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.

 

Scientists Confirm Significant Global Cooling Coming

page: 6
30
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Suppose it's pointless to add if you add water you've got your steam and presure power thrown in, lets not forget a nuclear reactor works by extracting the rods to create steam.

My dynamo kettle can do it!




posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin
Do you accept that water vapour is a GHG and causes warming of the planet's surface? I would hope you say, yes.


Water vapor is an interesting animal. In the winter a cloud layer will absolutely keep temperatures up as a clear sky allows the warmth to radiate back out into space. However water vapor also has a cooling effect in that it blocks heat from building in the summer months. Water vapor makes a nice temperature regulator. It keeps the lows from getting too low and it keeps the highs from getting too high.

So I would say calling it a temperature regulator is a more accurate statement.



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Engines live and die by compression. Hydrogen Engine anyone...



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indy
Water vapor is an interesting animal.


Yes, it is.

Is it a greenhouse gas. Simple question really.



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 01:09 PM
link   
How about we get away from compression/combustion based engines? Someone came up with that idea a very long idea ago and we've never really acknowledged it as dated technology. But thats a completely different thread :-)



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 01:10 PM
link   
No wonder the Aliens love visiting earth, pick up your free H2O fuel.



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin
Yes, it is.

Is it a greenhouse gas. Simple question really.


No it isn't that simple. And that is exactly why the AGW house of cards is crumbling. The climate is very dynamic and it isn't as cut and dry as you are trying to make out. GW supporters think it is that simple. It isn't. But that is what happens to two dimensional thinking in a three dimensional world.



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indy
No it isn't that simple. And that is exactly why the AGW house of cards is crumbling. The climate is very dynamic and it isn't as cut and dry as you are trying to make out. GW supporters think it is that simple. It isn't. But that is what happens to two dimensional thinking in a three dimensional world.


No, the question was that simple. And no amount of obfuscation will cloud that. You can try to claim clouds as water vapour if you like, but they are condensed droplets and ice. That is not considered water vapour, which is the gas phase.

Lets try a different approach. The greenhouse effect is the result of various atmospheric constituents. Two major components are water vapour and carbon dioxide.

True or false?

[edit on 8-1-2008 by melatonin]



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin
No, the question was that simple. And no amount of obfuscation will cloud that. You can try to claim clouds as water vapour if you like, but they are condensed droplets and ice. That is not considered water vapour, which is the gas phase.

Lets try a different approach. The greenhouse effect is the result of various atmospheric constituents. Two major components are water vapour and carbon dioxide.

True or false?


You really enjoy providing incomplete and misleading information don't you? Clouds are made up of either ice crystals or water droplets. Cirrus clouds are made up of ice crystals while lower level clouds can be made up of water droplets. Now while you try and dance around this for the sake of protecting AGW here is something that I'm sure many people already know.

Water vapor... aka clouds... do a number of things when it comes to regulating temperature on the surface. In the winter time a cloud layer (even a thin one) can cap cooling at night by not allowing warmer air built up during the day to escape. You would call that a greenhouse effect. Unlike a typical greenhouse gas water vapor also has an albedo effect. Water vapor can and does reduce warming during daylight hours. The concentration of water vapor amplifies both effects to a point. The ability of water vapor to reflect solar radiation back into space also diminishes the amount of heat that can be trapped at the surface. Water vapor will bring maximum and minimum temperatures closer together and the longer the heavier vapor layer remains the lower the maximum temperatures become.

Fortunately for us the amount of vapor in the atmosphere over any given point changes frequently allowing heat to escape or heat to build.

For those that think water vapor just warms consider this...

Are the hottest days of the year clear days or overcast/cloudy?

By contrast...

Are the coldest days of the year clear days or overcast/cloudy?

So there ya go. To think that something like this which involves many scenarios with multiple outcomes is a true/false question & answer is just silly.



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indy
You really enjoy providing incomplete and misleading information don't you? Clouds are made up of either ice crystals or water droplets. Cirrus clouds are made up of ice crystals while lower level clouds can be made up of water droplets.



Water vapor... aka clouds...


Please, indy, stop.

Water vapour is the gaseous phase of H2O. Ice is the solid phase of H2O. Water droplets are the liquid phase.

They are all the same substance, but are different phases. When one talks about water vapour, this is specifically the gaseous phase.

Water vapour is a greenhouse gas. Best if we left that for now, it's getting silly.

Anyway, this Bob Carter, do you find him a reliable source of information?



[edit on 8-1-2008 by melatonin]



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin
Water vapour is a greenhouse gas. Best if we left that for now, it's getting silly.


