Greta Thunberg to Congress: ‘You’re not trying hard enough. Sorry’

[JohnLarue]

I don't need to prove it, its not a theory, its a scientific fact as detailed here:
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter08_FINAL.pdf

Page 666

As the largest contributor to the natural greenhouse effect, water vapour plays an essential role in the Earth’s
climate.

Now they do go on to say

However, the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere is controlled mostly by air temperature, rather
than by emissions

So what? Who cares if water vapour is natural or man made ?
It is there in the atmosphere and its effect via absorption is orders of magnitude greater than CO2

Water vapour is the primary greenhouse gas in the Earth’s atmosphere. The contribution of water vapour to the
natural greenhouse effect relative to that of carbon dioxide (CO2) depends on the accounting method, but can
be considered to be approximately two to three times greater

It is a whole lot more than that

Water vapour behaves differently from CO2 in one fundamental way: it can condense and precipitate. When air
with high humidity cools, some of the vapour condenses into water droplets or ice particles and precipitates. The
typical residence time of water vapour in the atmosphere is ten days. The flux of water vapour into the atmosphere
from anthropogenic sources is considerably less than from ‘natural’ evaporation. Therefore, it has a negligible
impact on overall concentrations, and does not contribute significantly to the long-term greenhouse effect. This is
the main reason why tropospheric water vapour (typically below 10 km altitude) is not considered to be an anthropogenic
gas contributing to radiative forcing.

So the statement is "tropospheric water vapour (typically below 10 km altitude) is not considered to be an anthropogenic
g (man -made) as contributing to radiative forcing."
Too bad they just stated that

However, the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere is controlled mostly by air temperature, rather
than by emissions

Emissions means man -made, so they are confirming the water vapor in the atmosphere is pretty much all natural
Yet they exclude it because it is not anthropogenic (man-made)

In science You do not get to exclude physical interactions based on source.
A water vapour molecule does not know if it is anthropogenic

Again who cares if it is man-made as the nature component (all of it ) does absorb infrared radiation and it dominates CO2 wether man-made or natural

The statement about the residency time is irrelevant as there is always more water vapour in the atmosphere than C02. It just get replenished constantly by new molecules via evapouration
The atmosphere does not empty it self of water after 10 days


And these guys are giving policy recommendations???????

See link above, p694 of AR5 summarizes it.
Or take a look at the chart below and see that your claim would get you laughed out of any first year climatology class.

too bad your little chart is restricted to only man -made factors
I noticed they slipped stratospheric water vapour in there , how does it have radiative forcing effects , but tropospheric water vapour does Not???
Is the stratospheric water vapour man-made?

99% of he water vapour in the atmosphere lies well below the stratosphere

And one has a 10 day cycle and the other can stay up in the atmosphere for decades.
Some day you'll understand that.

Its been 10 days since you first said that, gee, so is the atmosphere empty of water vapour and unable to absorb infrared??? Opps there goes a cloud. I guess not

OMG, repeating the same question over and over again because you won't accept the answer isn't getting you anywhere larue.

Not when the answers are garbage (Yours ) or self contradictory (IPCC)

I will say it again because you have not ansered the question
Just show us the physics

You explicitly stated Co2 is a forcing (effect) while water is only a feedback effect
This is completely false

They are both covalently bonded, 3-atom molecules
Both absorb infrared radiation
Both have the same vibrational and rotational modes required for absorption of infrared radiation
They even share some of the same absorption wavelengths
Both are gases present in the greenhouse gas theory

Did you read that quote?
If says that CO2 causes climate changes and that humans have increased CO2 levels to 415ppm, causing climate change with levels that haven't been seen on earth for millions of years.
Are you so daft that you think that because it uses the word 'atmosphere' you don't think its still measuring climate change's effects through surface temperatures?

Are you so daft that in one post you claim atmospheric temperatures are irrelevant and in the next post you quote a source which clearly explains the greenhouse effect is occurring in the atmosphere

Get your head out of your asshole, larue.

I do so every day and yet here you are, still unable to understand the difference between a forcing and feedback effect in climatology.

If climatology gets to ignore the physics of infrared absorption of water vapour in the atmosphere because it is not man-made, then it is a flawed science
Science with an agenda or which excludes physical effects because it is not man-made is pseudo-science
Why not exclude the effect of the sun, it is not man-made?

you need to be able to explain your position in detail and cant be caught in any lies, especially if you are claiming a moral right to frighten children with your exaggerations, lies and falsehoods

 

[latinboy]

She's more fun in the death metal video.
Must suck to be that scared of a 16 year old girl.

So I looked at this thread without logging on first.

The Exorcist movie scared me, not that ignorant girl.

TROLL, don't ever change my post again, or the attached URL. You're unhinged, I will report you.

