Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
2 days ago.
by mythravere
harryanderson
#1

Thankfully, the anti-science propaganda campaign surrounding man-made climate change seems to have lost some of its effect.

Are you seeing storm clouds on the horizon? Two recent studies suggest that the latest anti-science campaign is following its forerunners--the propaganda campaigns attempting to refute science that tobacco causes cancer, that CFC's caused the hole in the ozone layer, and so on—into oblivion. Global warming denial seems to have climbed to a peak in 2010, and global warming acceptance is now climbing. This bodes well for rational public policy.

 
 

Member Comments

harryanderson

"YOU say proves co2 is the cause of climate change."

I did not say that. It proves CO2 traps heat.

Do you or do you not believe CO2 traps heat? Can we agree on that?

Posted 81 days ago.

Tiredofit

This radiation is strongly absorbed by matter, and will not pass through glass. It is also the radiation absorbed by CO2. THIS IS A QUOTE FROM SOMEONE ELSE AND ONLY SERVES TO show you as a fool.

Posted 81 days ago.

Tiredofit

I NEVER said CO2 absorbs radiation liar,

Posted 81 days ago.

Tiredofit

A flawed model on YOutube by a bill nye lookalike with a premise that is scientifically inaccurate and you two clowns defend it. LOL and I am THE DENIER>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Posted 81 days ago.

Kendall78

"I demonstrate scientifically that.."

...C02 absorbs radiation. That is what you said. Therefor, CO2 abosrbs heat radiation.

Posted 81 days ago.

Tiredofit

Harry would you rather sit back and be a hypocrite callning others ANIT SCIENCE while you yourself reject scientific fact????? WELL DO TELL US

Posted 81 days ago.

Tiredofit

So harry lets test your knowledge of science. Shall we???? or are you afraid?

Posted 81 days ago.

Tiredofit

Harry how old is the earth, when was the last ice age?????? Of course these questions are relevant, unless you deny the last ice age.

Posted 81 days ago.

Tiredofit

So let me get this straight, YOU suggest an experiment that YOU say proves co2 is the cause of climate change. I demonstrate scientifically that the thermal band of Infared heat does NOT penetreate GLASS that I used to model the sun and earth and YOU say what difference does it make &plagerising Hillary. Now what si the point of an experiment if it makes NO effort to replicate the conditions that exist?????????

Posted 81 days ago.

harryanderson

Actually, Tiredofit, you seem to be saying that CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas, even after Kendall pointed out the very blog you cited stated it CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

And the most-quoted skeptical scientistist like Judith Curry,, Richard Lindzen and Roy Spencer agree that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. They dispute that it will have a major impact on the planet.

So, Tiredofit, do you or do you not agree that increased CO2 in the atmosphere prevents some heat from radiating into space? For now, let's leave aside the question of how severely we will be impacted. Since we're responsible adults, let's see if we can agree on something basic.

Posted 81 days ago.

harryanderson

No, Tiredofit, I don't agree the experiment is flawed. Not until you explain why it matters how you heat the gasses. Not until you explain why a glass jar full of air isn't representative of the entire atmosphere.

Posted 81 days ago.

Kendall78

"The experiment is flawed, do you agree?"

Flawed as in how? That it isn't a perfect representation of the Earth and it's dynamic atmosphere? I would agree but that's not the point of the experiment now is it?

Does the experiment show that the addition of extra CO2 can make higher temps than without the extra CO2? Yes it does and that's point.

Do you understand now or do you need more assistance?

Posted 81 days ago.

Tiredofit

Night lemmings

Posted 81 days ago.

Kendall78

You haven't destroyed anything that the 97% has said little precious one.

Certain infared radiation can pass through glass...your own information said that.

You agreed with the 97% that CO2 absorbs radiation. So unless you are daft, you should agree that more CO2 should mean more absorbtion.

The blog you cited says that CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

Is there anything I have listed here that you don't agree with and why?

Posted 81 days ago.

Tiredofit

Ahh true believers, nothing sadder, later warmers gotta get my turkey on

Posted 81 days ago.

Tiredofit

The experiment is flawed, do you agree?

Posted 81 days ago.

Tiredofit

You boys lose, deflect with the 97% that I have already destroyed

Posted 81 days ago.

Kendall78

"It is also the radiation absorbed by CO2."

Soooo...you agree that CO2 absorbs radiation. Therefor more CO2 should absorbed even more radiation..right?

Posted 81 days ago.

Tiredofit

This radiation is strongly absorbed by matter, and will not pass through glass.  It is also the radiation absorbed by CO2.

Posted 81 days ago.

Kendall78

"even if 97% of the most-credible experts in the field are wrong."

But no one has shown that the 97% is incorrect. You just have misplaced faith that they are.

"when you start with the name-calling."

Hmm, there is a term that fits in with this about you Tired...oh yeah..hypocrite. That's the behavior you are performing right now..that of a hypocrite.

Posted 81 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or