Originally posted by rickymouse
CO2 is not technically a pollutant, you are right about that. If concentrations of any natural molecule build up in the atmosphere though it causes
changes in the atmosphere. We ignored real science before, creating a false idealism that the world is big enough that all the changes we made to it
would be absorbed and it would repair itself. That is true but what we do creates a change and that change could bring along mans extinction. I do
not consider that a bad thing though since we are destroying the environment.
There are so many things wrong about your argument that I don't even know where to start.
First fo all, if anyone is creating a false ideology are those who keep siding with liars like Mann, Jones, Hansen, et al. Every one of the main
proponents of AGW, who for some reason are still called scientists, have been caught lying, publishing false information, and erroneous data, and or
have been caught even writing about using any tactic to stop research that refutes the AGW hoax.
Making claims about other people "ignoring the real science" does not make your argument right... I can counter your argument by saying " the
concensus of the mayority of scientists has been wrong in the past, so the concensus of the mayority of scientists now must be wrong too"... That's
without going into an argument about whether there is, or there is not a real concensus, and whether or not is true that "a mayority of scientists
agree with the AGW claim"...
Not only that, but we do know as a fact that the Earth has had more atmospheric CO2 than now, and not only did Earth recover, but also in much of the
Earth's existance atmospheric CO2 was higher than now and life not only existed but THRIVED on Earth.
Not to mention that there is no real proof that an increase in CO2 ever caused mass extinctions. Now, bear with me and let me explain this last
statement I just made...
I know some of you will jump the gun and post about past extinctions which are THOUGHT that CO2 was the cause of, but the fact is that other events
were occurring, such as the cause for the release of CO2 which could have been the real reason/s behind the mass extinctions.
I can post links to many different scientists who THINK some other factor was the cause for those extinctions. For example, a large meteor/asteroid
crashing on Earth, or large scale volcanic activity on Earth, etc could have been the real cause/s for some, if not all of those extinctions.
Originally posted by rickymouse
Maybe you can't believe the truth. Maybe you believe god will take care of it or that the world is immortal. Everything can die, nothing is
Oh, so you have the truth, so I guess that's it, I shouldn't be even trying to discuss this topic because "you" know the truth. How about you make an
intelligent and concise argument instead of being so vague, and trying to proclaim you know the truth?
Not to mention that like always, people like you have to bring up "belief"... In fact, my arguments are not based on any "belief", but rather
because of knowledge...
First of all, nature itself and observation shows us that most, if not all the claims behind AGW are false. For example, the fact that the largest
seasonal and annual warmings have occurred in areas which are remote, and far away from large cities should be a quick tell-tale sign that the claim
behind AGW is wrong.
Current warmth seems to be occurring nearly everywhere at the same time and is largest at high latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere. Over
the last 50 years, the largest annual and seasonal warmings have occurred in Alaska, Siberia and the Antarctic Peninsula. Most ocean areas have
warmed. Because these areas are remote and far away from major cities, it is clear to climatologists that the warming is not due to the influence of
pollution from urban areas.
Not only that, but the claim that the Sun's activity stopped increasing in the 70s, or 80s is also wrong.
NASA STUDY FINDS INCREASING SOLAR TREND THAT CAN CHANGE CLIMATE
Since the late 1970s, the amount of solar radiation the sun emits, during times of quiet sunspot activity, has increased by nearly .05 percent
per decade, according to a NASA funded study.
"This trend is important because, if sustained over many decades, it could cause significant climate change," said Richard
Willson, a researcher affiliated with NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University's Earth Institute, New York. He is the lead
author of the study recently published in Geophysical Research Letters.
The above research was only made during the period between 1978-2003, and in that research, the main scientist in charge of NASA's ACRIM experiments
found that the Sun's activity was in fact increasing even during that time that to this day the AGW proponents claim the Sun's activity had slowed
down or stopped, when that is not true at all.
Other past, and later research, and even observation of solar activity such as the levels of electromagnetic storms in the Sun all show that in fact
the Sun's activity had been increasing since decades before the late 1970s, but that it didn't stop increasing in 2003, but even up to about the year
2006, right before the Sun's activity truly slowed down to a crawl, and coincidentally around the time when temperatures on Earth began to drop for a
while until it started picking up again.
Then there is the fact that GCMs (Global Computer/Climate Models) have been found to be not only inneficient but comepletely wrong. You can scroll
back in this same thread to find some of the research that supports the fact that GCMs are wrong.
Then there is the fact that water vapor is not only 10 times more potent than CO2 molecule, by molecule, or the fact that it is a lot more abundant
than CO2, meanwhile CO2 exists on Earth right now at 0.0038% of all atmospheric gases meanwhile water vapor exists at from 1%-4% of atmospheric gases.
It is also a known fact that during warming events the levels of water vapor increase exponentially causing a feedback effect. The warmer the earth's
atmosphere is, the more it can hold water vapor, and the Earth has been warming since around the 1600s, even as it was still undergoing the LIA (the
Little Ice Age)
Then there is the fact that we know that changes in level of atmospheric CO2 have most often than not occurred after changes in temperatures, or in
other words, as an average CO2 level ncreases have lagged temperature changes on Earth by an average 800 years. During the ongoing Climate Change the
lag was around 200 years since we know through borehole data that the Earth was warming slowly but surely since around the early 1600s, and
temperature has been exponentially increasing since that time.
edit on 28-2-2013 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)