 

[Frankfooter]

Emissions means man -made, so they are confirming the water vapor in the atmosphere is pretty much all natural
Yet they exclude it because it is not anthropogenic (man-made)

In science You do not get to exclude physical interactions based on source.
A water vapour molecule does not know if it is anthropogenic

Holy shit, larue.
You took a line about anthropomorphic water vapour and then claimed that it was about all atmospheric water vapour.
What was it you said in your post?

you need to be able to explain your position in detail and cant be caught in any lies, especially if you are claiming a moral right to frighten children with your exaggerations, lies and falsehoods

Here's your quote from AR5 again:

The flux of water vapour into the atmosphere
from anthropogenic sources is considerably less than from ‘natural’ evaporation. Therefore, it has a negligible
impact on overall concentrations, and does not contribute significantly to the long-term greenhouse effect. This is
the main reason why tropospheric water vapour (typically below 10 km altitude) is not considered to be an anthropogenic
gas contributing to radiative forcing.

And here's the paragraph you tried to ignore that clearly shows all your claims are incredibly ignorant and scientifically idiotic.

The maximum amount of water vapour in the air is controlled by temperature. A typical column of air extending from the surface to the stratosphere in polar regions may contain only a few kilograms of water vapour per square metre, while a similar column of air in the tropics may contain up to 70 kg. With every extra degree of air temperature, the atmosphere can retain around 7% more water vapour (see upper-left insert in the FAQ 8.1, Figure 1). This increase in concentration amplifies the greenhouse effect, and therefore leads to more warming.

This process, referred to as the water vapour feedback, is well understood and quantified. It occurs in all models used to estimate climate change, where its strength is consistent with observations. Although an increase in atmospheric water vapour has been observed, this change is recognized as a climate feedback (from increased atmospheric temperature) and should not be interpreted as a radiative forcing from


Currently, water vapour has the largest greenhouse effect in the Earth’s atmosphere. However, other greenhouse gases, primarily CO2, are necessary to sustain the presence of water vapour in the atmosphere. Indeed, if these other gases were removed from the atmosphere, its temperature would drop sufficiently to induce a decrease of water vapour, leading to a runaway drop of the greenhouse effect that would plunge the Earth into a frozen state. So greenhouse gases other than water vapour provide the temperature structure that sustains current levels of atmospheric water vapour. Therefore, although CO2 is the main anthropogenic control knob on climate, water vapour is a strong and fast feedback that amplifies any initial forcing by a typical factor between two and three. Water vapour is not a significant initial forcing, but is nevertheless a fundamental agent of climate change.

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter08_FINAL.pdf

Lets hope you are able to learn and aren't so set in your confirmation bias ways to learn when you are wrong.

 

[JohnLarue]

Holy shit, larue.You took a line about anthropomorphic water vapour and then claimed that it was about all atmospheric water vapour.
What was it you said in your post?

I said you need to be able to explain your position in detail and cant be caught in any lies, especially if you are claiming a moral right to frighten children with your exaggerations, lies and falsehoods

This is the main reason why tropospheric water vapour (typically below 10 km altitude) is not considered to be an anthropogenic
gas contributing to radiative forcing.

Too bad there is still lots of natural tropospheric water vapour contributing to to radiative forcing.
Total = Natural + anthropogenic

Here's your quote from AR5 again:


The flux of water vapour into the atmosphere
from anthropogenic sources is considerably less than from ‘natural’ evaporation.

So man-made water vapour is negligible relative to naturally occuring water vapour

Therefore, it has a negligible
impact on overall concentrations, and does not contribute significantly to the long-term greenhouse effect.

So man-made water vapour does not contribute significantly to the long-term greenhouse effect
That just leaves the 2-4% naturally occurring water vapour in the atmosphere which does contribute the long-term greenhouse effect
If no water vapour in the atmosphere the planet would be -35 degrees colder and uninhabitable

This is
the main reason why tropospheric water vapour (typically below 10 km altitude) is not considered to be an anthropogenic
gas contributing to radiative forcing.

But the natural water vapour does contribute to radiative forcing.and is the dominate greenhouse gas

And here's the paragraph you tried to ignore that clearly shows all your claims are incredibly ignorant and scientifically idiotic.

pretending that water Vapour does not absorb infrared radiation and pretending its concentration does not exceed co2 by 50-100 times because it is not man-made is about as ignorant and scientifically idiotic as it gets

The maximum amount of water vapour in the air is controlled by temperature. A typical column of air extending from the surface to the stratosphere in polar regions may contain only a few kilograms of water vapour per square metre, while a similar column of air in the tropics may contain up to 70 kg. With every extra degree of air temperature, the atmosphere can retain around 7% more water vapour (see upper-left insert in the FAQ 8.1, Figure 1). This increase in concentration amplifies the greenhouse effect, and therefore leads to more warming.

This process, referred to as the water vapour feedback, is well understood and quantified. It occurs in all models used to estimate climate change, where its strength is consistent with observations. Although an increase in atmospheric water vapour has been observed, this change is recognized as a climate feedback (from increased atmospheric temperature) and should not be interpreted as a radiative forcing from


Currently, water vapour has the largest greenhouse effect in the Earth’s atmosphere. However, other greenhouse gases, primarily CO2, are necessary to sustain the presence of water vapour in the atmosphere. Indeed, if these other gases were removed from the atmosphere, its temperature would drop sufficiently to induce a decrease of water vapour, leading to a runaway drop of the greenhouse effect that would plunge the Earth into a frozen state. So greenhouse gases other than water vapour provide the temperature structure that sustains current levels of atmospheric water vapour. Therefore, although CO2 is the main anthropogenic control knob on climate, water vapour is a strong and fast feedback that amplifies any initial forcing by a typical factor between two and three. Water vapour is not a significant initial forcing, but is nevertheless a fundamental agent of climate change.

