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.
The Paris Accord is vaporware fluff. Go read what each nation "pledges" per that ridiculous piece of EU-centric nonsense. China's "pledge" is to keep increasing their CO2 output until 2025, maybe 2030, at which time they'll consider taking a look at whether they want to slow down their rate of CO2 output. That's the pledge. We'll keep doing whatever we want and maybe in 10 or so years, we'll ponder not doing that, perhaps.
That's pretty much how all the signatories of that ridiculous agreement signed on. Vague "maybes and kinda_sorta, perhaps, but maybe not" diplomatic fluff that is useful for exactly one thing - bludgeoning the US with negative publicity.
The United States has lowered CO2 output per capita to the lowest it's been since the early 70s, and all without some sort of empty pledge to some useless piece of UN-EU fireplace kindling. There's not a single enforceable thing in the Paris Accord, even if we were still part of it, and yet we have reduced CO2 per capita regardless. OMFG...people did something without the EU-UN bullying them? Really?
And before you go even further down the "2017 was hot and it's all Trump's fault" path, go back and look at the roll call vote in the Senate per the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. Here, I'll help get you there: S.Res.98 roll call vote, 7/25/1997
Oh by the way, Clinton was POTUS back then and Gore, as VP, was the President of the Senate. We pretty much summed up, in a seriously bipartisan fashion, how we felt about treaties/accords where we do harm to economy in the name of 3rd World countries doing whatever they want.
during the "Anthropogenic Global Warming Era" Deaths contributable to Weather Related incidence have dropped 90%.
Exactly what is the problem with a warming world?
Population increases require greater and greater food resources.
for every tenth of a degree of warming, the growing zones march hundreds of miles toward the poles. That creates vast millions a acres of land that become arable thus providing far more food to feed a growing population.
during the "Anthropogenic Global Warming Era" Deaths contributable to Weather Related incidence have dropped 90%.
Exactly what is the problem with a warming world?
Population increases require greater and greater food resources.
for every tenth of a degree of warming, the growing zones march hundreds of miles toward the poles. That creates vast millions a acres of land that become arable thus providing far more food to feed a growing population.
The scientific theories behind moon landing were established mostly in the 1920s and virtually all by 1940s. It then became an engineering problem not an science problem - I hope you know the difference.
"A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested, in accordance with the scientific method, using a predefined protocol of observation and experiment."
On the contrary, no theory has been established on how the global temperature or the climate is being affected. We know some of the factors, but not all the factors or not how they interact with each other, for example, water vapor is the #1 contributor to warming, not CO2. The models we used to predict have all been proven bad, and we don't have any good data going back more than 100 years.
But for some reason, some of you can definitely say that human activities caused global warming???
You are missing the most important aspect of why there is greater water vapor, its because of increased CO2, Methane and other gases in our atmosphere. Increases in greenhouse gases causes higher temperatures causing more water vapor causes increased warming. If we didn't have an increase of these gases the temperature and amount of water vapor would remain relatively constant.
There is always some doubt but every scientific organization agrees that man is responsible for the current warming. The present models are fairly accurate, water vapor doesn't just increase on its own so if you disagree with these scientific organizations then to what do you attribute the increase in water vapor.
Here is a good article from the American Chemical Society.
Quote:
If there had been no increase in the amounts of non-condensable greenhouse gases, the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere would not have changed with all other variables remaining the same. The addition of the non-condensable gases causes the temperature to increase and this leads to an increase in water vapor that further increases the temperature. This is an example of a positive feedback effect. The warming due to increasing non-condensable gases causes more water vapor to enter the atmosphere, which adds to the effect of the non-condensables.
The Paris Accord is vaporware fluff. Go read what each nation "pledges" per that ridiculous piece of EU-centric nonsense. China's "pledge" is to keep increasing their CO2 output until 2025, maybe 2030, at which time they'll consider taking a look at whether they want to slow down their rate of CO2 output. That's the pledge. We'll keep doing whatever we want and maybe in 10 or so years, we'll ponder not doing that, perhaps.
That's pretty much how all the signatories of that ridiculous agreement signed on. Vague "maybes and kinda_sorta, perhaps, but maybe not" diplomatic fluff that is useful for exactly one thing - bludgeoning the US with negative publicity.
The United States has lowered CO2 output per capita to the lowest it's been since the early 70s, and all without some sort of empty pledge to some useless piece of UN-EU fireplace kindling. There's not a single enforceable thing in the Paris Accord, even if we were still part of it, and yet we have reduced CO2 per capita regardless. OMFG...people did something without the EU-UN bullying them? Really?
And before you go even further down the "2017 was hot and it's all Trump's fault" path, go back and look at the roll call vote in the Senate per the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. Here, I'll help get you there: S.Res.98 roll call vote, 7/25/1997
Oh by the way, Clinton was POTUS back then and Gore, as VP, was the President of the Senate. We pretty much summed up, in a seriously bipartisan fashion, how we felt about treaties/accords where we do harm to economy in the name of 3rd World countries doing whatever they want.
The Paris Climate Accord had some commitments as far as funding but you are correct in that the reductions were voluntary. Still it is important that we lead the world, is a little disingenuous that we as the number one polluter in the last 100 years pulls away from a world wide organization to address climate change. We have made large steps but now we are even trying to back away from Obama's Clean Power Act, doesn't sound like we are taking this seriously enough.
You are missing the most important aspect of why there is greater water vapor, its because of increased CO2, Methane and other gases in our atmosphere. Increases in greenhouse gases causes higher temperatures causing more water vapor causes increased warming. If we didn't have an increase of these gases the temperature and amount of water vapor would remain relatively constant.
There is always some doubt but every scientific organization agrees that man is responsible for the current warming. The present models are fairly accurate, water vapor doesn't just increase on its own so if you disagree with these scientific organizations then to what do you attribute the increase in water vapor.
Here is a good article from the American Chemical Society.
Once again, I am not qualified to argue with you on the exact science. Despite of my years of engineering and scientific education and training, this is a topic beyond my comprehension and the comprehension of the vast majority of the people, even the climatologists.
This is not something we understand well at all, and the science is still in its infancy at best. No good historical data available, no theories have been established, and all the models along with the predication have been proven wrong.
So, Goodnight, aka the super science genius, how did you know anything at all?
You'll find out when the food supply suffers disruptions and skyrocketing prices due to an increased incidence of droughts and floods worldwide. Even the Trump administration agrees with it: "Donald Trump’s secretary for agriculture signed a communique on Sunday at the G7 meeting recognizing climate change threatens the global food supply. "
You'll find out when the food supply suffers disruptions and skyrocketing prices due to an increased incidence of droughts and floods worldwide. Even the Trump administration agrees with it: "Donald Trump’s secretary for agriculture signed a communique on Sunday at the G7 meeting recognizing climate change threatens the global food supply. "
Once again, this is not a problem you, I or the climatologists can even understand.
You'll find out when the food supply suffers disruptions and skyrocketing prices due to an increased incidence of droughts and floods worldwide. Even the Trump administration agrees with it: "Donald Trump’s secretary for agriculture signed a communique on Sunday at the G7 meeting recognizing climate change threatens the global food supply. "
you do realize that a warming world increases both the amount of food that can be produced AND increases the amount of rainfall that aids in the growing... and CO2 increases give plants vitality?
saying there is a threat to the food supply is easy. suggesting the science that says the opposite is the case becomes a bit more difficult.
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.
