0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Is it just me or is it becoming colder as of february 2020.
The super hero that saves fanatical leftwing liberal fascists from the facts so they can continue pseudo science persecution at their leisure and supress the reality that is blowing (probably with snow come winter) directly infront of their face. # world famine
Sea ice is also bucking the trend despite the raging summers of the arctic siberia europe and the Usa
fanatical leftwing liberal fascists
Re: Does man's use of energy in the last 200 years mean global warming is man-made?« Reply #124 on: Yesterday at 15:24:42 »You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.
Quote from: Petrochemicals on 27/08/2020 14:43:56Sea ice is also bucking the trend despite the raging summers of the arctic siberia europe and the UsaIf you have data showing that the average rate of global ice loss has not changed significantly in the past few decades, I'd be interested in seeing it.
Quote from: Petrochemicals on 27/08/2020 14:43:56fanatical leftwing liberal fascistsDo you really think those are the only people who accept the reality of global warming? I, for one, have never understood the supposed political dichotomy on global warming. Why should one's political or economic leanings have any impact on whether they accept that the planet is warming or not?
Sorry kryptid forgot the link, https://earth.gsfc.nasa.gov/cryo/data/current-state-sea-ice-cover
Ahaa, you clicked on this ready to make statements about carbon dioxide.If by mans activity during the hours of daylight (point of the earth facing the sun) applies force to the surface of the earth, whilst by the hours of darkness he is static, would this activity have an effect (however small) to permanently alter the distance of the earth from the sun (and all the earths varying orbit cycles) and thus altering the climate. If a plane takes off from the surface of the earth when it is facing the sun, the earth is forced away from the sun. Said plane thrusts against the earth via the airduring the hours of daylight. When the plane lands the earth and plane once more move closer together, but the plane is now in darkness and once more the earth is moved further away from the sun and is left permanently more distant from the star. Similar activities powered by mass energy usage include vehicles moving across the surface.The flaw in this theory is that the earth should be getting colder, but i wonder whether i have the physics wrong and this activity is acting as a gravitational source that moves the earth closer.Also if the result of burning hydrocarbons is water and co2 is the sea level rise down to increased liquid in the oceans ? and i do not mean via the exon valdez.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 27/08/2020 15:24:42Re: Does man's use of energy in the last 200 years mean global warming is man-made?« Reply #124 on: Yesterday at 15:24:42 »You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.Yes bc, I understand what your saying, but you have said such becore and it really has no more bearing this time since the last.
Re: Does man's use of energy in the last 200 years mean global warming is man-made?« Reply #130 on: Today at 12:54:03 »You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.
The science data can show that the earth has gone through many cycles of climate change over its long history. This data is undeniable and accepted by science. The premise of man made climate change for the earth, is new. Because it is new to the earth, is has no precedent in terms o of the long term earth data. If we assume this premise was true, it would be the first time in the history of the earth. Therefore, the manmade premise has only one possible data point; one single connected event in earth history. The problem is, to draw a straight line you need two data points. If the Romans did this before we would have a second point. This is not the case. If we had three or more data points we can draw a curve. We can draw a curve with the natural earth data since we have dozens of good data points. However, If you try to draw a curve with one data point; one unique event in earth history, you have to guess at the slope of the line. This is where science starts to break down and politics and opinion have a voice in science.
Quote from: Petrochemicals on 28/08/2020 00:35:56Sorry kryptid forgot the link, https://earth.gsfc.nasa.gov/cryo/data/current-state-sea-ice-coverLooking at the first images about Arctic ice coverage, it most certainly shows a trend towards less sea ice as the years roll from 1979 to 2020. The Antarctic ice coverage data is more ambiguous, but the fact that Antarctica is literally a continent, I wouldn't expect it to react as quickly to warming weather as the Arctic.
Again chemist, another good post by you, alot better than your earlier posts which seemed to wish to get round an inconvenient truth,
Re: Does man's use of energy in the last 200 years mean global warming is man-made?« Reply #134 on: Yesterday at 16:20:44 »You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.
it lookslike you are slipping into your old habbits of repeatedly posting the same thing, over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 16:20:44Re: Does man's use of energy in the last 200 years mean global warming is man-made?« Reply #134 on: Yesterday at 16:20:44 »You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 12:54:03Re: Does man's use of energy in the last 200 years mean global warming is man-made?« Reply #130 on: Today at 12:54:03 »You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 27/08/2020 15:24:42Re: Does man's use of energy in the last 200 years mean global warming is man-made?« Reply #124 on: Yesterday at 15:24:42 »You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.
Quote from: Petrochemicals on 28/08/2020 13:25:15Again chemist, another good post by you, alot better than your earlier posts which seemed to wish to get round an inconvenient truth,There's no actual evidence to support that view of yours, is there?