[AdamB]

That does nothing besides further limit the heat co2 traps. Really I'm arguing with a clown.

As you appear to be arguing with your own strawman, I am forced to agree that yes, you are arguing with a clown.

[mustang19]

That does nothing besides further limit the heat co2 traps. Really I'm arguing with a clown.

As you appear to be arguing with your own strawman, I am forced to agree that yes, you are arguing with a clown.

It's a straw man because pops doesn't actually believe co2 is a 100x better insulator than fiberglass as global warming requires. Hence the argument is pointless.

Hopefully pops would invest in some of his renewables stocks and lose money.

[AdamB]

It's a straw man because pops doesn't actually believe co2 is a 100x better insulator than fiberglass as global warming requires. Hence the argument is pointless.

It's a strawman because you make things up on behalf of others, and then argue for or against what you made up. While throwing some other nonsense in to distract from having said something stupid during the previous go round. It isn't even good trolling, it is so A) transparent and B) ignorant.

Try harder, you are giving trolls a bad name.

[mustang19]

It's a straw man because pops doesn't actually believe co2 is a 100x better insulator than fiberglass as global warming requires. Hence the argument is pointless.

It's a strawman because you make things up on behalf of others, and then argue for or against what you made up. While throwing some other nonsense in to distract from having said something stupid during the previous go round. It isn't even good trolling, it is so A) transparent and B) ignorant.

Try harder, you are giving trolls a bad name.

Sure, co2 is a poor insulator being a gas, nobody actually believes it works.

[AdamB]

Try harder, you are giving trolls a bad name.

Sure, co2 is a poor insulator being a gas, nobody actually believes it works.

Yeah, that isn't trying harder.

[mustang19]

Try harder, you are giving trolls a bad name.

Sure, co2 is a poor insulator being a gas, nobody actually believes it works.

Yeah, that isn't trying harder.

Global cooling is a legitimate problem. Here is my favorite graph on temperature being sunspots with a 40 year lag.
https://i.ibb.co/YjzHqkj/0052-AF1-C-DDA ... 8-F395.jpg

Data from https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/ea ... es/sunspot

This will kill all liberals and be a worse problem than warming. Temperature will fall to 1880 levels in a few years.

[AdamB]

Try harder, you are giving trolls a bad name.

Global cooling is a legitimate problem.

For folks who can't number graphs in order maybe. Or trolls. In this case, both rolled into one!

[mustang19]

Try harder, you are giving trolls a bad name.

Global cooling is a legitimate problem.

For folks who can't number graphs in order maybe. Or trolls. In this case, both rolled into one!

Just as a example,

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Dim ... 021661/amp


Even a few inches of insulation shrinks the incremental effect to nothing, and we're talking about miles of insulation. By this relation, the miles of gas in the atmosphere should be thousands or millions times less efficient than real life.

So if an inch of co2 insulation raises temperatures a few degrees, then if there are miles of it, a doubling of insulation should raise temperature ~1 millionth of a degree.

Why is co2 still able to matter despite the diminishing returns making it a million times less effective?

Anytime you quote a post it gets the Internet archive bots to work saving the page.

[AdamB]

For folks who can't number graphs in order maybe. Or trolls. In this case, both rolled into one!

Just as a example,

Don't need an example of others mis-numbering graphs, you provided a sufficient proof of your own incompetence in this regard already.

[mustang19]

For folks who can't number graphs in order maybe. Or trolls. In this case, both rolled into one!

Just as a example,

Don't need an example of others mis-numbering graphs, you provided a sufficient proof of your own incompetence in this regard already.

As I said, continue replying to trigger the archive save.

https://web.archive.org/web/20210723012 ... 41-80.html

[FamousDrScanlon]

The other day I was hanging at a wildlife conservation blog & they were discussing whether or not they should dedicate a section of land they own in S America to build a climate change denier refuge & habitat, in a bid to save the deniers from extinction. Some of the conservationists seemed very concerned because the population of deniers started declining a decade ago & the rate of denier die-back has massively increased every year. The experts are not exactly sure how many of the species (Denierimbecilus) remain, but the estimates are in the mid double digits. They fear there may not be enough deniers remaining to constitute an adequate breeding population. Moreover, a female denier has not been seen for over 9 years, although female climate deniers are known to be the most elusive mammal on the planet.

