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.
During and after WW2, economies kicked into high gear, with massive outputs of CO2. Yet temps fell from their highs in the 1930s.
If CO2 is the "driver" of climate, which did temps fall over this 35 year period?
The year 1936 recorded the hottest thermometer readings of any year in the last 5,000. However, these days NOAA reports only its “adjusted” temperatures, which always seem to go only higher. In fact, the first surge of human-emitted carbon dioxide after World War II should have produced the biggest surge of warming – if CO2 is the control factor. Instead temperatures went down from 1940 to 1975.
The short answer is the use of aerosols in the atmosphere. The much longer answer is here:
You are truly in over your head Hawkeye...You obviously don't understand the role aerosols play in earth's climate any better than you understand the role of CO2.
Sulfate aerosols have declined significantly since 1970 with the Clean Air Act in the United States and similar policies in Europe. The Clean Air Act was strengthened in 1977 and 1990. According to the EPA, from 1970 to 2005, total emissions of the six principal air pollutants, including PM’s, dropped by 53% in the US. In 1975, the masked effects of trapped greenhouse gases finally started to emerge and have dominated ever since.
op is a a graduate of the Limbaugh university of climatology.A place where opinion becomes fact.
With all the what If'isms, appears to be'isms, could be'isms, and using all those vague ism's as proof that the science is settled? Seems it is those people who are turning opinions and wishes into facts far more than anyone else.
You are pulling the cart while calling everyone else donkeys.
Yes................. you guys are brilliant! Much like a Downs syndrome child, proud of using the poddy for the first time.
Are you prejudice against people with disabilities? How Christian of you.
Quote:
You see................ remember when you called it "global warming" (that was before you figured out it actually wasn't warming and changed it to "climate change")?
Do you have any idea why? No, of course you don't, you just remember the talking points.
The terms are used frequently in the scientific literature, because they refer to two different physical phenomena. As the name suggests, 'global warming' refers to the long-term trend of a rising average global temperature.
'Climate change', again as the name suggests, refers to the changes in the global climate which result from the increasing average global temperature. For example, changes in precipitation patterns, increased prevalence of droughts, heat waves, and other extreme weather, etc.
Now, think about this next time you want to use that old trope so many deniers love, OK, sparky?
You still fail to understand the difference, and how one affects the other. Why?
Do you mind showing where I made any comments about sulphur dioxide? Perhaps you are confusing me with another poster. Try and keep it straight, OK?
You have no idea what my political views are, but I can guarantee you your suppostions are wrong. I have no idea if you are a racist. Are you?
You have a short memory.
You stated that the cooling from 1940-1975 was due to "aerosols". The primary "aerosol" due to industrial production and combustion is sulpher dioxide.
If you believe in AGW, you are a lib. Chances are very poor that you voted for Trump or any republican ever for that matter.
on post #68, you congratulate yourself in being so learned in the ways of "science" (like a Monty Python skit) when actually YOU did not "understand", thus appearing a fool.
Last edited by hawkeye2009; 04-10-2019 at 01:49 PM..
This is what your AGW "climate engineers" advocate doing. This shows the obvious danger of the AGW lunacy as it is not just a bunch of crackpots making silly statements.
The "cure" proposed for AGW will certainly damage the global economy. Flooding the atmosphere with sulpher dioxide is sheer lunacy and could have disasterous effects on the planet- all for a hoax.
Besides, the concentration of sulpher dioxide in the atmosphere WORLDWIDE (that means global) has increased steadily over the 20th century. Emissions fell in the US and Europe, but have increased in asia, leading to GLOBAL INCREASES IN AEROSOLS.
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.
Much like a Downs syndrome child, proud of using the poddy for the first time.
