25 NASA Scientists Question the Sanity of the Global Warmists

submitted by sawboss from youtube.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]anescient 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I think your response was passive aggressive. But that's fine.

Is it? where is the evidence?

Is what? Is the composition?

You can certainly get there via separating the air, something we've got going on at an industrial scale. You can get there with absorption spectroscopy, too.

... or, is a top contributor? (a top contributor not the top contributor)

Spectroscopy, again, and some math: we know how this molecule reacts to different frequencies of light, and we know how much of it is up there. To corroborate, satellites observing the planet find a conspicuous drop in radiation right at CO2's favorite color. The planet seems to be hoarding infrared.

why haven't we seen comparable increases in temperature?

We... have. I'm not even going to bother with the CO2/Temperature history plot because there's no chance you haven't seen it, and there's no chance you trust it.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I'm not sure what you're suggesting with this statement, but you have failed to answer the a fault basic question.

If the "top contributor to the green house gas effect" CO2 increased by 33% (0.01%/0.03%), then why haven't we seen comparable increases in temperature?

[–]anescient 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Surely you don't mean, "why haven't we seen a 33% increase in temperature"?

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Of course not.

CO2 accounts for about 0.04% of the atmosphere, and it's a top contributor to the greenhouse effect, so 0.01% is actually pretty major.

This is your claim, not mine. If CO2 is a top contributor, as you claim, then why haven't temperatures increased by some significant margin, or relavent ratio?

[–]anescient 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I'm sorry, I was sure you'd be familiar with this data. The correlation of CO2 and temperature goes way, way back:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Vostok_Petit_data.svg

... and more specifically on anthropogenic:

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/blogs/climateqa/category/climate-human-impact/

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You may recall that man made climate change was once called man made global warming.

They changed the name to climate change, because the warming trend was bogus, and indefensible.

[–]anescient 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

In other words.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Exactly!!!

My man! ;-)

Edit: You hit it out of the park. Respect.