Ice core temperature analysis shows that our current warm interval between ice ages is due to end soon. However, their is reason to hope that an increase in CO2 levels might head off the next ice age, if a methane release from the Arctic regions comes into play. This isn't much consolation to the UK and Ireland right now who are experiencing one of the coldest winters on record going back to the invention of the thermometer.
The new Ice Age Cometh!
by Gill 221 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Gill
Besty - Confirmation bias cuts both ways.
As to CO2 being a greenhouse gas, I don't know. I do believe that a lot of the 'stuff' we are told is bumble bee poo and just like all 'New Light' will change when TPTB decides it suits them.
-
bohm
Gill: "As to CO2 being a greenhouse gas, I don't know"
You know we are talking about really basic physics here? Can you explain which part of this you doubt:
...CO 2 is an important component of Earth's atmosphere because it absorbs and emits infraredradiation at wavelengths of 4.26 µm (asymmetric stretching vibrational mode) and 14.99 µm (bending vibrational mode), thereby playing a role in the greenhouse effect. [3]
-
Gill
Bohm - Let me put it like this, WE NEED CO2 to live.
Demonising this gas is like demonising oxygen. Let's have less oxygen, shall we? Let's have less water in the world, shall we? Let's have less C02 in the world, shall we?
In all my years, I have heard scientists, doctors, professors, 'great minds' , men in suits, spout facts, figures, graphs, 'absolute facts' as unchangeable laws of nature, (including by the way that it is or now was impossible to travel faster than the speed of light, now obsolete science since electrons have been proved able to do this), so that spouting facts and figures, taken from a book, paper etc by Professor X, no longer cuts ice with me in any way.
You may call that scepticism but one thing I know or you'd prefer me to say 'believe' as I won't provide a graph and facts and figures for this, is that the Earth's temperature is not getting warmer whatever little number 'they' may come up with.
I don't 'know' that C02 is a greenhous gas.
I do know that people are paid to say this so that we can be taxed to hell and back. Now that IS a fact in my mind. This 'fact' that people are paid to say this, means that I personally cannot believe that whatever they say is without a personal agenda and therefore I will not trust them.
Can't help it if people don't like that.
I can't help it if you don't like it that I have not stood up in a suit, white coat, whatever and pronounced this with a graph, figures etc.
But one very IMPORTANT fact remains and that is THAT TIME WILL TELL!
All the global warming fanatics cannot deny one thing, that the story has already changed from 'Runaway Global Warming' scares, to 'Climate Change' scares. I haven't changed my stance and I still don't believe that the human race, a colony of ants in space, is responsible.
But, The Emperor Has No Clothes!
It will be interesting to come back to this story in 2 - 5 years time, if it is possible and compare notes on how the 'story' is changing.
-
amicus
You all crack me up, but it looks like we are up for more cold...more in Europe than here in Sunny Ca.
Weather changes and hopefully we humans change as well.
-
amicus
nice to see Robdar here.
and my take on all this is look to the sun and moon
-
amicus
You all remind me of an old movie in which all these astrologists danced around and blew flames out of their mouths...you have no idea what is going on.
Unless any of you choose to study the sun and moon?
-
bohm
amicus: sun and the moon -- what should we look for?
Gill: seriously. i dont know how to respond to your post because you get just about everything wrong.
- The scientists who happends to agree with you. Do you believe they are a corrupt bunch of crooks to?
- Is your position based on actual evidence? ie. can i change your position by citing scientific evidence from a scientific community you find entirely corrupt? if no, whats the point of discussing it with other?
- If i told you science ruled out the possiblity of electrons moving faster than the speed of light more than a hundred years ago (why? it would require more energy than there is in the universe to accelerate it above the speed of light), would this somehow change your view of science since you apparently think "faster-than-light" electrons is a reason to distrust science?
- are you aware science is only hope to find approximate answers to how nature work, not definate laws that they insist is 100% right?
- Do you think my position can be summed up as "CO2 is bad" or is that just something you wrote for fun? bonus question -- do you or do you not think the earth would be about 18 degrees cooler without CO2 in the atmosphere?
- how do you go from "lets demonize CO2" to "lets demonize oxygen"... why do you think i demonize anything..
- okay i just give up. i dont feel like going through your entire post, try to answer the first 3 of the above questions if you fee like. if you were drunk or just felt like being a bit condescending last night just tell me and we can ignore this exchange, which i find entirely unbecoming.
-
besty
Gill says:
Now that IS a fact in my mind.
The problem you have Gill is you don't appear to understand the definition of the word 'fact'
A belief can exist in your mind, and your mind only. A fact is subject to a stricter set of criteria, namely it must objectively be provable to represent reality.
My advice - be happy with your beliefs and your opinions and be happy for others that have a more rational yardstick for their universe.
-
besty
Gill says
WE NEED CO2 to live.
Gill also says:
I don't 'know' that C02 is a greenhous gas.
What properties of CO2 makes it essential to human life? Partly that it helps create a livable temperature?