREQUENCIES ARE THE SAME as in the lab. That's why spectroscopy works.
Helium got its name from the Greek word for sun, helios, because its spectrum was discovered by spectroscopy. After helium was discovered on the earth (where it is unusual), its lower energy frequencies could be seen in the lab as well.
The frequencies where molecular magnetic dipole transitions occur do not depend on temperature. blah blah
Once again, all you can do is RUN FOR THE HILLS and BABBLE more CULT-SPEAK.

Look I will explain it ONCE MORE for you and your Delusional AGW Cult.

You SAID:

"That is, THE ATMOSPHERE HELPS THE SUN WARM THE EARTH, even though it's significantly cooler than the surface. This is a scientific fact. There are not just thousands, but many millions,

perhaps billions, of measurements that support this."

NOW, CAN YOU POST:

- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT, EVER DONE DONE, IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND WHERE ANY COLD OBJECT HAS EVER "HEATED-UP" A WARMER OBJECT ?
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT WHERE THE COLDER ATMOSPHERE HAS "HEATED-UP" A WARMER EARTH ?

I say these Measurements DO NOT EXIST and that YOU ARE A JUST ANOTHER AGW CULT LIAR.

So, Either POST THEM or ADMIT that YOU ARE A LIAR and these PHANTOM MEASUREMENTS DO NOT EXIST.

It's THAT SIMPLE, DUMBASS.

----------
Watch as Homo-ody has another Panic Attack and RUNS FOR THE HILLS because he was CONFRONTED with the TRUTH again.

Homo-ody and the rest of the AGW CULT can't post the Measurements they LIE ABOUT because THEY DO NOT EXIST.

So, they will call me every name under the Sun, post more CULT BABBLE but NONE OF THESE CULT IDIOTS will be able to POST those PHANTOM MEASUREMENTS.

Like ALL CULTS, the AGW CULT cannot stand it when their LIES are EXPOSED BY THE TRUTH.

For the Normal People reading this, WATCH and LEARN about the AGW CULT.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#31015 Jan 18, 2013
ObamaSUX wrote:
<quoted text>
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT, EVER DONE DONE, IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND WHERE ANY COLD OBJECT HAS EVER "HEATED-UP" A WARMER OBJECT ?
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT WHERE THE COLDER ATMOSPHERE HAS "HEATED-UP" A WARMER EARTH ?
SUX-
Do you read English? Are you capable of that? I'll say this AGAIN:
I TOLD you, John Tyndall, in the middle of the 19th century, showed how infrared radiation could be absorbed & re-emitted by atmospheric gases. That process happens when the gas is COOLER than the ground.
The earth emits IR EMR (electromagnetic radiation), some of the gases in the atmosphere, REGARDLESS OF TEMPERATURE, absorb & re-emit some of that radiation back toward the ground, warming it. The atmosphere can be freezing cold, yet because of this absorption & re-emission of IR EMR, it can still help the sun warm the earth.
This DOES NOT VIOLATE THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS. PERIOD.
The FREQUENCIES one sees in spectroscopic measurements are not particularly affected by temperature. If you do spectroscopic measurements of a hot object like the sun, you see higher energies & "more lines," but the low energy lines are at the same frequency as you see at room temp in the lab. That's why spectroscopy works.
Did you read about spectroscopy? Did you read about radiative forcing? Did you read about John Tyndall?
Or was he part of the "AGW cult"? Keep in mind he died in 1893. Maybe Svante Arrhenius (look him up) was also part of the "cult"? He died in 1927.
You can call me an idiot, or a moron, or a cultist, all in capitals, as many times as you want, but that doesn't make any of those things true. Why don't you try to read before you post?
Scientific facts are true no matter how many times YOU claim they aren't.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#31016 Jan 18, 2013
SUX,

Again, you can call me a dumbass idiot in capitals as much as you want, but it won't change scientific FACTS.

