Can I get even one left winger to view the climate of the planet?

No one blames every climate event on humans.

 

The warming loons and the media sure play a part doing that. Like the current hysteria over AGW and a few hurricanes.

 

Did you learn anything from the planet Earth that I posted? Did you click on the Earth and move it about? Did you study the vast variations in wind patterns? To blame humans for any part of climate, means that humans direct wind patterns. But for that, they can't direct Earth's climate. Trying to direct the climate is a huge waste of time. We would take a shot at directing the hurricanes were we able to direct climate or weather.

 

The climate models all of this hysteria is based on cannot model the immensely complex and chaotic wind patterns.

 

That is not my point. My point is man is extremely vain if he thinks he can concoct some scheme that changes climate or temperatures of this earth.

Carbon Dioxide is a strawman.

 

That is accurate. My training to become a pilot in 1980 gave me my first hint that earth is too vast, too complex, for any one thing to catch the blame for climate. I knew how the great lakes were formed, the various ice ages in the Sierra Nevada so I was certain man was not in charge of climate so laws on climate are silly laws.

 

Then by your terms, it is pointless to change laws to direct Earth's climate. It is pointless for the UN to try to enforce the rules they plan to put into place!!!!

 

thanks for yet another demonstration of your "powers of comprehension" or more precisely total lack thereof.

 

Because I couldn't make my birth date 1800.

Well it's good that string theory is too complex for me. But if we could use the climate of the Earth for testable predictions of string theory that would make for some frigin' awesome UN conference don't you think? And as for the human part, yeah people definitely have an impact on the planet's climate. Minus some volcanoes, Milankovitch cycles, meteors, axial precession and stuff like that, I agree.

You can submit a preprint to arxiv which has over a million articles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArXiv#Peer_review But I don't think you get published on some forum so to say.

I was like a cat playing with a ball of string.

I don't fart! Well, at least prodigiously in public.

Well, I think affecting temperature was the goal, not trying to play wind Gods or something.

 

I supported Bernie and then protest voted Jill. I am not a parts per million progressive. I am a "Raising Minimum Wage Aggravates Pollution. Stop wasting So Much Money On Chinese Crap That Goes in the Landfill in Six months" Progressive. I generally do not vote democrat anymore because they are a collection of contradictory patronizing positions that amount to more Wall Street exploitation of the masses. I think I told someone snarky but kind of truthfully awhile back I am a progressive with both libertarian and communist tendencies.

 

It is not that hard for organisms to change the climate. Vanity has nothing to do with it, is just the way it works. Every organism on this planet affects the environment, but humans have one of the biggest affects because of our technology. Humans have been responsible for the desertification of the Sahara and the extinction of several species. Every place on Earth that humans inhabit has been fundamentally changed by us. Is it that hard to believe that we could cause global climate change?

I think you need to look up the definition of "strawman".

 

No just the climate events they think they can attribute to AGW.

 

It's not hard to believe our C02 contribution could have some infinitesimal effect on climate but what is hard to believe is that tiny contribution to one of God only knows how many things that effect climate is not going to be swept aside like a speck of dust by naturally occurring events. The earths climate is going to do what it's going to do regardless of us and what we do or don't do. We are just along for the ride and someday a super volcano or an asteroid hit or who knows what else will make us go the way of the dinosaur. Relax and enjoy your brief time here.

 

I don't think you pay him enough.

 

Shouldn't you be getting ready for school?

 

You're right. Maybe I should go and learn things and someday I might be as smart as you.

 

I'm not a Climate Scientist ... I'll defer to the Experts, not a Politician.

 

Which one of these statements are wrong?

C02 is a greenhouse gas
C02 is put into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels
Humans are burning fossil fuels at an unprecedented rate

If none of these are wrong, then the only other issue would be, how much C02 is it going to take before we cause disruptive climate change.

 

So you honestly think C02 is the single cause of climate change?