What is getting silly is your pathetic attempt to skew reality in order to support your ideas. I would recommend starting your own thread talking about how evil man is and you can promote your agenda to your hearts content. In your thread you can pretend the climate is 2 dimensional and non reactive. In your thread you can pretend H20 lives in the atmosphere as an invisible gas that heats the world and never transitions to different forms where it blocks solar radiation from reaching the surface. You can start your own thread and limit the complex discussions to true/false answers only. We'll keep thread open for common sense discussions.



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 07:47 PM
link   
Ahem.

Calling Indy 'muad'dib' had better stop now. I'd like to see this thread return to a civil discussion of the topic - Scientists Confirm Significant Global Cooling Coming, not 'does the evaporative effect exist'.

Thank you.



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Duzey
Calling Indy 'muad'dib' had better stop now.


lol.. um. I don't get it? muad'dib? This isn't one of those things that I'm going to be the last person to figure out is it? :-)



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indy
What is getting silly is your pathetic attempt to skew reality in order to support your ideas.

...

We'll keep thread open for common sense discussions.


sheesh, yeah, common sense...

Indy, you have no idea what you are talking about.


The Earth's comfortable (for us) average temperature of about 15C is maintained that way by the atmosphere. The presence of small amounts of water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide - the "greenhouse gases" which absorb Earth's outgoing heat radiation and re-emit some of it downwards - causes warming. Most of the total warming of 33 degrees is caused by water vapour (more than 30 degrees), carbon dioxide contributing only about 1.2 degrees worth. And of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, just 3per cent comes from human sources, which equates to a warming effect of about four-hundredths of a degree.

Bob Carter

Even your denialist friend in your videos knows that it is a simple question. Of course, he then goes on to mislead muchly with the 3% number, for example.

But at least he's honest enough to accept the reality of water vapour as a greenhouse gas. It was just a very simple question to help clarify one issue, it didn't need an obfuscating politician's answer.

It all started from a very simple example attempting to show why the lag issue is a canard. How even a GHG like water vapour can both be affected by temperature and have an effect on temperature, just like CO2.

What a wicked web we weave...



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indy
Global Warming supporters will be fuming over this. They will come up with nonsense replies like the one I am responding to that tries to attack the messenger because the report is damaging to their beliefs. This is much in the way people in the past were attacked for research because it was felt that such worked diminished god somehow. GW is like a religion to these people and they will protect it at all cost.


Aaaaaand there it is. You almost had me thinking you were actually interested in the science going on, but it would appear it's just intended as a "gotcha." Well done, though you could have held the act up to at least the second page.



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Duzey
Calling Indy 'muad'dib' had better stop now....Thank you.


I never called Indy muad'dib. Indy's Indy.

I called the new user commonsense4eber muad'dib. He is by the way.

I'll just call him 'Leto' if that's better though.

ABE: And I'm happy to discuss the solar issue, I think I have to a large extent, I'm just correcting a few misconceptions, shall we say


[edit on 8-1-2008 by melatonin]



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin
I never called Indy muad'dib. Indy's Indy.


So.... I must be the only person that doesn't get it :-) Anyone care to explain the muad'dib reference?



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indy
So.... I must be the only person that doesn't get it :-) Anyone care to explain the muad'dib reference?


Heh, no problem, indy.

He's a banned user who appears to have taken the Lazarus story to heart.



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 08:45 PM
link   
I have no idea who Lazarus is. :-)

BTW there are no misconceptions when it comes to water vapor. The amazing thing about water is the very limited temperature range needed to pass it from a solid, to a liquid, and to a gas. It exists in all forms in the atmosphere and it provides both warming and cooling. To call it strictly a greenhouse was wouldn't be accurate. Unlike CO2 in the atmosphere water isn't trapped in a gaseous state. It is easily trapped in layers of the atmosphere where it forms small water droplets (clouds). In this form in can easily trap heat from escaping and easily block heat from building. The greater the volume the greater the effect.

Not unlike the small water droplets form the gaseous form also is a temperature regulator. It seems to keep temperatures confined within a relatively small window. You will notice that extreme temperatures in either direction accompany very low relative humidity. You just aren't going to find -20F with an 80% relative humidity. You aren't going to find 120F with an 80% relative humidity either. And thank god for that.

Do label it strictly as a greenhouse gas is an injustice to it. Water is far more dynamic than that in all of its forms. It can give us warmth by trapping heat or it can provide evaporative cooling.



posted on Jan, 8 2008 @ 08:54 PM
link   
I agree, indy.

Water does all sorts of stuff in the climate system. I wasn't really arguing against that. I accept that clouds can both warm and cool. But water vapour is a GHG.

I was only trying to raise a comparison between CO2 and water vapour. In that both can be affected by temperature, and also have an effect on temperature.

Indeed, they both predominately act as positive feedbacks in the climate system. The big difference between them in this regard is that CO2 has a longer residence time, and can therefore also be an effective forcing.

ABE: oh, and Lazarus was raised from the dead by the jesus dude.

[edit on 8-1-2008 by melatonin]



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join