Your quote above
1. Refutes your earlier claim that water vapour was a cooling or negative feedback. I believe you insulted me several time when I point this out. Once again you post quotes which show you do not understand this at all
2. shows how the IPCC excludes water vapour from the discussion of infrared radiation (radiative forcing if you must) for the illogical reason it is not man-made , however feels free to include Water Vapour in an amplifying affect? How does that cherry picking work. The Water vapour in the theoretical feedback is not anthropogenic. Hence it must be ignored by their definition

So if the IPCC gets to exclude water vapor because it is not man made, does the IPCC also exclude the 2/3 of current CO2 levels which were present before the industrial revolution?? That CO2 was not man made
Explain this

Climate is a non-linear chaotic system of ever changing multiple inputs. Claiming a trace gas is the control knob for the climate is both arrogant and ignorant
It is down right dispicable when it is used to frighten children for political reasons

 

[Frankfooter]

I said you need to be able to explain your position in detail and cant be caught in any lies, especially if you are claiming a moral right to frighten children with your exaggerations, lies and falsehoods
Too bad there is still lots of natural tropospheric water vapour contributing to to radiative forcing.
Total = Natural + anthropogenic
So man-made water vapour is negligible relative to naturally occuring water vapour
So man-made water vapour does not contribute significantly to the long-term greenhouse effect
That just leaves the 2-4% naturally occurring water vapour in the atmosphere which does contribute the long-term greenhouse effect
If no water vapour in the atmosphere the planet would be -35 degrees colder and uninhabitable
But the natural water vapour does contribute to radiative forcing.and is the dominate greenhouse gas
pretending that water Vapour does not absorb infrared radiation and pretending its concentration does not exceed co2 by 50-100 times because it is not man-made is about as ignorant and scientifically idiotic as it gets
Your quote above
1. Refutes your earlier claim that water vapour was a cooling or negative feedback. I believe you insulted me several time when I point this out. Once again you post quotes which show you do not understand this at all
2. shows how the IPCC excludes water vapour from the discussion of infrared radiation (radiative forcing if you must) for the illogical reason it is not man-made , however feels free to include Water Vapour in an amplifying affect? How does that cherry picking work. The Water vapour in the theoretical feedback is not anthropogenic. Hence it must be ignored by their definition
So if the IPCC gets to exclude water vapor because it is not man made, does the IPCC also exclude the 2/3 of current CO2 levels which were present before the industrial revolution?? That CO2 was not man made
Explain this
Climate is a non-linear chaotic system of ever changing multiple inputs. Claiming a trace gas is the control knob for the climate is both arrogant and ignorant
It is down right dispicable when it is used to frighten children for political reasons

That's a totally dishonest post, larue.
You use a combination of partial quotes again with outright false statements.

Look at your major bolded claim:

pretending that water Vapour does not absorb infrared radiation and pretending its concentration does not exceed co2 by 50-100 times because it is not man-made is about as ignorant and scientifically idiotic as it gets

1) Neither the IPCC nor I claim that water vapour doesn't absorb infrared radiation. Nowhere is that in print from either me or the IPCC. You just made that shit up.
2) Neither the IPCC nor I 'pretend' that there isn't more water vapour in the atmosphere than CO2, you made that shit up too. The IPCC just states that CO2's effect is a forcing effect so can change the global temp while water vapour only reacts to changes in temp, as its a feedback effect.
3) Claiming that water vapour is ignored is just more shit you're making up. After all, you've already quoted from the IPCC section that shows your claims are pure bullshit. You've read them, you just can't understand them.

So if the IPCC gets to exclude water vapor because it is not man made

You quoted the section on water vapour, its not ignored. Stop making shit up.

Your arguments are incredibly dishonest, larue.
I'm assuming that you're smart enough to understand the basics here, larue, which means you're just making shit up because that's all you've got.

 

[Moviefan-2]

This is a sign of how weird things have become in this time of Greta-mania -- one of the people who makes the most sense is Vladimir Putin:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...re-excitement-Greta-Thunbergs-U-N-speech.html

 

[bver_hunter]

This is a sign of how weird things have become in this time of Greta-mania -- one of the people who makes the most sense is Vladimir Putin:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...re-excitement-Greta-Thunbergs-U-N-speech.html

Putin the brutal dictator that has killed his own citizens and suppressed democratic rights is to be believed?? Okay I forgot that the cult leader of those praising Putin do so because their own cult leader kisses Putin's derriere on a daily basis!!

 

[JohnLarue]

[That's a totally dishonest post, larue.
You use a combination of partial quotes again with outright false statements.

Get real

1) Neither the IPCC nor I claim that water vapour doesn't absorb infrared radiation. Nowhere is that in print from either me or the IPCC. You just made that shit up.
2) Neither the IPCC nor I 'pretend' that there isn't more water vapour in the atmosphere than CO2, you made that shit up too. The IPCC just states that CO2's effect is a forcing effect so can change the global temp while water vapour only reacts to changes in temp, as its a feedback effect.