KEEP HUMANITY DIVERSE - SAVE THE DENIERS

[mustang19]

The other day I was hanging at a wildlife conservation blog & they were discussing whether or not they should dedicate a section of land they own in S America to build a climate change denier refuge & habitat, in a bid to save the deniers from extinction. Some of the conservationists seemed very concerned because the population of deniers started declining a decade ago & the rate of denier die-back has massively increased every year. The experts are not exactly sure how many of the species (Denierimbecilus) remain, but the estimates are in the mid double digits. They fear there may not be enough deniers remaining to constitute an adequate breeding population. Moreover, a female denier has not been seen for over 9 years, although female climate deniers are known to be the most elusive mammal on the planet.

KEEP HUMANITY DIVERSE - SAVE THE DENIERS

I'm pretty sure 20% of democrats don't care about global warming and a lot are female.

[FamousDrScanlon]

I'm pretty sure 20% of democrats don't care about global warming and a lot are female.

Only the truly desperate would seriously respond to a completely satirical post. I hope you washed your foot this morning.

Btw, 'pretty sure' = I don't know & I'm blindly grasping. Either you have the numbers or you don't. You don't. Moreover global warming is a 'global' threat. Who cares what a small percent of the females of 1 American sub-tribe think? I don't care what Americans think, nor does most of the world. They still 'watch' America, but only as a freak-show they can't look away from. As for American's thoughts on matters of import, no. Y'all are irrelevant now & by your own making. Sure they once listened & valued American's opinions - your great grandpas generation. Not now. Not you.

Let's give the satire another try shall we? A classic from 2015

Climate Change Deniers Present Graphic Description Of What Earth Must Look Like For Them To Believe

The skeptics laid out four conditions that must be met for them to accept that climate change isn’t simply a theory: 100 named hurricanes a year, the full evaporation of the Mississippi River, nine-month-long heat waves, and the complete extinction of every animal in the class Reptilia.

The group of skeptics, who said that the consensus among 97 percent of the scientific community and the documented environmental transformations already underway are simply not proof enough, laid out the precise sequence and magnitude of horrific events—including natural disasters, proliferation of infectious diseases, and resource wars—they would have to witness firsthand before they are swayed.

“For us to accept that the average surface temperature of the Earth has risen to critical levels due to mankind’s production of greenhouse gases, we’ll need to see some actual, visible evidence, including a global death toll of no less than 500 million people within a single calendar year,” said spokesperson William Davis, 46, of Jackson, NJ, who added that at least 70 percent of all islands on the planet would also have to become submerged under rising seas before he and his cohort would reconsider their beliefs. “To start, we’re going to have to see supercell tornadoes of category F4 or higher ripping through Oklahoma at least three times a day, leveling entire communities and causing hundreds of fatalities—and just to be perfectly clear, we’re talking year-round, not just during the spring tornado season.”

The reality is that we’re still experiencing cold, snowy winters, and the entire global population is not currently embarking on cross-continental migrations in search of arable land,” Davis continued. “Until that changes, we cannot be expected to believe climate change is occurring.”

Davis went on to say that certain events, such as massive, uncontrollable wildfires across the U.S—not just restricted to the American West, but in areas including Florida and New England—would render climate change deniers open to reevaluating the decades’ worth of data that show the planet is warming at a catastrophic rate. Additionally, Davis said that for the community to begin believing a single word of any scientific journal article corroborating climate change, every one of Earth’s glaciers would have to retreat at a rate exceeding 20 miles per year, and each of the skeptics, individually, would have to go a decade without seeing naturally occurring ice anywhere.

Furthermore, climate change deniers maintained that if the total number of plant and animal species on the planet remained higher than 200 in aggregate, they would not be dissuaded from their belief that Earth is simply experiencing one of its natural warming cycles that would eventually resolve itself on its own.

“I don’t think it’s too much to ask to see a super hurricane destroying the Southeast U.S. and another one at the same time decimating the Pacific Northwest before I make up my mind about this,” said global warming skeptic Michelle Wilkinson of Medina, MN, adding that she would be willing to recognize the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change if repeated and unpredictable storm surge flooding rendered every major East Coast city, including Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Washington, D.C., wholly uninhabitable. “The fact of the matter is that if I walk outside at any time of day at any point in the year and it’s below 90 degrees, then there simply isn’t enough proof that we need to be cutting carbon emissions.”

After clarifying that the desertification of major population centers, and the global refugee crisis that would result, would be necessary but not sufficient evidence of climate change, the skeptics reportedly unveiled a vivid artist’s rendering of the vast expanse of parched, lifeless earth and dead trees that each of them must see through the windows of their homes before reversing their opposition to public schools teaching children about global warming.