Did you actually READ the links I provided to you? Let's post them again. You're at your computer & have internet access. You're certainly capable of calling people names in English, maybe you can actually READ it also, IDK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tyndall

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiative_forcin...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectroscopy

Let's thrown in a few more for good measure. If you read these carefully, you MIGHT actually understand a bit of the science. You'll know more than just insulting names to call people. You might actually LEARN something! Just think!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svante_Arrhenius

Again, there is still heat transfer from warmer to cooler parts of the earth & atmosphere, as one would expect from the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Once AGAIN: cooler temps do NOT prevent the transitions one sees spectroscopically, in this case at the IR EMR energy level. A cold atmospheric gas can absorb IR EMR from the ground & re-emit it in all directions, some of which goes back to the ground, further warming it.

AGAIN: this does NOT violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics. It is a different process. It is not molecular motion (heat).

You can deny it a million times if you want, but you'll still be wrong. This science has been known for more than 150 years.

Scientific facts are true. You are wrong.
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31017 Jan 19, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
SUX-
Do you read English? Are you capable of that? I'll say this AGAIN:
I TOLD you, John Tyndall, in the middle of the 19th century, showed how infrared radiation could be absorbed & re-emitted by atmospheric gases. That process happens when the gas is COOLER than the ground.
The earth emits IR EMR (electromagnetic radiation), some of the gases in the atmosphere, REGARDLESS OF TEMPERATURE, absorb & re-emit some of that radiation back toward the ground, warming it. The atmosphere can be freezing cold, yet because of this absorption & re-emission of IR EMR, it can still help the sun warm the earth.
This DOES NOT VIOLATE THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS. PERIOD.
blah blah
Just as I PREDICTED the AGW CULT LIAR COULD NOT POST:

- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT, EVER DONE DONE, IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND WHERE ANY COLD OBJECT HAS EVER "HEATED-UP" A WARMER OBJECT
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT WHERE THE COLDER ATMOSPHERE HAS "HEATED-UP" A WARMER EARTH

Instead, as I PREDICTED, He just posted MORE CULT BABBLE.

It's THAT SIMPLE to EXPOSE THESE AGW CULT LIARS.

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
----------
WTF does John Tyndall's 19th Century work have to do with ANY MEASUREMENT WHERE THE COLDER ATMOSPHERE HAS EVER "HEATED-UP" A WARMER EARTH ???

Don't YOU KNOW that John Tyndall just showed that infrared is absorbed and emitted by atmospheric gasses.

John Tyndall DID NOT PRODUCE "ANY" MEASUREMENT "EVER", where the COLD ATMOSPHERE EMISSIONS EVER HEATED-UP A WARMER EARTH, YOU LYING AGW IDIOT!
----------
The COLD ATMOSHERIC EMISSIONS can ONLY BE RADIATED TO A COOLER OBJECT, like COLD SPACE, EXACTLY AS THE 2nd LAW STATES.

“Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is NOT POSSIBLE for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.”
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/th...

There is not:

- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT, EVER DONE DONE, IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND WHERE ANY COLD OBJECT HAS EVER "HEATED-UP" A WARMER OBJECT
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT WHERE THE COLDER ATMOSPHERE HAS "HEATED-UP" A WARMER EARTH

And THAT'S WHY YOU CAN'T POST "ANY" MEASUREMENT.

THAT INCLUDES YOUR LIE ABOUT JOHN TYNDALL WHO NEVER "EVER" MADE ANY SUCH MEASUREMENT !!!

THE MEASUREMENTS DO NOT EXIST and your "LIE" about there being "BILLIONS" of these MEASUREMENTS has been EXPOSED BY THE TRUTH....AGAIN.
----------
Like I said before:

"Watch as Homo-ody has another Panic Attack and RUNS FOR THE HILLS because he was CONFRONTED with the TRUTH again.

Homo-ody and the rest of the AGW CULT can't post the Measurements they LIE ABOUT because THEY DO NOT EXIST.

