Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This thread is a fine example of the futility of arguing observed fact against pure faith. Evidence is irrelevant to the faithful and always has been.
Good one. My observation is that soot may have had a hand in the ending of the last ice age. Those before I can't answer too. But the last one was cut short.
Oh come on: haven't you got anything better than putting your fingers in your ears and saying,"Lalalalal I can't hear you."
Fact: the greenhouse gas effect is real. Even Roy Spencer, the darling of the deniers, accepts it
Fact: Man has increased the level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and the sea
Fact: there is a continuing upward trend in the global temperature Data.GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis: Analysis Graphs and Plots
(Note that temperature is only a proxy for the total heat content of the earth system, which is the most importent metric.)
Fact: I now anticipate a flurry of well known debunked denier bumper sticker slogons or inane 2 second sound bites. Please check here Global Warming and Climate Change skepticism examined for the most common ones so you don't reveal your lack of knowledge and/or understanding.
Fact. You are right green housegases are real. Even Ferd one of C-D's CAGW skeptics agrees.
Fact Man has increased the level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and sea
Fact your link to the Surface Temp analysis is awesome! it points out that since 1998 there has been very little warming. However during that same time, there has been additional CO2 added to the atmosphere... what gives? Also your link shows a general rise in temperature from the 1880's. No one suggests that the rise before about 1970 or so was man caused. Yet the man caused rise from 1980 to 1998 follows the same trend found from 1880 to about 1950. interesting
Your second link has interesting stuff to. Like the lies concerning Dresslers pile of puke that somehow made an historic race thru the review process to get published in 6 weeks. interesting in deed.
Hey at least we agree that greenhouse gases are real!
Now can you show us where we have actually seen forcing that has compounded the impact of greenhouse gas caused temperature rise? LOL.
This thread is a fine example of the futility of arguing observed fact against pure faith. Evidence is irrelevant to the faithful and always has been.
Greg we do agree on this. However I suspect we disagree on which side has taken to resorting to pure faith and which side is relying on actual evidence.
No one suggests that the rise before about 1970 or so was man caused. Yet the man caused rise from 1980 to 1998 follows the same trend found from 1880 to about 1950. interesting
I think that we may have started global warming back in the first bit of the 1700's. That is my opinion. My observation. Soot. That is the culprit not CO2
I think that we may have started global warming back in the first bit of the 1700's. That is my opinion. My observation. Soot. That is the culprit not CO2
good for you. find a scientist that agrees.
Also, soot while a cause for some melt in certain places, is NOT a cause of warming. In fact, it falls into the catagory (at least from a scientific perspective) of cooling.
i would be interested in you explaining where you saw some soot causing warming.
Also, soot while a cause for some melt in certain places, is NOT a cause of warming. In fact, it falls into the catagory (at least from a scientific perspective) of cooling.
i would be interested in you explaining where you saw some soot causing warming.
Soot makes snow melt sooner. less snow means more light captured. A small amount of soot makes a big difference in snow melt rates. As the snow melts the soot tends to stay on top. It absorbs more light. It is black. Where there is a lot of soot in the air it makes things cooler locally. But the soot in the snow pack makes it melt sooner and that makes things warmer. I've been talking about this from when Al did his movie well from when it hit the discount movies. Some people at the local university are studying it.
You can see the soot from the industrial revolution in the peat bogs in England. If you can see the soot in the peat you can see the soot in the snow on top of the peat.
My Dad said (when asked why did the snow melt) because it got dirty.
This thread is a fine example of the futility of arguing observed fact against pure faith. Evidence is irrelevant to the faithful and always has been.
When the facts are faked, where does one put their faith? ...In those that faked the facts?
I personally don't have one of those faith issues. I do see one camp lying their butts off to sell a very profitable agenda. What so many are accepting as fact is nothing more than argumentum ad verecundiam. Let's not confuse truth with fact, particularly when falsifiable fact appears diametrically opposed to the truth, or the proverbial "consensus".
You are correct in stating that evidence is irrelevant to the faithful but you may just be confused as to who's falling for what dogma.
Soot makes snow melt sooner. less snow means more light captured. A small amount of soot makes a big difference in snow melt rates. As the snow melts the soot tends to stay on top. It absorbs more light. It is black. Where there is a lot of soot in the air it makes things cooler locally. But the soot in the snow pack makes it melt sooner and that makes things warmer. I've been talking about this from when Al did his movie well from when it hit the discount movies. Some people at the local university are studying it.
You can see the soot from the industrial revolution in the peat bogs in England. If you can see the soot in the peat you can see the soot in the snow on top of the peat.
My Dad said (when asked why did the snow melt) because it got dirty.
As I said, soot will cause some snow melt. but you have to take the affect on albedo and balance that against soot in the atmosphere blocking the incoming radiation from the sun.
while melt may happen as a result of dirt on the snow, that does not mean the actual climate has warmed.
When the facts are faked, where does one put their faith? ...In those that faked the facts?
I personally don't have one of those faith issues. I do see one camp lying their butts off to sell a very profitable agenda. What so many are accepting as fact is nothing more than argumentum ad verecundiam. Let's not confuse truth with fact, particularly when falsifiable fact appears diametrically opposed to the truth, or the proverbial "consensus".
You are correct in stating that evidence is irrelevant to the faithful but you may just be confused as to who's falling for what dogma.
two words.
Tiljander
Yamal
Roe_Ryder, you are right on...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