“We keep hearing all this mumbo-jumbo about the sixth mass extinction we’re in the midst of,” said Mitch McConnell, a U.S. senator from Kentucky, at the conclusion of the press conference. “Well, if that’s the case, then tell me this: Why aren’t the streets littered with human bodies right now, with the ragged bands of the still-living siphoning the moisture from the corpses of the dead?”

https://www.theonion.com/climate-change ... 1819578104

From 2015. Quite prophetic, just like much of the climate science, except for the timing. They were way off on much of it. 2050, 2075, 2100 was when they were 'expecting' to see all these record smashing events, we've seen in the last 2 decades, begin. Whoops, I guess a bunch of us are going bye bye 'sooner than expected" & getting there is going to suck big time.

[Plantagenet]

..... climate science, except for the timing. They were way off on much of it. 2050, 2075, 2100 was when they were 'expecting' to see all these record smashing events, we've seen in the last 2 decades, begin. Whoops, I guess a bunch of us are going bye bye 'sooner than expected"

The problem isn't the timing....that problem is that climate scientists underestimated the climate sensitivity of the earth to changes in atmospheric greenhouse gases.

There were some climate scientists like Dr. James Hansen who argued that the climate was highly sensitive to greenhouse gas forcing.....and it turns out Dr. Hansen is right. The evidence for high climate sensitivity comes from paleoclimate data------we know the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere for, say, the Pliocene was higher then the current atmospheric concentration, and we know how what the earth was much hotter then it is now so its pretty simple to figure out exactly how much temperature increase we'll get for a given increase in CO2 and other greenhouse gases.

The bottom line is we're screwed, especially since our so-called leaders keep putting together fake climate treaties like the Paris accords that don't actually reduce Greenhouse emissions.


Oopsies! most climate scientists have assumed a value for climate sensitivity that is too low......

Cheers!

[mustang19]

..... climate science, except for the timing. They were way off on much of it. 2050, 2075, 2100 was when they were 'expecting' to see all these record smashing events, we've seen in the last 2 decades, begin. Whoops, I guess a bunch of us are going bye bye 'sooner than expected"

The problem isn't the timing....that problem is that climate scientists underestimated the climate sensitivity of the earth to changes in atmospheric greenhouse gases.

There were some climate scientists like Dr. James Hansen who argued that the climate was highly sensitive to greenhouse gas forcing.....and it turns out Dr. Hansen is right. The evidence for high climate sensitivity comes from paleoclimate data------we know the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere for, say, the Pliocene was higher then the current atmospheric concentration, and we know how what the earth was much hotter then it is now so its pretty simple to figure out exactly how much temperature increase we'll get for a given increase in CO2 and other greenhouse gases.

The bottom line is we're screwed, especially since our so-called leaders keep putting together fake climate treaties like the Paris accords that don't actually reduce Greenhouse emissions.


Oopsies! most climate scientists have assumed a value for climate sensitivity that is too low......

Cheers!

Umm your post is pretty much incoherent and temperatures are falling for years. Temperature basically peaked in 1998.

http://www.earth-policy.org/images/uplo ... pgraph.PNG

Also none of those people are scientists because they ignore basic concepts like how adding five miles of insulation to your home has no effect.

[mustang19]

I guess when the moderators take the thread off topic there isn't much hope they will keep it on topic.

Sorry Pops, I moved the Fossil Water diversion over to the Sustainability thread where it goes way back into the past and the hoax posts over to the hoax thread where they belong.

Liberals lack understanding of basic concepts like how insulation works. It's like adding five feet of blankets versus five miles, there's no way carbon would matter. Also ban me.

[mustang19]

https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2016 ... ing-world/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... catch/amp/

Sea ice recovering

[mustang19]

Pops, one obvious problem is the greenhouse effect only works during the day. At night there's no incoming heat so it would just be pure loss. So we'd see strange things like big daily swings in temperature.

[FamousDrScanlon]

I never said it was a problem because there is no problem.

I guess it's hard to give up those old climate change denier tricks eh planty?

Hell ya, lil planty was a game playing denier a lot longer than he/she was convinced. It's all there - peakoil.com site search.

Now planty's on the forum pretending she knew it all along & is the resident, know it all, climate expert.

Sorry planty, but you're not special for it. There's plenty of of other blogs & social media sites I've frequented where former deniers are now playing climate expert. I long predicted we'd see it.