So, they will call me every name under the Sun, post more CULT BABBLE but NONE OF THESE CULT IDIOTS will be able to POST those PHANTOM MEASUREMENTS.

Like ALL CULTS, the AGW CULT cannot stand it when their LIES are EXPOSED BY THE TRUTH.

For the Normal People reading this, WATCH and LEARN about the AGW CULT."
------
Now you Normal People have WITNESSED the AGW CULT in action and Homo-ody WILL CONTINUE EXACTLY AS I JUST DESCRIBED ABOVE.

The AGW CULT behaviour is COMPLETELY PREDICTABLE, so WATCH and LEARN about the AGW CULT.
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31018 Jan 19, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
SUX,
Again, you can call me a dumbass idiot in capitals as much as you want, but it won't change scientific FACTS.
Did you actually READ the links I provided to you? Let's post them again. You're at your computer & have internet access. You're certainly capable of calling people names in English, maybe you can actually READ it also, IDK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tyndall
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiative_forcin...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectroscopy
Let's thrown in a few more for good measure. If you read these carefully, you MIGHT actually understand a bit of the science. You'll know more than just insulting names to call people. You might actually LEARN something! Just think!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svante_Arrhenius
Again, there is still heat transfer from warmer to cooler parts of the earth & atmosphere, as one would expect from the 2nd law of thermodynamics. blah blah
Yes, I read ALL your AGW CULT LINKS and THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE MEASUREMENT IN THEM !!!

What a SURPRISE!
----
Like I POSTED BEFORE:

"You SAID:

"That is, THE ATMOSPHERE HELPS THE SUN WARM THE EARTH, even though it's significantly cooler than the surface. This is a scientific fact. There are not just thousands, but many millions, perhaps billions, of measurements that support this."

NOW, CAN YOU POST:

- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT, EVER DONE DONE, IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND WHERE ANY COLD OBJECT HAS EVER "HEATED-UP" A WARMER OBJECT ?
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT WHERE THE COLDER ATMOSPHERE HAS "HEATED-UP" A WARMER EARTH ?

I say these Measurements DO NOT EXIST and that YOU ARE A JUST ANOTHER AGW CULT LIAR.

So, Either POST THEM or ADMIT that YOU ARE A LIAR and these PHANTOM MEASUREMENTS DO NOT EXIST.

It's THAT SIMPLE, DUMBASS."
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
----------
Homo-ody has once AGAIN shown that he is a LYING AGW CULT MEMBER.

Like I said before:

"Watch as Homo-ody has another Panic Attack and RUNS FOR THE HILLS because he was CONFRONTED with the TRUTH again.

Homo-ody and the rest of the AGW CULT can't post the Measurements they LIE ABOUT because THEY DO NOT EXIST.

So, they will call me every name under the Sun, post more CULT BABBLE but NONE OF THESE CULT IDIOTS will be able to POST those PHANTOM MEASUREMENTS.

Like ALL CULTS, the AGW CULT cannot stand it when their LIES are EXPOSED BY THE TRUTH.

For the Normal People reading this, WATCH and LEARN about the AGW CULT."
------
Now you Normal People have WITNESSED the AGW CULT in action AGAIN and Homo-ody WILL CONTINUE EXACTLY AS I HAVE DESCRIBED ABOVE.

The AGW CULT behaviour is COMPLETELY PREDICTABLE, so continue to WATCH and LEARN about the AGW CULT.
PHD

Overton, TX

#31019 Jan 19, 2013
More scientific science fiction. They really really don't know.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#31020 Jan 19, 2013
SUX,

You can capitalize all you want, & call me any names you want. You're just repeating your inanity. Your attitudes & posts don't change scientific fact.

Every single time temperature is measured in the upper atmosphere, where it's cold, & on the earth, where it's warm, PROVES I'm right & you're wrong. Tyndall's experiments show you why. This science has been known for more than 150 years.