 

Let's conclude on this note about carbon dioxide

Carbon dioxide, being heavier than air ... rises or falls?
Carbon dioxide being a trace gas in the atmosphere can be visualized like this.
https://scied.ucar.edu/carbon-dioxide-400-ppm-diagrams


As of 2012, the concentration of carbon dioxide in Earth' s atmosphere is 400 parts per million. For every 1,000,000 gas molecules in our atmosphere, about 400 are carbon dioxide molecules (see the special note about water vapor below). How much is 400 parts per million? The following two diagrams may help you visualize how much 400 parts per million is. Each rectangle is 600 by 400 pixels in size, and therefore contains just a bit fewer than a quarter of a million pixels (240,000 = 600 x 400). At this scale, carbon dioxide represents slightly less than 100 pixels (actually 96 pixels = 400 parts per million times 0.24 million). The first diagram shows 96 black dots (representing carbon dioxide molecules) scattered throughout the rectangle (which represents the whole atmosphere).



In the second diagram, the black dots representing carbon dioxide have been concentrated into a single small rectangle. The black rectangle has dimensions of 12 by 8 pixels and thus contains 96 pixels representing carbon dioxide (the same as the previous diagram).



When referring to gas concentrations in the atmosphere, values in parts per million are typically understood to mean parts per million volume (abbreviated ppmv) as opposed to parts per million mass. This volume concentration essentially tells us what fraction of all atmospheric gas molecules are carbon dioxide molecules.

The amount of water vapor in Earth's atmosphere varies substantially from place to place, from season to season, and as the weather conditions change. Typically, the troposphere (the lowest layer of the atmosphere where we live and most weather happens) contains 1 to 4% water vapor. When atmospheric scientists discuss gas concentrations, they usually subtract out the changing value for water vapor and compare the amounts of various gases in a perfectly dry sample of air. Carbon dioxide, therefore, makes up 400 parts per million by volume of dry air.

How does 400 ppmv for carbon dioxide compare to other gases in Earth's atmosphere? The following diagram shows the amounts of the other major gases in our atmosphere.

• nitrogen (N2) 78%
• oxygen (O2) 21%
• argon (Ar) almost 1%
• carbon dioxide (CO2) 400 ppmv (0.04%)
• everything else (neon, helium, methane, krypton, hydrogen,...) less than 28 ppmv total

 

There is more salt on your steak by far than carbon dioxide all over earth in the atmosphere. Most carbon dioxide suffers the fate of the ocean absorbing it along with plants on Earth consuming it.

Does this hint at a solution?

 

Do we have evidence that for billions of years, man changed climate?

Were this man did it theory correct, man ought to be able to control the climate all over Earth. Has science yet come close?

Man has carbon dioxide scrubbers. What global impact have you noticed using them?

 

Yes and when you know, with hard evidence how much co2 is needed to cause disruptive change, get back with us.

With all of the alarm, why is it there is no effort to reforest, use land management, and stop the deforestation of the rain forests? Why not even an effort to extract co2? Instead we are removing co2 extractors. Why is this? All we hear about being really pushed are carbon taxes, a redistribution of income scheme, with greedy middlemen, with beaks the size of pelicans to dip into the stream of trillions over time. LOL

We have no clue what the level of co2 must be in order to cause doom and gloom global warming. In fact, we know so little about the various causes of climate change, for if we did, our science could tell us why the cyclical ice ages? Are there things that a living planet does to control the atmosphere needed for life? Does a planet like ours have some sort of intelligence, a metaphor? Well, we really do not know.

One would think that with growing levels of co2, due to us putting more in and deforestation taking less out, that we should see average temps rise in each and every year, in a worldwide average. It is my understanding we are not seeing that. And yet the warming phase began two hundred years ago before massive fossil fuel burning. And yet average temps are still within natural variability. When indeed they should exceed that.

 

Humans were not responsible for the Sahara. We just are not that powerful nor important

Where did you get such rubbish? Did man also create the long droughts which is thought to have ended the Mayan civilization?

 

Yeah .... I know. Funny innit how that works against their cult following.