I remember when you admitted you had it wrong, planty - 2015-16. I gave you props for admitting it, as I would for anyone who admits they were wrong.

As for your, blame the scientists (climate sensitivity) - more meaningless games. Is that going to be the conservative denier's get out of jail (or lamp post) free card from here on out? "We would have totally stopped using fossil fuels if not for the uncertainty of climate sensitivity - damn those scientists!" Lame. Only other US conservatives will buy it.

Climate models are overrated, over relied on, overly conservative & incomplete & thus inadequate for big picture predictions. The paleoclimate record is a better indicator of where the humans are headed - off the evolutionary stage along with loads of other creatures. Shit can go south in a hurry (decadal scale). This is known.

Things are bad (faster than expected) & getting worse by the year & my country has no national climate protection plan - we just react after the fact. Same in the US, UK & many others. How can all these rich nations be so unprepared to protect their citizens (consumer workers) from these ever worsening & unavoidable AGW Jacked disasters? Because no plan was the plan. Evolution & thermodynamics guarantee that there would be no attempt to stop or slow down, but it doesn't matter what the energy is used for as long as gradients are reduced. I once thought wealthy western nations would use some of their fossil fuel treasure to shore up their defences against the non stop wave of people killing, infrastructure smashing, climate disasters that are rolling in. I guess I underestimated the degree of Short-termism in our overlords. Honestly the whole of western capitalist civilization, is infected with an extreme form of Hyper Short-termism . This mentality, which is cultural, assures we'll suffer more & go down first. China will be last man standing, but at least a couple of our oligarchs kinda, sort-a, went to space. Jeff Bezos is a genuine god damn merican hero!


Anyone dealing out blame for AGW, don't get it. That would be most humans. The litigation has just begun for Big oil. Next they'll go after their hired guns - PR firms, think tanks, 'institutes', bought politicians, etc. As the AGW Jacked events & consequences increase so will the need for blame. The terrified plebs will scream for blood. Scapegoats are a psychological necessity. The denial funding overlords will throw any & all of their puppets to the wolves, as per usual. Joe Sixpack deniers will, by & large, be unaffected as long as they don't run their mouths in the wrong place. There are mountains of evidence against big oil funding denial & given that most humans believe in freewill & other illusions of control, it might cost the defendants, upper managment, dearly. Shareholders might take a big hit too. We'll see. I'll wager China, Russia, et al competing nations are loving the US climate litigation & anger-rage that is increasing political & social division all around. They're probably contributing to it. I would in their position.

I guess it's fitting the west goes out unprepared, yet still talking talking talking. Just think of all the preparations that could have been funded with all the treasure burned on climate denial & climate hopium (the other denial) combined.

There's no better article (below) that describes the absurd amount of treasure the hopium side burned on pretending governments were going to take 'action' to 'fight'' climate change. Very expensive gate keeping is what it amounts to. They've been successfully stringing the plebs along for over 30 years. Every year the climate authorities wave around a new agreement & the ever hopeful plebs go to great lengths to convince themselves that 'this time is different'. Same as the way y'all US political tribe members device yourselves every time your puppet candidate wins the POTUS prize. The last 2, Trump & Obama, were crisis cult saviours. 'Our new daddy will fix everything & save us'. Nothing changed for the better. Grow up already.

Expert IPCC Reviewer Speaks Out

We’ve seen this act (COP) repeat over and over, ever since COP1 in Berlin in 1995, as each successive COP-ending-ceremony finds the Parties congratulating each other, slaps on the back, for one more successful climate conference of 20,000-30,000 able-bodied professionals wiped-out from overconsumption of Beluga caviar and Domaine de la Romanee-Conti, but subsequently carbon emissions increase the following year, and every following year thereafter. What’s to congratulate?

More to the point, the annualized CO2 emissions rate is +60% since COP1, not decreasing, not going down, not once. After 25 years of the same identical pattern, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that the take-home-work from all 25 COPs mysteriously turns into the antithesis of the mission statement of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

“Climate change is an existential threat to the survival of life on Earth, particularly including human kind.”

At this late point in time, there are no easy choices. The challenge ahead is daunting: “Everything is accelerating, everything is at a record high. In a nutshell, everything is getting worse faster.” (Carter)

https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/11/20 ... peaks-out/

I was hoping Canada was going to 'gird up our loins' to defend against climate consequences, but collectively the nation has it's head up it's ass
America is a hundred times more hopeless. Lambs to the slaughter.