The colder atmosphere can help the sun keep the earth warm by absorbing & re-emitting IR EMR. Why don't you try to read about the earth's atmosphere? This article has lots of information (& measurements) about how cold the earth's atmosphere gets, as low as -150º C at the mesopause. I'd imagine even you'd admit the earth's surface is generally quite a bit warmer than that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Ea...

Let's quote them:

"The atmosphere of Earth is a layer of gases surrounding the planet Earth that is retained by Earth's gravity. The atmosphere protects life on Earth by absorbing ultraviolet solar radiation, warming the surface through heat retention (greenhouse effect), and reducing temperature extremes between day and night (the diurnal temperature variation)."

Then let's look at the greenhouse effect:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effec...

"The greenhouse effect is a process by which thermal radiation from a planetary surface is absorbed by atmospheric greenhouse gases, and is re-radiated in all directions. Since part of this re-radiation is back towards the surface and the lower atmosphere, it results in an elevation of the average surface temperature above what it would be in the absence of the gases."

I quoted the 1st paragraph of each article. If you think those articles are written by "AGW cultists," then grow HALF a gonad & sign on there at Wiki. If you have facts & logic on your side, in the small-D democratic Wiki community you'll prevail.

But of course you won't do that because at heart you're a coward. All you can do is call me names in capitals & repeat the same mistakes over & over again.

Scientific facts are true no matter how many times you scream that they're not.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#31021 Jan 19, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
SUX,
You can capitalize all you want, & call me any names you want. You're just repeating your inanity. Your attitudes & posts don't change scientific fact.
Every single time temperature is measured in the upper atmosphere, where it's cold, & on the earth, where it's warm, PROVES I'm right & you're wrong. Tyndall's experiments show you why. This science has been known for more than 150 years.
The colder atmosphere can help the sun keep the earth warm by absorbing & re-emitting IR EMR. Why don't you try to read about the earth's atmosphere? This article has lots of information (& measurements) about how cold the earth's atmosphere gets, as low as -150º C at the mesopause. I'd imagine even you'd admit the earth's surface is generally quite a bit warmer than that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Ea...
Let's quote them:
"The atmosphere of Earth is a layer of gases surrounding the planet Earth that is retained by Earth's gravity. The atmosphere protects life on Earth by absorbing ultraviolet solar radiation, warming the surface through heat retention (greenhouse effect), and reducing temperature extremes between day and night (the diurnal temperature variation)."
Then let's look at the greenhouse effect:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effec...
"The greenhouse effect is a process by which thermal radiation from a planetary surface is absorbed by atmospheric greenhouse gases, and is re-radiated in all directions. Since part of this re-radiation is back towards the surface and the lower atmosphere, it results in an elevation of the average surface temperature above what it would be in the absence of the gases."
I quoted the 1st paragraph of each article. If you think those articles are written by "AGW cultists," then grow HALF a gonad & sign on there at Wiki. If you have facts & logic on your side, in the small-D democratic Wiki community you'll prevail.
But of course you won't do that because at heart you're a coward. All you can do is call me names in capitals & repeat the same mistakes over & over again.
Scientific facts are true no matter how many times you scream that they're not.
GORD/SUXOBAMA is either very, very stupid or he has a job to do. You're not going to have much luck either way, just like the rest of us haven't.

And he sees us all RUNNING FOR THE HILLS because of his powerful arguments, which goes right along with his delusion that putting on more clothes will keep you cool.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#31022 Jan 19, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
GORD/SUXOBAMA is either very, very stupid or he has a job to do. You're not going to have much luck either way, just like the rest of us haven't.
And he sees us all RUNNING FOR THE HILLS because of his powerful arguments, which goes right along with his delusion that putting on more clothes will keep you cool.
Yes, he does see us all running for the hills because of his "powerful arguments"... ROFLMAO!

It can be fun to goad him. All he does is post long rants full of insults in all caps, & repeat his same incorrect understandings of the science. Hopefully the lurkers (& regular posters) can just scroll past his verbal diarrhea - unless it REALLY amuses them, LOL.