By saying water vapour does not have have any radiative effect because it is not man made, you are saying there is not any infrared absorption by water vapour. Which is false
Water Vapour, man made or natural absorbs infrared radiation and it is a gas in the atmosphere, which is only criteria that matter for a greenhouse gas
DO you think the photons of Infrared Radiation travelling at the speed of light can distinguish between man-made molecules Co2 and natural ones H20 ?

The fact it is the largest contributor by far of the absorption and subsequent RADIATION of Infrared radiation by water Vapour in the atmosphere is not magically eliminated because someone doe not think it is man made or has decide to categorize molecules and assigned to specific tasks based upon what he thinks is their source?

) Claiming that water vapour is ignored is just more shit you're making up. After all, you've already quoted from the IPCC section that shows your claims are pure bullshit. You've read them, you just can't understand them.

You do not seem to get it
Total = Natural + Man Made

Absorption of infrared radiation is by both types of water (natural and man-made). Yes H2O is a byproduct of the combustion reaction
Absorption of infrared radiation is by both Co2 and H2O,

any absorption of infrared radiation by any molecule in the atmosphere has the radiative effect. Call it forcing if you must.
The only difference between the two molecules (CO and water) is some of the wavelengths differ where absorption takes place
To say one only works as feed back , while the other does all the absorbing is 100% absolutely false and a physical impossibility

Explain the physics behind this nonsense

I'm assuming that you're smart enough to understand the basics here, larue, which means you're just making shit up because that's all you've got.

too bad you are not smart enough to recognise the basics

 

[Frankfooter]

By saying water vapour does not have have any radiative effect because it is not man made,

I didn't say that water vapour doesn't have any radiative effect nor would I say it has anything to do with being manmade.
Stop lying.

Its not worth responding to your posts if you're just going to out and out lie about what I and the IPCC have said.

 

[JohnLarue]

I didn't say that water vapour doesn't have any radiative effect nor would I say it has anything to do with being manmade.
Stop lying.

Really
From Post 179

Originally posted by Frankfooter

No, I said that water vapour does not have a forcing effect on the climate, its a feedback effect.

Sure sound like you did water vapour does not have any radiative effect

However

from The IPCCs AR5 Chapter 8
Page 666

The full extent of these variations is not well understood and is probably less a forcing than a feedback process added to natural variability. The contribution of stratospheric water vapour to warming, both forcing and feedback, is much smaller than from CH4 or CO2.

Page 674

Oxidation of CH4 in the stratosphere (see Section 8.2.3.3) is a significant source of water vapour and hence the long-term increase in CH4 leads to an anthropogenic forcing (see Section 8.3) in the stratosphere.

Page 679

There has been one study since AR4 (Myhre et al., 2007) on the RF from water vapour formed from the stratospheric oxidation of CH4 (Section 8.3.3.3). This is consistent with the AR4 value and so has not led to any change in the recommended value of 0.07 (0.02 to 0.12) W m–2 since AR4.

From the full report
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_all_final.pdf
Page 54

The short-lived GHGs ozone (O3) and stratospheric water vapour also contribute to anthropogenic forcing

On Page 55 they even quantify the radiative forcing of water vapour per meter squared, in the atmosphere no less

RF for stratospheric water vapour produced from CH4 oxidation is 0.07 [0.02 to 0.12] W m–2.

Page 127

An example of a positive feedback is the water vapour feedback whereby an increase in surface temperature enhances the amount of water vapour present in the atmosphere. Water vapour is a powerful GHG: increasing its atmospheric concentration enhances the greenhouse effect and leads to further surface warming.

I like this one the best as it pretty much verifies what I have been saying all along ie Water Vapour is the primary greenhouse gas.
The IPCC have in my opinion greatly down played the size of the difference
Page 666

Water vapour is the primary greenhouse gas in the Earth’s atmosphere. The contribution of water vapour to the natural greenhouse effect relative to that of carbon dioxide (CO2) depends on the accounting method, but can be considered to be approximately two to three times greater.

So you are 100% wrong. Water vapour does have a forcing effect on the climate, as per the IPCC

In addition, the theoretical feedback effect from water vapour is entirely dependant upon water vapour having a forcing effect
ie. the feedback theory is more heat cause evaporation and hence more water vapour in the atmosphere which increases the forcing effect via more absorption of infrared radiation
Therefore if there is no forcing effect for water (as you foolishly claimed post #179), then there is no feedback. Simple straight forward logic anyone older than 18 can understand

Now that we have that lie cleaned up, we can focus on the facts, (at least until you lie again and post something else ridiculous)

Water vapour is the primary greenhouse gas
It in fact dominates CO2
The atmosphere is where the greenhouse effect takes place
There is very little warming occuring in the atmosphere

Its not worth responding to your posts if you're just going to out and out lie about what I and the IPCC have said.

You are caught in one of your many, many lies & you have been proven to be a scientific know-nothing
Do not ever attack a scientists character again
I also suggest you think long and hard about the implications of lying and, exaggerating falsehoods to children, frightening the hell out of them and using them as pawns for your twisted political agenda

 

[Moviefan-2]

Putin the brutal dictator that has killed his own citizens and suppressed democratic rights is to be believed?? Okay I forgot that the cult leader of those praising Putin do so because their own cult leader kisses Putin's derriere on a daily basis!!