There was no way the fossil fuels were not getting used, so denial don;y matter on that count, BUT denial & the scumbags behind it do bear a big part of blame for entire nations being totally unprepared. They already have blood on their hands for all the deaths that could have easily have been prevented so far. Their dirty deeds divide & prevent any national plan, that must include input & cooperation from all. If judging them by any of the moral & legal codes the western humans have invented they deserve to swing, after their trials of course. Also, strip them of all their assets (fuck their families) & transfer some to the victims & the rest to a climate refugee fund.

All economically extractable energy will be burned. It can be no other way for the humans who slaves to the dictates of evolution & the Maximum Power Principle (MPP).

The purpose of life is to disperse energy

The truly dangerous ideas in science tend to be those that threaten the collective ego of humanity and knock us further off our pedestal of centrality. The Copernican Revolution abruptly dislodged humans from the center of the universe. The Darwinian Revolution yanked Homo sapiens from the pinnacle of life. Today another menacing revolution sits at the horizon of knowledge, patiently awaiting broad realization by the same egotistical species.

The dangerous idea is this: the purpose of life is to disperse energy.

"nature abhors a gradient,"

Virtually all organisms, including humans, are, in a real sense, sunlight transmogrified, temporary waypoints in the flow of energy. Ecological succession, viewed from a thermodynamic perspective, is a process that maximizes the capture and degradation of energy. Similarly, the tendency for life to become more complex over the past 3.5 billion years (as well as the overall increase in biomass and organismal diversity through time) is not due simply to natural selection, as most evolutionists still argue, but also to nature's "efforts" to grab more and more of the sun's flow. The slow burn that characterizes life enables ecological systems to persist over deep time, changing in response to external and internal perturbations.

The concept of life as energy flow, once fully digested, is profound. Just as Darwin fundamentally connected humans to the non-human world, a thermodynamic perspective connects life inextricably to the non-living world. This dangerous idea, once broadly distributed and understood, is likely to provoke reaction from many sectors, including religion and science. The wondrous diversity and complexity of life through time, far from being the product of intelligent design, is a natural phenomenon intimately linked to the physical realm of energy flow.

Moreover, evolution is not driven by the machinations of selfish genes propagating themselves through countless millennia. Rather, ecology and evolution together operate as a highly successful, extremely persistent means of reducing the gradient generated by our nearest star.

OVERSHOOT LOOP:
Evolution Under The Maximum Power Principle

The destruction of the natural world is not the result of global capitalism, industrialisation, “Western civilisation” or any flaw in human institutions. It is a consequence of the evolutionary success of an exceptionally rapacious primate. Throughout all of history and prehistory, human advance has coincided with ecological devastation. — John Gray, STRAW DOGS

Our collective behavior is the quandary that must be overcome before anything can be done to mitigate the coming global social collapse. The single most-important lesson for me was that we cannot re-wire (literally, because thought is physical[1]) our basic political agendas through reading or discussion alone. Moreover, since our thoughts are subject to physical law, we do not have the free-will to either think or behave autonomously. We are “political” animals from birth until death. Everything we do or say can be seen as part of lifelong political agendas. Despite decades of scientific warnings, we continue to destroy our life-support system because that behavior is part of our inherited (DNA, RNA, etc.) hard wiring. We use scientific warnings, like all inter-animal communications, for cementing group identity and for elevating one’s own status (politics). Only physical hardship can force us to rewire our collective-political agendas. I am certainly not the first to make the observation, but now, after 25 years of study and debate, I am totally certain. The “net energy principle” guarantees that our global supply lines will collapse. The rush to social collapse cannot be stopped no matter what is written or said. Humans have never been able to intentionally-avoid collapse because fundamental system-wide change is only possible after the collapse begins.

The above loop was repeated countless thousands of times during the millions of years that we were evolving[9]. This behavior is inherent in the architecture of our minds — is entrained in our biological material — and will be repeated until we go extinct.

https://dieoff.com/

Stay Frosty Planty

[Gmark]

https://physics.stackexchange.com/quest ... of-rm-co-2

Your filter argument means it's less effective and you refuted global warming. So you've refuted your own point and are basically incomprehensible. If you mean infrared causes more heat than visual light, that's wrong, IR is simply easier to generate.

You gave a link to StackExchange where you posted your "what is the R value of CO2" theory.

The physicists on StackExchange responded to your post that you don't know what you're talking about. Then they banned you from the site for posting in bad faith and attempting to deceive.

It's kind of weird that you'd post that link to support your statement.