Maybe all that extra clothing he puts on is making both of his brain cells freeze.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#31023 Jan 19, 2013
ObamaSUX wrote:
<quoted text>
Just as I PREDICTED the AGW CULT LIAR COULD NOT POST:
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT, EVER DONE DONE, IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND WHERE ANY COLD OBJECT HAS EVER "HEATED-UP" A WARMER OBJECT
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT WHERE THE COLDER ATMOSPHERE HAS "HEATED-UP" A WARMER EARTH
The most conclusive evidence for the greenhouse effect – and the role CO2 plays – can be seen in data from the surface and from satellites. By comparing the Sun’s heat reaching the Earth with the heat leaving it, we can see that less long-wave radiation (heat) is leaving than arriving (and since the 1970s, that less and less radiation is leaving the Earth, as CO2 and equivalents build up). Since all radiation is measured by its wavelength, we can also see that the frequencies being trapped in the atmosphere are the same frequencies absorbed by greenhouse gases.
Disputing that the greenhouse effect is real is to attempt to discredit centuries of science, laws of physics and direct observation. Without the greenhouse effect, we would not even be here to argue about it.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/does-greenhou...
Others are:

Scientific papers that prove empirical evidence that 20th century changes in average global temperatures are linked to human emissions of CO2 and that the current changes are unusual

Fourier, J.-B. J. 1824. "Memoire sur les Temperatures du Globe Terrestre et des Espaces Planetaires." Annales de Chemie et de Physique 2d Ser. 27, 136-167.

Tyndall, J. 1859. "Note on the Transmission of Radiant Heat through Gaseous Bodies." Proceed. Roy. Soc. London 10, 37-39.
Arrhenius, S.A. 1896. "On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground." Phil. Mag. 41, 237-275.
Manabe, S. and R.F. Strickler, 1964. "Thermal Equilibrium of the Atmosphere with a Convective Adjustment." J. Atmos. Sci. 21, 361-385.
Suess, H.E. 1955. "Radiocarbon Concentration in Modern Wood." Sci. 122, 415-417.
Revelle, R. and H.E. Suess 1957. "Carbon Dioxide Exchange between Atmosphere and Ocean and the Question of an Increase of Atmospheric CO2 During the Past Decades." Tellus 9, 18-27.
Hanel, R. A., and B. J. Conrath 1970. "Thermal Emission Spectra of Earth and Atmosphere from Nimbus-4 Michelson Interferometer Experiment." Nature 228, 143-&.
Hoffert, Martin I., Covey, Curt 1992. "Deriving Global Climate Sensitivity from Palaeoclimate Reconstructions." Nature 360, 573-576.
Harries, J.E., H.E. Brindley, P.J. Sagoo, and R.J. Bantges 2001. "Increases in greenhouse forcing inferred from the outgoing longwave radiation spectra of the Earth in 1970 and 1997." Letter, Nature, 410, 355-357.
Griggs, J.A. and J.E. Harries 2004. "Comparison of spectrally resolved outgoing longwave data between 1970 and present." EUMETSAT Conference and Workshop Proceedings 2004.
Philipona, R., B. Du"rr, C. Marty, A. Ohmura, and M. Wild 2004. "Radiative Forcing--Measured at Earth's Surface--Corroborate the Increasing Greenhouse Effect." Geophys. Res. Lett. 31, L03202
Hegerl Gabriele C., Crowley Thomas J., Hyde William T., Frame David J. 2006. "Climate Sensitivity Constrained by Temperature Reconstructions over the Past Seven Centuries." Nature 440, 1029-1032 (letter).
W.F.J. Evans, W.F.J., and E. Puckrin 2006. "Measurements of the Radiative Surface Forcing of Climate." 18th Conference on Climate Variability and Change, P1.7
Rowa*n T. Sutton, Buwen Dong, and Jonathan M. Gregory (2006) Land/sea warming ratio in response to climate change: IPCC AR4 model results and comparison with observations, Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 34, L02701, pp. 1-5
http://atmosdyn.yonsei.ac.kr/nrl/seminar/Sutt...
Royer, D.L. 2006. "CO2-forced climate thresholds during the Phanerozoic" Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 70, 5665-5675.
Came R.E., J.M. Eiler, J. Veizer, K. Azmy, U. Brand, and C.R. Weidman 2007. "Coupling of surface temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentrations during the Palaeozoic era." Nature 449, 198-201.