Are you telling us that you actually believe the people in the developing nations have it worse than the citizens in Sweden?

Or do you think it's possible that maybe Putin has a point, regardless of what we think of him as a brutal dictator.

 

[bver_hunter]

Are you telling us that you actually believe the people in the developing nations have it worse than the citizens in Sweden?

Or do you think it's possible that maybe Putin has a point, regardless of what we think of him as a brutal dictator.

Greta Thunberg has undertaken to do what she is doing, voluntarily. Putin is tied to the big oil companies as he personally benefits from such resources irrespective of the impact on greenhouse gases etc. What exactly is he offering to curb or help in the CO2 emissions rather than having a dig at Thunberg?

There are numerous developing countries that are using such resources, but they are not the biggest polluters like the developed nations as well as India and China. Definitely, new forms of renewable energy is the future that should in the long run benefit all nations. Why is that not on his agenda??

 

[Frankfooter]

Really
From Post 179

Sure sound like you did water vapour does not have any radiative effect

It has a radiative effect but not a forcing effect as defined by climatology.

from The IPCCs AR5 Chapter 8

Water vapour is the primary greenhouse gas in the Earth’s atmosphere. The contribution of water vapour to the natural greenhouse effect relative to that of carbon dioxide (CO2) depends on the accounting method, but can be considered to be approximately two to three times greater.

You pulled a lot of single sentence quotes but ignored this quote from previous 666.

Water vapour behaves differently from CO2 in one fundamental way: it can condense and precipitate. When air with high humidity cools, some of the vapour condenses into water droplets or ice particles and precipitates. The typical residence time of water vapour in the atmosphere is ten days. The flux of water vapour into the atmosphere from anthropogenic sources is considerably less than from ‘natural’ evaporation. Therefore, it has a negligible impact on overall concentrations, and does not contribute significantly to the long-term greenhouse effect. This is the main reason why tropospheric water vapour (typically below 10 km altitude) is not considered to be an anthropogenic gas contributing to radiative forcing.

You're lying about what the IPCC says.

Water vapour is not a forcing effect, its a feedback effect, that the IPCC statement.

Larue, you are intentionally lying here. This is the most dishonest move you've done here on this board. You should be ashamed and apologize.

You said this:

So you are 100% wrong. Water vapour does have a forcing effect on the climate, as per the IPCC

After you read the IPCC's statement:

the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere is controlled mostly by air temperature, rather
than by emissions. For that reason, scientists consider it a feedback agent, rather than a forcing to climate change.

You are a liar, larue.

 

[JohnLarue]

It has a radiative effect but not a forcing effect as defined by climatology.

What is wrong with you?
?????
Radiative effect is the forcing effect

Explain what other special forcing effects water and CO2 have?
Explain the physics of how these supposed effects work ?

You pulled a lot of single sentence quotes but ignored this quote from previous 666.

From your quote

This is the main reason why tropospheric water vapour (typically below 10 km altitude) is not considered to be an anthropogenic gas contributing to radiative forcing.

Anthropogenic = man made
Therefore
This is the main reason why tropospheric water vapour (typically below 10 km altitude) is not considered to be an Man-made gas contributing to radiative forcing.

Too bad for you 99% of the water vapour in the atmosphere was not man-made
But your definition does not apply to the 99% of the water Vapour which is natural

You're lying about what the IPCC says.

What is wrong with you?
I gave you the link, the page number and the quote
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_all_final.pdf
Page 666

Water vapour is the primary greenhouse gas in the Earth’s atmosphere. The contribution of water vapour to the natural greenhouse effect relative to that of carbon dioxide (CO2) depends on the accounting method, but can be considered to be approximately two to three times greater.

So you are 100% wrong. Water vapour does have a forcing effect on the climate, as per the IPCC

I found and presented half a dozen numerous examples of the IPCC stating water vapour has a forcing effect
There were over 300 references to water Vapour in the report, I am sure I can find more statements explicitly stating water vapour has a forcing effect

you do not understand any of this

Water vapour is not a forcing effect, its a feedback effect, that the IPCC statement.

What part of the following statement of fact do you not understand?
from The IPCCs AR5 Chapter 8
Page 666

The full extent of these variations is not well understood and is probably less a forcing than a feedback process added to natural variability. The contribution of stratospheric water vapour to warming, both forcing and feedback, is much smaller than from CH4 or CO2.

Larue, you are intentionally lying here. This is the most dishonest move you've done here on this board. You should be ashamed and apologize.

You are the the most untrustworthy lying mislead person I have ever had the displeasure to encounter
Your record speaks for itself groggy

You said this:
So you are 100% wrong. Water vapour does have a forcing effect on the climate, as per the IPCC

Yes it does

After you read the IPCC's statement:
The amount of water vapour in the atmosphere is controlled mostly by air temperature, rather
than by emissions. For that reason, scientists consider it a feedback agent, rather than a forcing to climate change.

You left out an important word anthropogenic

here is the proper quote, from your post # 217

This is the main reason why tropospheric water vapour (typically below 10 km altitude) is not considered to be an anthropogenic gas contributing to radiative forcing.

