Stitch on 21/1/2010 at 14:08
STOP POSTING YOU RIDICULOUS IDIOT
Fragony on 21/1/2010 at 14:24
Oh sorry did I say anything wrong? Let's not get things get too heated and keep it cool as well (just to be sure the trees man think of the trees man), who knows people could die this is fucking dangerous. So say your prayer and wish for the best but you are fucked, it would be a pretty safe deal to wish for the best given the track-record of eco-scaremongers and their budgets to make you absolutely terrified of CO2, but you are dead anyway, just uhh because
Stitch on 21/1/2010 at 15:36
Quote Posted by Fragony
Oh sorry did I say anything wrong?
You have been nothing if not consistent.
But seriously, I'm happy to drop all this as long as you STOP POSTING
DDL on 21/1/2010 at 15:54
Heee! My favourite bit was the sentence with "this is what real science looks like", which linked straight to a 404.
Also seems to go down the route of saying WARMING AIN'T HAPPENING, and then explains all the reasons why CO2 isn't behind this warming. This warming that..ain't happening?
And the maths on the water vapour really don't add up. Water vapour contributes 70% of the greenhouse effect, whereas CO2 is 4.2-8.4%, apparently. Then he goes on to say that there is effectively 70 times as much water as there is CO2 in the atmosphere, which by my back-of-a-beermat calculations makes CO2 about 4-8 times as potent a greenhouse gas as water. Water has gone up by a LOT! in quantity, but only a tiny amount in proportion, whereas CO2 has gone up by a tiny amount in quantity, but a LOT! in proportion.
So...it still comes down to CO2 being more important.
Ultimately, you can bitch on about how OMG CORRUPT science is, and to a certain extent, you'd be right: scientists are humans, after all. The thing is, though: bullshit only lasts for so long, and if all this data truly was being just made up and manipulated by EVIL SCIENTISTS, it would've been discredited looooong ago. That it's still around is pretty good evidence in and of itself. Combine this with the fact that possible consequences of non-action include effective extinction, and it seems incredibly stupid not to try and actually fucking DO something about it.
Still, not sure why I'm actually bothering to post this: most of you already know it, and Frag's too busy worrying about the U.N. stealing his tax money to pay for bogus environmental death lasers or something.:erg:
Fragony on 21/1/2010 at 16:15
Quote Posted by Stitch
You have been nothing if not consistent.
Read that again
SubJeff on 21/1/2010 at 16:36
Wait, are you trying to challenge another native English speaker on his delivery of a widely used phrase?
GET OUT OF MY FORUM
zombe on 21/1/2010 at 16:38
Quote Posted by DDL
Water vapor ... CO2 ...
The thing with thous two is that:
Water vapor: concentration is high only in low altitude and nonexistent high up.
CO2: concentration is the same on every altitude.
Water vapor: blocks heat very damn well and is plentiful - but works for only a relatively short band of heat.
CO2: on the other hand blocks quite large band - essentially plugging the huge holes that water vapor leaves. Also, differently from water vapor, CO2 works also at altitudes where there is not enough water vapor to do the job at any band.
This is why comparing their (average) concentration and potency is meaningless.
st.patrick on 21/1/2010 at 17:49
Also
Quote:
I am told that, "... meteorologists I know that are skeptical about global warming are weather forecasters (not researchers) and have little expertise in the science of climate change -- their jobs do not require it."
Well if changing weather isn't climate change what is it?this.
Sulphur on 21/1/2010 at 21:00
Quote Posted by Fragony
Explaining why something that isn't happening is in fact happening should be a great start for any discussion on things that are a clear and present danger to humanity's sheer existence.
Well I'm not the one who needs the tampons. Stop bleeding over me, and to resurrect a comeback gone so long it's back now I suggest you
PLUG IT UP
