It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: spurgeonatorsrevenge
Well if you want a real example of the effects of carbon dioxide and heat exchange look at the planets Mercury and Venus which is actually the scientific genesis of "global warming" prior to examining the impact here on Earth; or Al Gore and all the rest..
originally posted by: spurgeonatorsrevenge
...
The Earth is subject to the exact same scientific principles
...
originally posted by: WeAre0ne
a reply to: schuyler
That is the problem right there... People like you who think they know how to read a graph.
Just because the red line is often in front of the blue line when scanning the graph left to right, does NOT mean that the blue line is lagging behind the red line. It does not mean temperature changes are causing CO2 changes...
As shown above, 130000 years ago, it is actually the temperature that is lagging behind the CO2, if you read the graph correctly.
Another good example is 330000 years ago (almost the beginning of the graph) you see a huge spike in CO2 (blue), and then later temperature (red) increases. It keeps that same lag throughout the graph.
You have been reading the graph completely wrong.
You are still correct that warmer temperatures causes oceans to release trapped CO2, but it is also true that CO2 causes warmer temperatures. That causes what is known as the "CO2 Positive Feedback Loop" which is what the main concern is.
www.abc.net.au...
originally posted by: Daedalus
a reply to: spurgeonatorsrevenge
earth is NOT subject to the same principles, because earth and venus are different enough to assert that there are different rules as to how the two planets "function"
furthermore, if CO2 causes the "greenhouse effect", and we're producing all the CO2 here on earth, where did the CO2 come from on venus? what's causing it there?
A runaway greenhouse effect is a process in which a net positive feedback between surface temperature and atmospheric opacity increases the strength of the greenhouse effect on a planet until its oceans boil away.[1][2] An example of this is believed to have happened in the early history of Venus. On the Earth, the IPCC states that "a 'runaway greenhouse effect'—analogous to Venus
originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
originally posted by: spurgeonatorsrevenge
Well if you want a real example of the effects of carbon dioxide and heat exchange look at the planets Mercury and Venus which is actually the scientific genesis of "global warming" prior to examining the impact here on Earth; or Al Gore and all the rest..
Wow...talk about being misinformed... First of all Venus is a lot closer to the Sun than Earth is. Second, Venus atmosphere is much denser than Earth's, and although it's atmosphere consists of 96% carbon dioxide, Earth's Co2 levels would never reach that level because of man's activities... Right now CO2 in Earth's atmosphere consists of about 0.038-0.040%...
Then there is the fact that if CO2 really causes such "massive temperature increases" then why hasn't it already done so?
originally posted by: spurgeonatorsrevenge
...
The Earth is subject to the exact same scientific principles
...
wow... It is certainly not... This is nothing more than scaremongering from misinformed people who don't know how else to try to scare people into believing their hogwash...
originally posted by: dieseldyk
Wow the shills are out in full force on this one. Here is the evidence of shilling
1. First someone quintuple posts (times 2) to bury the thread.
2. Then this guy here wrongly attributes my quote to someone else, I suppose so that I won't be alerted that someone has replied/quoted my post.
3. And if that wasn't enough, you resized the graph I posted so that you have to slide it over to see the most important part of the graph. A purposeful attempt to mislead.
originally posted by: dieseldyk
Its nice to bust a misinfo agent.
originally posted by: Daedalus
a reply to: WeAre0ne
then how do you explain rises in CO2, before we were producing all this CO2?
originally posted by: WeAre0ne
Our CO2 is building up, and it's not stopping anytime soon, so no matter what there is a problem.
originally posted by: Daedalus
a reply to: spurgeonatorsrevenge
you're still not answering the question
what caused it there?
and you're also completely ignoring the facts that venus is closer to the sun than earth, and that there are substantial differences between the planet, in terms of composition, orbit, and core function, which have a direct impact on atmospheric behavior, and overall planet function...
originally posted by: Stuship
a reply to: seeker1963
In the United States our Government funds the scientists at 2.6 billion dollars per year. We are to trust them that they are not just as greedy as Wall Street, even after the entire climate gate scandal erupted showing they are manipulating data.
originally posted by: raymundoko
You're cute. You don't even know why Venus is hot but here you are using decade old data invented by Sagan.
The runaway greenhouse effect of Venus is going the way of the dodo:
wattsupwiththat.com...
The first problem is that the surface of Venus receives no direct sunshine. The Venusian atmosphere is full of dense, high clouds “30–40 km thick with bases at 30–35 km altitude.”
wattsupwiththat.com...
Venera 9 measured clouds that were 30–40 km thick with bases at 30–35 km altitude. It also measured atmospheric chemicals including hydrochloric acid, hydrofluoric acid, bromine, and iodine. Other measurements included surface pressure of about 90 atmospheres (9 MPa), temperature of 485 °C, and surface light levels comparable to those at Earth mid-latitudes on a cloudy summer day.
there is very little sunshine reaching below 30km on Venus, it does not warm the surface much
This is further evidenced by the fact that there is almost no difference in temperature on Venus between day and night. It is just as hot during their very long (1400 hours) nights, so the 485C temperatures can not be due to solar heating and a resultant greenhouse effect.
The third problem is that Venus has almost no water vapor in the atmosphere