So man-made water vapour does not have any forcing effects, natural water vapour does have forcing effects

You are a liar, larue.

No words are available to describe what you are

This is crystal clear
As stated by the IPCC
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_all_final.pdf
Page 666

Water vapour is the primary greenhouse gas in the Earth’s atmosphere.

Check your facts before you dare to call me a lair

You are caught in one of your many, many lies & you have been proven to be a scientific know-nothing
Do not ever attack a scientists character again
I also suggest you think long and hard about the implications of lying and, exaggerating falsehoods to children, frightening the hell out of them and using them as pawns for your twisted political agenda

 

[Frankfooter]

What is wrong with you?
?????

What is wrong with you?
I gave you the link, the page number and the quote
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_all_final.pdf
Page 666

So you are 100% wrong. Water vapour does have a forcing effect on the climate, as per the IPCC
you do not understand any of this
What part of the following statement of fact do you not understand?
from The IPCCs AR5 Chapter 8
Page 666

You're lying again larue, totally dishonest.
Look at this quote you posted, I'll put the part you bolded in green and then bold the part that shows your claim to be totally fucking bullshit.

The full extent of these variations is not well understood and is probably less a forcing than a feedback process added to natural variability. The contribution of stratospheric water vapour to warming, both forcing and feedback, is much smaller than from CH4 or CO2.

That one quote shows you to be a total bullshitter.

You are the the most untrustworthy lying mislead person I have ever had the displeasure to encounter

Bullshit, you're attempts at using partial quotes show you to be bullshitting here, larue.
Every single quote you've provided from the IPCC says the opposite of what you claim.
You are bullshitting and totally dishonestly.

This is crystal clear
As stated by the IPCC
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_all_final.pdf
Page 666

This is the summary from page 666 that you refuse to acknowledge because it shows your claims to be lying, dishonest, bullshitting.
You've been caught out, larue.
You're a bullshitter.

the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere is controlled mostly by air temperature, rather than by emissions. For that reason, scientists consider it a feedback agent, rather than a forcing to climate change.

Check your facts before you dare to call me a lair

Ok, fine.
You're not a 'lair', you are a liar.
A total liar.

 

[JohnLarue]

You're lying again larue, totally dishonest.
Look at this quote you posted, I'll put the part you bolded in green and then bold the part that shows your claim to be totally fucking bullshit.

You really do not understand anything about the greenhouse theory
your quote

The full extent of these variations is not well understood and is probably less a forcing than a feedback process added to natural variability. The contribution of stratospheric water vapour to warming, both forcing and feedback, is much smaller than from CH4 or CO2.

Less than 1% of the atmospheric water vapour is in the stratosphere, so at that altitude the forcing effect of water Vapor in the stratosphere could very well be less than C02
However at pointed out to you many times it is 40-50 degrees colder and the Stephan Boltzmann law dictates A=C*T^4 (remember the effect of a change to the fourth power), the energy absorbed is reduced significantly.
In addition the number of collision of a photon with a trade gas Co2 is significantly reduced due to the lower pressure and expansion of the gas

Just as important is the fact that specific statement by the IPCC makes it clear that Water Vapour does have a forcing effect

DO NOT INSULT ME just because you are ignorant of how the greenhouse theory works

That one quote shows you to be a total bullshitter.

Nope,

here is the proper quote, from your post # 217
This originates from the IPCC
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uplo..._all_final.pdf
Page 666

This is the main reason why tropospheric water vapour (typically below 10 km altitude) is not considered to be an anthropogenic gas contributing to radiative forcing.
So man-made water vapour does not have any forcing effects, natural water vapour does have forcing effects

anthropogenic = man made
Exactly what part of this can you not understand?

Bullshit, you're attempts at using partial quotes show you to be bullshitting here, larue.
Every single quote you've provided from the IPCC says the opposite of what you claim.
You are bullshitting and totally dishonestly.

No it is quite clear

As stated by the IPCC
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uplo..._all_final.pdf
Page 666

Water vapour is the primary greenhouse gas in the Earth’s atmosphere.

That is as about as clear as it can be
If you feel that the IPCC is dead wrong when they agree with me on this point, perhaps you should be insulting them and calling them liars

This is the summary from page 666 that you refuse to acknowledge because it shows your claims to be lying, dishonest, bullshitting.
You've been caught out, larue.
You're a bullshitter.

the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere is controlled mostly by air temperature, rather than by emissions. For that reason, scientists consider it a feedback agent, rather than a forcing to climate change.

.

Speaking of partial quotes
Here is the full quote

As the largest contributor to the natural greenhouse effect, water vapour plays an essential role in the Earth’s
climate. However, the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere is controlled mostly by air temperature, rather
than by emissions. For that reason, scientists consider it a feedback agent, rather than a forcing to climate change.
Anthropogenic emissions of water vapour through irrigation or power plant cooling have a negligible impact on
the global climate.

