Thread: Does CO2 really drive global warming?

[quote=James Cessna;1060949686]

Originally Posted by Bowerbird

Why? Especially when the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is 0.038

[/COLOR]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_...9;s_atmosphere

The really sad part is - that is not the first time I have corrected that misplaced decimal point.

Your math is wrong again, Bird.

The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is not 0.0387.

Here is how your perform the calculations correctly,

387 ppm = 387/1,000,000 = 0.000387

0.000387 x 100% = 0.0387%.

Learn to do math correctly, and then you might have some credibility with our group. Until then, you don't!

Also, your link doesn't work. Please provide a link that actually works.

Math is one of The Great Mysteries to Leftninnies, who are typically English/sociology/psych/art appreciation majors.

Science is another area of Leftninny ignorance;just read the posts on this thread, and what was posted as a response to my request for a chemical/baro/thermo test proveing the verifiable thermal retention properties of the miniscule amount of CO2 in the atmosphere...they haven't a CLUE, and can only regurgitate what "Skeptical Science" spoonfeeds them...

Originally Posted by Grokmaster

"Suggested"; "might have".

Still having a problem with how CHEMICAL TESTS ARE DONE...?

You need a baro chamber; you would then fill it with a gas mixture equal to the average of the Earth's atmosphere, with a level of CO2 LOWER than .000382, average humidity, 14.7 psi. (sea level)

You would then introduce radiant heat from above, measure what is RETAINED at the bottom of the chamber.

Then, with everything else constant, you would increase the amount of CO2 to .000382 (approx.), and then measure again the heat retention at the bottom of the chamber, AWAY from the heat source.

Try it. There is NO DIFFERENCE in thermal retention at .000382 (approx.) CO2.

That's why Warmists NEVER , EVER publish such a test.

The idea that .03% of CO2 concentrations are CHANGING THE CLIMATE is so idiotic, that REAL CHEMISTS never took AGW seriously....EVER.

However, a trian engineer at the UN's IPCC disagrees....what a joke....

No wonder you are confused. You either do not understand the basics of the science or you are being deceptive. There is very little "thermal retention"; because the warming of the atmosphere does not come from thermal retention of CO2; it comes about because the IR is reflected back towards the ground. Some of the IR (heat) cannot escape back into space. CO2 absorbs and then emits the infrared radiation; some downward; some upward and some sideways. The molecules of CO2 do not get warmer.



http://www.ucar.edu/learn/1_3_1.htm

For more thorough scientific explanation: CO2 – An Insignificant Trace Gas? Part One

introduces several very important concepts in climate. Blackbody radiation and how we can differentiate between energy from the sun and from the earth. What temperature the earth would be without any gases that absorb longwave radiation. And how we can separate out the effects of the different gases.

Originally Posted by MannieD

No wonder you are confused. You either do not understand the basics of the science or you are being deceptive. There is very little "thermal retention"; because the warming of the atmosphere does not come from thermal retention of CO2; it comes about because the IR is reflected back towards the ground. Some of the IR (heat) cannot escape back into space. CO2 absorbs and then emits the infrared radiation; some downward; some upward and some sideways. The molecules of CO2 do not get warmer.



http://www.ucar.edu/learn/1_3_1.htm

For more thorough scientific explanation: CO2 – An Insignificant Trace Gas? Part One

No confusion here, just actual CHEMICAL KNOWLEDGE.

The deflection of thermal energy is only possible due to thermal retention in the lower atmosphere.

It is a relatively simple concept, and complete nonsense, insofar as CO2's involvement in it.

.000382 CO2 is causing ZERO thermal reaction....sorry. Cute video though, despite being nothing more than an illustration of completely unproven bunk.

It is not a significant enough amount to cause much of anything, beyond provide the carbon and the O2 molecules in the carbohydrates and oxygen produced by photosynthesis...

My BS in Chemistry is from UMR...

Originally Posted by Grokmaster

No confusion here, just actual CHEMICAL KNOWLEDGE.

The deflection of thermal energy is only possible due to thermal retention in the lower atmosphere.

It is a relatively simple concept, and complete nonsense, insofar as CO2's involvement in it.

.000382 CO2 is causing ZERO thermal reaction....sorry.

It is not a significant enough amount to cause much of anything, beyond provide the carbon and the O2 molecules in the carbohydrates and oxygen produced by photosynthesis...

My BS in Chemistry is from UMR....

Then why is the temperature of the earth about 16C instead of -18C?

Originally Posted by MannieD

Then why is the temperature of the earth about 16C instead of -18C?

Primarily due to water vapor in our atmosphere...

According to research i have done, higher temperatures actually cause higher atmospheric CO2 not necessarly the other way around.

i believe that this is quite well established by geologists/climatologists.

Originally Posted by Shins

According to research i have done, higher temperatures actually cause higher atmospheric CO2 not necessarly the other way around.

i believe that this is quite well established by geologists/climatologists.

It's what nearly ALL geo-chemists ( and backyard BBQers) have determined; heating things releases carbon from them...

Originally Posted by Phoebe Bump

I'm not claiming that the earth is warming due to CO2. I'm just claiming that the earth is warming. Maybe the earth is warming due to the the sun moving closer to us (we don't move closer to the sun because we are the center of the universe).

Astrologic alignment is a valid avenue to explore in my opinion.

axial, equinox and orbital processions could align in a way to make us closer to the sun.

Originally Posted by Grokmaster

It's what nearly ALL geo-chemists ( and backyard BBQers) have determined; heating things releases carbon from them...

So maybe climate change warming is happening for other reasons and increased co2 is just a correlating effect.

Co2 is good for plants too, it grows bigger, stronger plants no?

Originally Posted by Shins

So maybe climate change warming is happening for other reasons and increased co2 is just a correlating effect.

Co2 is good for plants too, it grows bigger, stronger plants no?

Sure does; I'm a big fan of increased CO2 AND a warmer climate; both good for plants AND animals, including HUMANS...