con't

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#31024 Jan 19, 2013
ObamaSUX wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I read ALL your AGW CULT LINKS and THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE MEASUREMENT IN THEM !!!
Need measurements?

The most conclusive evidence for the greenhouse effect – and the role CO2 plays – can be seen in data from the surface and from satellites. By comparing the Sun’s heat reaching the Earth with the heat leaving it, we can see that less long-wave radiation (heat) is leaving than arriving (and since the 1970s, that less and less radiation is leaving the Earth, as CO2 and equivalents build up). Since all radiation is measured by its wavelength, we can also see that the frequencies being trapped in the atmosphere are the same frequencies absorbed by greenhouse gases.

Disputing that the greenhouse effect is real is to attempt to discredit centuries of science, laws of physics and direct observation. Without the greenhouse effect, we would not even be here to argue about it.

==========

: Scientific papers that prove empirical evidence that 20th century changes in average global temperatures are linked to human emissions of CO2 and that the current changes are unusual

Fourier, J.-B. J. 1824. "Memoire sur les Temperatures du Globe Terrestre et des Espaces Planetaires." Annales de Chemie et de Physique 2d Ser. 27, 136-167.

Tyndall, J. 1859. "Note on the Transmission of Radiant Heat through Gaseous Bodies." Proceed. Roy. Soc. London 10, 37-39.

Arrhenius, S.A. 1896. "On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground." Phil. Mag. 41, 237-275.

Manabe, S. and R.F. Strickler, 1964. "Thermal Equilibrium of the Atmosphere with a Convective Adjustment." J. Atmos. Sci. 21, 361-385.

Suess, H.E. 1955. "Radiocarbon Concentration in Modern Wood." Sci. 122, 415-417.

Revelle, R. and H.E. Suess 1957. "Carbon Dioxide Exchange between Atmosphere and Ocean and the Question of an Increase of Atmospheric CO2 During the Past Decades." Tellus 9, 18-27.

Hanel, R. A., and B. J. Conrath 1970. "Thermal Emission Spectra of Earth and Atmosphere from Nimbus-4 Michelson Interferometer Experiment." Nature 228, 143-&.

Hoffert, Martin I., Covey, Curt 1992. "Deriving Global Climate Sensitivity from Palaeoclimate Reconstructions." Nature 360, 573-576.

Harries, J.E., H.E. Brindley, P.J. Sagoo, and R.J. Bantges 2001. "Increases in greenhouse forcing inferred from the outgoing longwave radiation spectra of the Earth in 1970 and 1997." Letter, Nature, 410, 355-357.

Griggs, J.A. and J.E. Harries 2004. "Comparison of spectrally resolved outgoing longwave data between 1970 and present." EUMETSAT Conference and Workshop Proceedings 2004.

Philipona, R., B. Du"rr, C. Marty, A. Ohmura, and M. Wild 2004. "Radiative Forcing--Measured at Earth's Surface--Corroborate the Increasing Greenhouse Effect." Geophys. Res. Lett. 31, L03202

Hegerl Gabriele C., Crowley Thomas J., Hyde William T., Frame David J. 2006. "Climate Sensitivity Constrained by Temperature Reconstructions over the Past Seven Centuries." Nature 440, 1029-1032 (letter).