So, once again you intentionally leave out the word "Anthropogenic" in a pathetic and illogical attempt to mislead , but the only one you are fooling is yourself.
1. Water Vapour does have a forcing effect as per the iPCC
2. It is the the largest contributor to the natural greenhouse effect as per the IPCC
3. Its concentration 2-4% is orders of magnitude higher vs. C02. 0.04%, until the Infrared radiation reaches altitudes which are so cold (t= -40 A=C*t^4) and thin (low pressure) that absorption is insignificant
Therefore water vapour is the dominate total greenhouse gas

You are wetting your pants because you are starting to realize your Environmental catastrophe required to achieve your political change is not going to pan out
You are in panic mode & will say anything to preserve your lie and you have.
Most of it comical, illogical and just plain WRONG

The physics of the issue does not lie
Water Vapour is the dominate greenhouse gas and Co2 is not the control knob for the climate.
Climate is a nonlinear chaotic system which is next to impossible to predict using computer models

Check your facts before you dare to call me a lair

You are caught in one of your many, many lies & you have been proven to be a scientific know-nothing
Do not ever attack a scientists character again
I also suggest you think long and hard about the implications of lying and, exaggerating falsehoods to children, frightening the hell out of them and using them as pawns for your twisted political agenda

 

[Frankfooter]

You really do not understand anything about the greenhouse theory
Less than 1% of the atmospheric water vapour is in the stratosphere, so at that altitude the forcing effect of water Vapor could very well be less than C02
However at pointed out to you many times it is 40-50 degrees colder and the Stephan Boltzmann law dictates A=C*T^4 (remember the effect of a change to the fourth power), the energy absorbed is reduced significantly.
In addition the number of collision of a photon with a trade gas Co2 is significantly reduced due to the lower pressure and expansion of the gas
Just as important is the fact that specific statement by the IPCC makes it clear that Water Vapour does have a forcing effect
DO NOT INSULT ME just because you are ignorant of how the greenhouse theory works
Nope,
here is the proper quote, from your post # 217
anthropogenic = man made
Exactly what part of this can you not understand?
No it is quite clear
As stated by the IPCC
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uplo..._all_final.pdf
Page 666
Speaking of partial quotes
Here is the full quote
So
1. Water Vapour does have a forcing effect as per the iPCC
2. It is the the largest contributor to the natural greenhouse effect as per the IPCC
3. Its concentration 2-4% is orders of magnitude higher vs. C02. 0.04%, until the Infrared radiation reaches altitudes which are so cold (t= -40 A=C*t^4) and thin (low pressure) that absorption is insignificant
Therefore water vapour is the dominate total greenhouse gas
You are wetting you pants because you are starting to realize your Environmental catastrophe required to achieve your political change is not going to pan out
The physics of the issue does not lie
Water Vapour is the dominate greenhouse gas and Co2 is not the control knob for the climate.
Climate is a nonlinear chaotic system which is next to impossible to predict using computer models

Larue, you're lying and doing it very poorly.

1) The IPCC notes that the only anthropomorphic effects on climate change from water vapour are in the upper atmosphere or stratosphere, where they are less than CO2 and CH4. Yet you try to claim that this is for the entire atmosphere. Very dishonest and lame lying here, larue. The quote you like to pretend backs you, when its clearly shows you are lying:

The full extent of these variations is not well understood and is probably less a forcing than a feedback process added to natural variability. The contribution of stratospheric water vapour to warming, both forcing and feedback, is much smaller than from CH4 or CO2.

2) Water vapour is the primary greenhouse gas but because its effects are those of a feedback effect it only reacts to climate change, it doesn't cause it, even should you pump the atmosphere full of water vapour filled hot air through your spittle filled ranting. CO2, on the other hand, is a forcing effect and when you pump it into the atmosphere with your breathless ranting it does increase the planet's temperature. As clearly stated in the IPCC reports you selectively quote.

the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere is controlled mostly by air temperature, rather than by emissions. For that reason, scientists consider it a feedback agent, rather than a forcing to climate change.

You read the IPCC reports enough to selectively quote then try to ignore the fact that they show everything you claim to be ignorant, lying, bullshit.
Larue, you're a liar, and a bad one.

I mean, how bad of a liar to you have to be to try to quote something that says it has a 'negligible impact' and then try to claim is the primary effect?

As the largest contributor to the natural greenhouse effect, water vapour plays an essential role in the Earth’s
climate. However, the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere is controlled mostly by air temperature, rather
than by emissions. For that reason, scientists consider it a feedback agent, rather than a forcing to climate change.
Anthropogenic emissions of water vapour through irrigation or power plant cooling have a negligible impact on
the global climate.

 

[JohnLarue]

]Larue, you're lying and doing it very poorly.

1) The IPCC notes that the only anthropomorphic effects on climate change from water vapour are in the upper atmosphere or stratosphere, where they are less than CO2 and CH4. Yet you try to claim that this is for the entire atmosphere. Very dishonest and lame lying here, larue. The quote you like to pretend backs you, when its clearly shows you are lying:

Once again you are wrong. here is exactly what I said , making it clear this is occurring in the stratosphere

Originally posted by JohnLarue

Less than 1% of the atmospheric water vapour is in the stratosphere, so at that altitude the forcing effect of water Vapor in the stratosphere could very well be less than C02
However as pointed out to you many times it is 40-50 degrees colder and the Stephan Boltzmann law dictates A=C*T^4 (remember the effect of a change to the fourth power), the energy absorbed is reduced significantly.
In addition the number of collision of a photon with a trade gas Co2 is significantly reduced due to the lower pressure and expansion of the gas

What part of the word Stratosphere did you not understand?

