I love it. Fuji has just dismissed the AGW hypothesis as "crazy kook bullshit."Show me an article in Nature or Science that bscjds up your crazy kook bullshit about the result being minescule.
https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/faq-2-1.htmlWater vapour is the most abundant and important greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. However, human activities have only a small direct influence on the amount of atmospheric water vapour. Indirectly, humans have the potential to affect water vapour substantially by changing climate.
But the CO2 in the atmosphere is NOT thoroughly mixed in the atmosphere,...as per NASA,...and yes,...I gave you a link for that.Not one thing in your post is true. CO2 does mix, and is the CO2 settled out that .04 would be deep enough to suffocate you.
So says the guy who spent more than a year insisting that the water vapour feedback has a "reducing" effect on the Earth's temperature.The level of water vapor is driven by CO2.
He takes that bull shit line because he won't acknowledge that what NASA calls a water vapour positive feed back loop,...which consists of two, and ONLY components,...water vapour and temperature,...and is a natural phenomena,...responsible for as NASA states,...90% of the green house effect.So says the guy who spent more than a year insisting that the water vapour feedback has a "reducing" effect on the Earth's temperature.
Never said that. You lie. You can't win this debate on the merits do you have turned to slinging mud.So says the guy who spent more than a year insisting that the water vapour feedback has a "reducing" effect on the Earth's temperature.
Spam. Cutting and pasting you stupid post over and over won't make it any less wrong.But the CO2 in the atmosphere is NOT thoroughly mixed in the atmosphere,...as per NASA,...and yes,...I gave you a link for that.
So according to you,...NASA is wrong,...
And,... "CO2 will have the same effect on the planets temperature regardless if its 5 feet above ground or 50,000 feet above ground",....
And you agreed that you are also obviously wrong,...
And,...it isn't CM's claim,...read the fricken post before you begin your childish insulting.
Now we are getting some where,...took you long enough though.
So once again you are stating that NASA is wrong,...way to go fuji.Spam. Cutting and pasting you stupid post over and over won't make it any less wrong.
Nope I'm stating that you are wrong. I'm also pointing out that you are a disgusting spammer who cuts and pastes the same thing over and overSo once again you are stating that NASA is wrong,...way to go fuji.
Nope,...once again fuji,...you are stating NASA is wrong.Nope I'm stating that you are wrong. I'm also pointing out that you are a disgusting spammer who cuts and pastes the same thing over and over
NASA does not claim all the CO2 in the atmosphere sinks out into a layer at the bottomNope,...once again fuji,...you are stating NASA is wrong.
Everything I posted was from NASA,...you know,...the kooky site.
So now I'm a disgusting spammer,...now that's a new childish insult for you,...but hey,...you have so many childish insults,... kinda hard to keep track.
NASA'S own graphic of the planet shows that CO2 does NOT mix well in the atmosphere,...far from it.,..to which I gave you a link.NASA does not claim all the CO2 in the atmosphere sinks out into a layer at the bottom.
NASA states that water vapour is responsible for the very least 90% of the planets green house gases warming of the planet,...which is a natural occurrence,...and has been for recorded history.NASA does not dispute that CO2 caused global warming.
So you agree that CO2 mixes in the troposhere, and not the stratosphere, which is not news and not interesting.NASA'S own graphic of the planet shows that CO2 does NOT mix well in the atmosphere,...far from it.,..to which I gave you a link.
I didn't state that CO2 sinks to the "bottom",...what ever the hell that means.
NASA states that water vapour is responsible for the very least 90% of the planets green house gases warming of the planet,...which is a natural occurrence,...and has been for recorded history.
If it wasn't for the water vapour green house phenomena,...we would not have evolved to what man is today,...according to NASA,...and any other site that understands how the planet works.
I didn't produce the graphics that showed that CO2 is NOT well mixed, not even close,...NASA did,...and obviously,...it was in regard to the troposphere,...but I guess not obvious to you.So you agree that CO2 mixes in the troposhere, and not the stratosphere, which is not news and not interesting..
So once again you are stating that NOAA is wrong,...about how the water vapour positive feedback loop functions,...your level of expertise knows no bounds,...I'm impressed.I've already answered your water vapor statement by pointing out that the warming caused by CO2 levels caused the increase in water vapor levels.
I don't think you understand anything you post. You do realize that if CO2 concentrated nearer the surface it traps more heat?I didn't produce the graphics that showed that CO2 is NOT well mixed, not even close,...NASA did,...and obviously,...it was in regard to the troposphere,...but I guess not obvious to you.
So once again you are stating that NOAA is wrong,...about how the water vapour positive feedback loop functions,...your level of expertise knows no bounds,...I'm impressed.
Maybe you should write an article and have it published in some discredited, biased nature magazine,...but maybe you should contact NOAA first,...and tell them they are stupid.
I dont think you even know what you're arguing anymoreI don't think you understand anything you post. You do realize that if CO2 concentrated nearer the surface it traps more heat?
My statements are consistent with both. Yours are not
He's actually resorted to arguing with himself,...and then gets pissed off at the world when he loses the argument with himself.I dont think you even know what you're arguing anymore
So you agree that CO2 mixes in the troposhere, and not the stratosphere, which is not news and not interesting.
I've already answered your water vapor statement by pointing out that the warming caused by CO2 levels caused the increase in water vapor levels.
For while I've just been stating facts and watching you guys fall over one another trying to avoid them.I dont think you even know what you're arguing anymore
Yes, all your made up "facts" are extremely questionable, thanks for letting us know you are aware.For while I've just been stating facts and watching you guys fall over one another trying to avoid them.
Fact: the warming contributed by CO2 has been measured
Fact: CO2 increases result in water vapor increases
Fact? The planet is significantly warmer now than a hundred years ago, fifty years ago, can or thirty years ago.
You just make a fool of yourself denying the facts. All you've done is expose yourself for what you are.Yes, all your made up "facts" are extremely questionable, thanks for letting us know you are aware.
What a pompous ass you are! Thx for the chuckle :spit:You just make a fool of yourself denying the facts. All you've done is expose yourself for what you are.