W.F.J. Evans, W.F.J., and E. Puckrin 2006. "Measurements of the Radiative Surface Forcing of Climate." 18th Conference on Climate Variability and Change, P1.7

Rowa*n T. Sutton, Buwen Dong, and Jonathan M. Gregory (2006) Land/sea warming ratio in response to climate change: IPCC AR4 model results and comparison with observations, Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 34, L02701, pp. 1-5
http://atmosdyn.yonsei.ac.kr/nrl/seminar/Sutt...

Royer, D.L. 2006. "CO2-forced climate thresholds during the Phanerozoic" Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 70, 5665-5675.

Came R.E., J.M. Eiler, J. Veizer, K. Azmy, U. Brand, and C.R. Weidman 2007. "Coupling of surface temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentrations during the Palaeozoic era." Nature 449, 198-201.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#31025 Jan 19, 2013
Part II.

Griggs, J. A., and J. E. Harries 2007. "Comparison of spectrally resolved outgoing longwave radiation over the tropical Pacific between 1970 and 2003 using IRIS, IMG, and AIRS." Journal of Climate 20, 3982-4001.

Horton, D.E. et al. 2007. "Orbital and CO2 forcing of late Paleozoic continental ice sheets" Geophys. Res. Lett. L19708.

Fletcher, B.J. et al. 2008. "Atmospheric carbon dioxide linked with Mesozoic and early Cenozoic climate change" Nature Geoscience 1, 43-48.

Fu, Qiang and Celeste M. Johanson 2005. "Satellite-Derived Vertical Dependence of Tropical Tropospheric Temperature Trends." Geophys. Res. Lett. 32, L10703

Vinnikov, K.Y., N.C. Grody, A. Robock, R.J. Stouffer, P.D. Jones, and M.D. Goldberg 2006. "Temperature trends at the surface and in the troposphere." J. Geophys. Res. 111, D03106.
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2006/2005JD0...

Knutti, R. and G. Hegerl 2008. "The equilibrium sensitivity of the earth's temperature to radiation changes." Nature Geoscience 1, 735-743.

W. M. Kurschner et al. 2008. "The impact of Miocene atmospheric carbon dioxide fluctuations on climate and the evolution of the terrestrial ecosystem"Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 105, 499-453.

Lean, J.L. and D.H. Rind 2008. "How natural and anthropogenic influences alter global and regional surface temperatures: 1889 to 2006." Geophys. Res. Lett. 35, L18701.

Sherwood, S.C., C.L. Meyer, R.J. Allen, and H.A. Titchner, 2008. "Robust Tropospheric Warming Revealed by Iteratively Homogenized Radiosonde Data." J. Clim. 21, 5336-5350.
http://camels.metoffice.gov.uk/quarc/Sherwood...

Zachos, J.C. 2008. "An early Cenozoic perspective on greenhouse warming and carbon-cycle dynamics" Nature 451, 279-283.

Allen, R.J. and S.C. Sherwood 2009. "Warming maximum in the tropical upper troposphere deduced from thermal winds." Nature Geosci. 1, 399 - 403.
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v1/n6/abs/... http://cce.890m.com/models/images/allen-sherw...

Clement, A.C., Burgman R., and J.R. Norris 2009. "Observational and Model Evidence for Positive Low-Level Cloud Feedback." Science 325, 460-464.

Titchner, H.A., P.W. Thorne, M.P. McCarthy, S.F.B. Tett, L. Haimberger, and D.E. Parker 2009. "Critically Reassessing Tropospheric Temperature Trends from Radiosondes Using Realistic Validation Experiments." J. Clim. 22, 465-485.

Go check them out.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#31026 Jan 19, 2013
Thanks much, Wallop; you are a 10.

Welcome to our humble forum. You fit right in.

:-)

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

2012 Presidential Election Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 6 min bad thinking 165,407
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 33 min Agents of Corruption 1,153,940
The uncomfortable truth about racism in America 1 hr xxxrayted 218
Who is the worst president since WWII ? 2 hr Aprilvue 1,096
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 2 hr Sunshine 181,798
Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 3 hr kal 33,469
"Obama's actions have vindicated the brutal beh... 9 hr Le Duped 2
More from around the web