Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-11-2014, 09:14 AM
 
Location: Someplace Wonderful
5,177 posts, read 4,794,097 times
Reputation: 2587

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by DCforever View Post

You're missing one other basic science issue. The water vapor is a direct function of temperature and thus not an independent variable. CO2 is one of several green house gasses that we know affect the planets energy balance. The CO2 level on Venue and the resulting temperature is an interesting comparison.

BTW science is never "settled". Law can be settled, but not science.
1) I was making a joke, directed at the AGW crowd.

2) do you have a more correct reason about lunar "climate" versus earth climate?

3) I'm pretty sure that gravity is "settled" So is radioactive decay. So is that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. So is a LOT of other stuff. AGW is NOT settled, no matter how much the AGW crowd whines that it is. Hell, they cant even answer a simple question about what happens when an ice age ends.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-11-2014, 09:41 AM
 
2,777 posts, read 1,782,756 times
Reputation: 2418
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
And researchers won't get grants to say it's the sun, either.
What about these researchers?

NASA/Marshall Solar Physics
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2014, 09:45 AM
 
2,777 posts, read 1,782,756 times
Reputation: 2418
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckmann View Post
What current warming?

An ice age (no matter how little in the grand scheme of things) ended 150 years ago. It has warmed ever since.
Yes, but the real question (on city-data, not in reality) is why it has warmed more than solar activity alone can explain.

The answer to this question is CO2 emissions from human activity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckmann View Post
The massive CO2 releases of the last 60 years have NOT led to the catastrophes that the AGW crow have screamed about for the last 20 years
What catastrophes?

Is this where you claim that anyone (no matter what their credentials) who made a prediction that failed to pass is suddenly at the forefront of climatology, and that it therefore follows that all predictions are totally useless?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2014, 09:45 AM
 
Location: Someplace Wonderful
5,177 posts, read 4,794,097 times
Reputation: 2587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spatula City View Post
What about these researchers?

NASA/Marshall Solar Physics
Well, I got ten bucks says the AGW crowd will find some way to discredit them. They always do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2014, 09:52 AM
 
2,777 posts, read 1,782,756 times
Reputation: 2418
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckmann View Post
Well, I got ten bucks says the AGW crowd will find some way to discredit them. They always do.
You really have no idea how this works, do you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2014, 10:02 AM
 
Location: San Diego California
6,795 posts, read 7,291,785 times
Reputation: 5194
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCforever View Post
There is currently no scientific evidence that disputes the evidence of anthropogenic climate change. Saying the Sun influences climate is certainly true. So do green house gases. The two assertions are not in conflict.
As with most things the devil is in the details. Increases in CO2 are favorable to plant growth which in turn regulates CO2 and increases O2.
The earth has a system which regulates atmospheric gasses, it can do nothing about changes in solar activity.
Climate is also being changed by the fact that the poles are migrating some 25 to 40 miles a year.

Yet none of this helps build the case for taxes and the monopolization of industry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2014, 10:19 AM
 
Location: Someplace Wonderful
5,177 posts, read 4,794,097 times
Reputation: 2587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spatula City View Post
You really have no idea how this works, do you?
I know EXACTLY how the AGW crowd works. Ask THESE GUYS
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2014, 10:23 AM
 
Location: Long Island
57,311 posts, read 26,236,916 times
Reputation: 15651
Who is Principia Scientific?

Love it when a link starts with "New Scientific Paper".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2014, 10:24 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,805,597 times
Reputation: 24863
The climate of the Earth is effected by the solar output. The sun is not constant? I am shocked. I thought it was only related to the amount of smoke mankind makes by burning coal and weed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2014, 10:26 AM
 
Location: Someplace Wonderful
5,177 posts, read 4,794,097 times
Reputation: 2587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spatula City View Post
Yes, but the real question (on city-data, not in reality) is why it has warmed more than solar activity alone can explain.

The answer to this question is CO2 emissions from human activity.
Says who?

[quote=Spatula City;37599909]What catastrophes?

Oh yez, I get it. When backed into a corner you peope DENY you ever made those catastrophic predictions. Never said we would get more and more extreme whether/

Damn, arguing with you people is like playing whack a mole.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spatula City View Post
Is this where you claim that anyone (no matter what their credentials) who made a prediction that failed to pass is suddenly at the forefront of climatology, and that it therefore follows that all predictions are totally useless?


So you DENY that the AGW crowd has NEVER predicted catastrophe and that all this talk about carbon exchanges and taxation is what? Amazing. I have been arguing with AGW bots since 2004. They all change their story very time they are caught fibbing, or every time their climate models are shown to be nonsense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:57 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top