Water vapour is the primary greenhouse gas but because its effects are those of a feedback effect it only reacts to climate change, it doesn't cause it, even should you pump the atmosphere full of water vapour filled hot air through your spittle filled ranting. CO2, on the other hand, is a forcing effect and when you pump it into the atmosphere with your breathless ranting it does increase the planet's temperature. As clearly stated in the IPCC reports you selectively quote.

Oh no, water Vapour absorbs Infrared radiation which is the forcing effect.
Besides I already point out to you that any feedback effect for water vapour is dependant up it have a forcing effect. ie absorption of electromagnetic Infrared radiation.

The theory is the feedback is a result of hotter temperatures producing more evaporation, which puts more water vapour into the atmosphere which absorbs more infrared radiation(a forcing effect)
So if water vapour does not have any forcing effects (absorption of infrared) then it can not produce the feedback effect

If this the case then no feedback and 2/3 of the IPCC models warming goes away and then there is not an environmental catastrophe
and sadly for you no excuse for the political change you want more than anything in the world

You read the IPCC reports enough to selectively quote then try to ignore the fact that they show everything you claim to be ignorant, lying, bullshit.
Larue, you're a liar, and a bad one.

I understand what I read, you do not
You have made this crystal clear

I mean, how bad of a liar to you have to be to try to quote something that says it has a 'negligible impact' and then try to claim is the primary effect?

Water Vapour does have a negligible impact in the stratosphere as does CO2 simply because it is 40-50 degrees colder there and the air is so thin
, however water vapour does have the dominating effect from the ground up to the upper troposphere,

Hense
As stated by the IPCC
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uplo..._all_final.pdf

Page 666
Water vapour is the primary greenhouse gas in the Earth’s atmosphere.

You are caught in one of your many, many lies & you have been proven to be a scientific know-nothing
Do not ever attack a scientists character again
I also suggest you think long and hard about the implications of lying and, exaggerating falsehoods to children, frightening the hell out of them and using them as pawns for your twisted political agenda

 

[Frankfooter]

Once again you are wrong here is excatly what I siad , making it claer this is occurring in the stratosphere

This is what the IPCC says about water vapour in the stratosphere:

The contribution of stratospheric water vapour to warming, both forcing and feedback, is much smaller than from CH4 or CO2.

Water vapour forcing effects in the stratosphere have a 'negligible impact' while water vapour in the troposphere has a feedback effect and CO2 is the primary driver of climate change.
Your claims about water vapour are outright lies, you've read the reports and the science.
Your claims are out and out lies.

the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere is controlled mostly by air temperature, rather than by emissions. For that reason, scientists consider it a feedback agent, rather than a forcing to climate change.

You lied.

 

[JohnLarue]

This is what the IPCC says about water vapour in the stratosphere:
The contribution of stratospheric water vapour to warming, both forcing and feedback, is much smaller than from CH4 or CO2.

Ok, good now you finally agree water Vapour has both forcing and feedback effects

Water vapour forcing effects in the stratosphere have a 'negligible impact' while water vapour in the troposphere has a feedback effect and CO2 is the primary driver of climate change.

Your words not the IPCC

Ah no!
a molecule either has forcing effects or it does not. The magnitude of the forcing can change if the temperature or pressure change,but a molecule dos not shut off an effect based upon altitude
If you disagree show us the physics

in this case the absorption of Infrared by water vapour occurs in both the stratosphere and the troposphere
In the stratosphere the forcing effect is negligible because of the colder temperatures and thin air and water vapours low concentration. Co2 absorption is also negibable
In the troposphere water vapour is found in higher concentration 2-4% vs 0.04% Co2 and the forcing effect is quite strong ie dominate, until the gradual temperature decrease reduces the forcing effect of both water Vapour and C02
the total forcing effect of water vapour dominates Co2

Besides I already point out to you that any feedback effect for water vapour is dependant up it have a forcing effect. ie absorption of electromagnetic Infrared radiation.

The theory is the feedback is a result of hotter temperatures producing more evaporation, which puts more water vapour into the atmosphere which absorbs more infrared radiation(a forcing effect)
So if water vapour does not have any forcing effects (absorption of infrared) then it can not produce the feedback effect
(This is grade six logic)
If you disagree show us the physics

If this the case then no feedback and 2/3 of the IPCC models warming goes away and then there is not an environmental catastrophe
and sadly for you no excuse for the political change you want more than anything in the world

Your claims about water vapour are outright lies, you've read the reports and the science.
Your claims are out and out lies.
You lied.

As stated by the IPCC
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uplo..._all_final.pdf
Page 666

Water vapour is the primary greenhouse gas in the Earth’s atmosphere.

You are a denier

You are caught in one of your many, many lies & you have been proven to be a scientific know-nothing
Do not ever attack a scientists character again
I also suggest you think long and hard about the implications of lying and, exaggerating falsehoods to children, frightening the hell out of them and using them as pawns for your twisted political agenda