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.
You and every other reader have been provided the link to the original article. Why dont you read it, and stop with this attack on some blog site that referenced it?
You and every other reader have been provided the link to the original article. Why dont you read it, and stop with this attack on some blog site that referenced it?
I actually went one step further and pointed out that the ORIGINAL STUDY does NOT include the years AFTER 1895/the advent of modern industry, therefore is almost completely irrelevant when discussing AGW, which took place AFTER those years.
You didn't even read my post so how am I supposed to get tips on how to debate this sort of issue from you?
I actually went one step further and pointed out that the ORIGINAL STUDY does NOT include the years AFTER 1895/the advent of modern industry, therefore is almost completely irrelevant when discussing AGW, which took place AFTER those years.
You didn't even read my post so how am I supposed to get tips on how to debate this sort of issue from you?
Well, I did read your post and it was nonsense.
Explain to us all what happens when and ice age (even a Little Ice Ave) ends. When you have ansered that question, I will debate you further.
Oh I dont know. How about one has an atmosphere and the other one doesnt, and the one with the atmosphere has water as 75% of its surface area while the other doesnt. That's the basic science of it. And yes the science of it is settled, so I dont need peer reviewed papers to quote.
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.
I read the article. At the bottom it links to a right-wing denialist site call "hockeyshtick". This is not science. There's no science here.
I'm sure that if the denialists ever post something of actual scientific merit, it will show up in the scientific publications. This is why they never, ever post anything from scientific publications; their claims have no scientific merit.
Better luck next time, denialists.
Brietbart has a link to NOAA data. I guess NOAA is a crazy Tea Party site. You really are a
It's one link in a very long chain of things that effect climate. CO2 is actually an insulator and reflects more heat away from the earth, of course that doesn't mitigate the greenhouse effect. Let's suppose for a second the sun has absolute supremacy in controlling climate. In that scenario it could drive temperatures down. Wouldn't that be a stunner.
CO2 reflect little of the incident radiation. It reflects lower temperature infrared.
Explain to us all what happens when and ice age (even a Little Ice Ave) ends. When you have ansered that question, I will debate you further.
How is it nonsense?
This study OMITS practically ALL of the years in which AGW occurred... and yet this is proof that the current warming is caused by the sun? I'm pretty sure that if they were trying to debunk AGW they would be studying the years in which AGW occurred, not ignoring them and focusing ONLY on the past.
I don't think that anyone has ever debated that past warming was caused by the sun... obviously it was, because CO2 emissions from humans were almost nonexistent.
It doesn't mean that CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas, or that CO2 can't/has never caused warming. In fact, climatologists know that the sun is NOT responsible for the warming we're experiencing, so if no previous warming has been caused by CO2 I guess that makes this one pretty unique for the Holocene.
The 'story' in the OP is a deliberate attempt to mislead people, hoping they won't actually read the original study-- and it seems to have succeeded.
And now you're trying to change the subject-- seriously, what happens when an Ice Age ends? The sun triggers interglacial periods. Why do I have to repeatedly say this? Does that automatically mean the sun is growing hotter as we speak? That the current warming trend is obviously the result of the sun, just because?
Last edited by Spatula City; 12-10-2014 at 03:41 PM..
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.
