Voters In Almost Every Riding Are Worried About Climate Change, Data Suggests
- Thread starter Charlemagne
- Start date
...and the money collected for carbon taxes will help this apparent situation by what % and how will that be measured against the amount collected to determine the impact over time?
Have you even considered that perhaps most people don't want to bother getting into a debate or be called names and just answer?
Silent majority.
Or stick with your numbers if that makes you feel better.
You can't read your own graph
Besides the fact there are no references to explain who produced the graph
,
Everything after 1999 was an inaccurate computer model so as onthebottom accurately points out, this is 19 years old.
See post # 34
You have pull this stunt several times so you must have an IPCC, NOAA or NASA source link to this specific graph with a verifiable real date.
Show this or admit what you have done here & then say no more on this subject
Here is a more up-to-date picture of what is occuring
The chart is posted by Gavin Schmidt
https://twitter.com/climateofgavin?lang=en
Its put together and updated annually by realclimate who collect the data from the sources
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2019/02/update-day/
Its also worth reading their post on modelling and the history of projections.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/climate-model-projections-compared-to-observations/
What the chart notes are the projections made in 1999 plotted against the latest annual global temp results.
And the chart is updated every year, it shows the global temp readings up to 2018 (latest full years temp), so is most definitely up to date and not 19 years old.
It shows the accuracy of projections made in 1999.
Again, you are trying to bait and switch IPCC model projections of surface temperatures against atmospheric temperature anomalies that happen in the clouds where the temperature is roughly 40ºC colder.Here is a more up-to-date picture of what is occuring
Not only that, but your chart is 4 years old, with the last satellite entry in 2015.
You failed to read your own chart, failed to read the realclimate chart and still are trying to compare surface projections against temps in the mid troposphere.
Total failure.
Almost every riding worried about climate change are
burning fossil fuel through driving like there is no tomorrow.
Voters concern for climate change in reality mean very little to
our politicians. They will worry more about the solution
which has to be higher prices at the pump.
burning fossil fuel through driving like there is no tomorrow.
Voters concern for climate change in reality mean very little to
our politicians. They will worry more about the solution
which has to be higher prices at the pump.
Bait & Switch you say ???
What a pile of garbage
Explain how the surface is heating up faster than the atmosphere if CO2 in the ATMOSPHERE is causing the Greenhouse effect to warm the planet?
That is defiantly not a result the GReenhouse gas theory predicts. Ask an alarmist scientist
Temperature anomaly is the change in temp per unit time . Again it is calculus, something you do not understand
The two are in contact and thus strive to achieve thermal equilibrium.
The greenhouse gas theory does not violate the second law of thermodynamics, but the idea the planet is heating up at a faster rate than the atmosphere would violate the second law of thermodynamics.
The logical (and only)rational explanation is the Surface Temperature record is biased by incomplete coverage & the urban heat Island effect
Your response will of coarse be to trash John Christy. A non-scientific and despicable approach to a scientific issue by someone who plainly does not understand any science
Yes, bait and switch.
You are trying to bait and switch IPCC model projections of surface temperatures against atmospheric temperature anomalies that happen in the clouds where the temperature is roughly 40ºC colder.
Some of sunlights energy warms the atmosphere through IR and UV (22%), but most of that energy (45%) treats the atmosphere as transparent and that energy is absorbed by the surface, warming it.
Lie down on the road on a hot summer day, do you get warmer than when standing up?
That's the energy absorbed by the surface of the planet.
Yes, bait and switch.
You are trying to bait and switch IPCC model projections of surface temperatures against atmospheric temperature anomalies that happen in the clouds where the temperature is roughly 40ºC colder.
What you did is like having a debate about Toronto's weather and you tried to use a chart from Baffin Island to prove that winter is cold in Toronto.
Stop with the insults, that gets you banned here.
If you can't argue the science, then don't post at all.
You are claiming that only IR and UV heat the atmosphere while ignoring visible light.
That is wrong.
http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast161/Unit5/atmos.html
The economy has been booming under Trudeau.
The diminishing standard of living can only be fixed by more progressive taxation.
