Climate Change

[Frankfooter]

i am smart enough to peg you for what you are

No, if you're not smart enough to understand the post above, from NASA, you are not smart enough to know anything about me.

 

[JohnLarue]

No, if you're not smart enough to understand the post above, from NASA, you are not smart enough to know anything about me.

 

[Frankfooter]

You really can't understand the basics.

 

[JohnLarue]

You really can't understand the basics.

in science it is fundamentals, not basics
had you not dropped out of high school you might have learned this.


this and your many other statements make it glaring obvious that you have never experienced any formal scientific training
you think you can fake your way through a scientific discussion.
however you fail miserable and instead just reinforce your position as an untrustworthy laughing stock
why you continue to display your ignorance while pretending to be knowledgeable is strange , yet comedy gold at the same time

 

[Frankfooter]

in science it is fundamentals, not basics
had you not dropped out of high school you might have learned this.


this and your many other statements make it glaring obvious that you have never experienced any formal scientific training
you think you can fake your way through a scientific discussion.
however you fail miserable and instead just reinforce your position as an untrustworthy laughing stock
why you continue to display your ignorance while pretending to be knowledgeable is strange , yet comedy gold at the same time

Explain the difference between a feedback and forcing effect on the climate, larue.
Prove you understand the 'fundamentals'.

We know you won't, your entire fabrication of a theory is based on not understand the differences.
Is it willful ignorance or are you really that stupid?

 

[JohnLarue]

Explain the difference between a feedback and forcing effect on the climate, larue.
Prove you understand the 'fundamentals'.

We know you won't, your entire fabrication of a theory is based on not understand the differences.
Is it willful ignorance or are you really that stupid?

defining one triatomic black body radiator differently than another triatomic black body radiator in order to fit a false narrative is not science

Decoupling CO2 from Climate Change
This study determines if there is a correlation between rising carbon dioxide levels and global warming. Historical data were reviewed from three different time periods spanning 500 million years. It showed that the curves and trends were too dissimilar to establish a connection. Observations...

www.scirp.org

5. Why Was Water Vapor Excluded from Consideration in the Climate Change-CO2 Hypothesis?

The IPCC excludes water vapor and clouds for reasons other than science.

The statement by the IPCC on page xv of the Executive Summary identifies the purpose of excluding water vapor [3]. “Two important greenhouse gases, water vapour, and ozone, are not included in this table. Water vapour has the largest greenhouse effect, but its concentration in the troposphere is determined internally within the climate system, and, on a global scale, is not affected by human sources and sinks.” Emphasis added. “It was agreed at the first meeting of the IPCC that a new assessment of the whole issue of anthropogenic climate change should be prepared.” [23] Emphasis added.

They excluded Ozone from consideration for a different reason. The IPCC [3] stated at page xv of the Executive Summary that reason to be: “The concentration of ozone is changing both in the stratosphere and the troposphere due to human activities, but it is difficult to quantify the changes from present observations.” Hence, ozone was excluded because it was too difficult to quantify.

exclude the largest contributor to the greenhouse effect (water vapor) because it does not fit their false narrative ?????
exclude clouds because they can not model cloud formation ???????
exclude ozone because it was too difficult to quantify ?????

yet they claim this is settled science
pseudoscience .........pure and simple


and frankfooter will never be able to figure this out..................

1. because he dropped out of high school
2. because he does not want to figure it out

 

[Frankfooter]

defining one triatomic black body radiator differently than another triatomic black body radiator in order to fit a false narrative is not science

larue, are you really that stupid?

I've posted the links to the IPCC chapters on water vapour too many times already.
We've gone over this repeatedly.

The issue is that you aren't smart enough to understand the difference between a forcing and feedback effect on the climate.
No matter how many times I try, you just can't understand that fundamental concept.
So you keep posting idiotic, science denier crap that you don't even understand.
You aren't even bright enough to understand why it doesn't answer the challenge about forcing and feedback effects.

 

[lomotil]

Climate change has always happened since the earth formed. Long after the wacky “ woke” left“ and self righteous “right “ with their boiler plate bipartisan identity politics has become extinct, the climate will continue to change. It is increasingly difficult to ignore the fact that current climate change is moving toward “ global warming “ as scientific evidence as well as year to year changes evident to common folk are everywhere.

Maybe it is “ the economy stupid” as China fires up more coal burning plants and Trump will do the same on a scale large even to obliterate any supposed gains from EVs replacing ICE vehicles.

It is arrogant of mankind to think that they can control the forces of nature during their ultra limited and minute lifespan to maintain climates, even local climates for their industrial, agricultural and leisure requirements.
There will be a time when oranges will be able to grow in Toronto and another time where an ice age will occur despite mankind. The next volcanic global climate changing eruption is a bit overdue now.

Mankind so far is only a very minute catalyst in the guaranteed phenomenon known as climate change.

 

[JohnLarue]

larue, are you really that stupid?

I've posted the links to the IPCC chapters on water vapour too many times already.
We've gone over this repeatedly.

The issue is that you aren't smart enough to understand the difference between a forcing and feedback effect on the climate.
No matter how many times I try, you just can't understand that fundamental concept.
So you keep posting idiotic, science denier crap that you don't even understand.
You aren't even bright enough to understand why it doesn't answer the challenge about forcing and feedback effects.

defining one triatomic black body radiator differently than another triatomic black body radiator in order to fit a false narrative is not science

Decoupling CO2 from Climate Change
This study determines if there is a correlation between rising carbon dioxide levels and global warming. Historical data were reviewed from three different time periods spanning 500 million years. It showed that the curves and trends were too dissimilar to establish a connection. Observations...

www.scirp.org

5. Why Was Water Vapor Excluded from Consideration in the Climate Change-CO2 Hypothesis?

The IPCC excludes water vapor and clouds for reasons other than science.

The statement by the IPCC on page xv of the Executive Summary identifies the purpose of excluding water vapor [3]. “Two important greenhouse gases, water vapour, and ozone, are not included in this table. Water vapour has the largest greenhouse effect, but its concentration in the troposphere is determined internally within the climate system, and, on a global scale, is not affected by human sources and sinks.” Emphasis added. “It was agreed at the first meeting of the IPCC that a new assessment of the whole issue of anthropogenic climate change should be prepared.” [23] Emphasis added.
Click to expand...

They excluded Ozone from consideration for a different reason. The IPCC [3] stated at page xv of the Executive Summary that reason to be: “The concentration of ozone is changing both in the stratosphere and the troposphere due to human activities, but it is difficult to quantify the changes from present observations.” Hence, ozone was excluded because it was too difficult to quantify.
Click to expand...

Click to expand...

exclude the largest contributor to the greenhouse effect (water vapor) because it does not fit their false narrative ?????
exclude clouds because they can not model cloud formation ???????
exclude ozone because it was too difficult to quantify ?????

yet they claim this is settled science
pseudoscience .........pure and simple


and frankfooter will never be able to figure this out..................

1. because he dropped out of high school
2. because he does not want to figure it out

 

[Frankfooter]

Climate change has always happened since the earth formed.

So?
Does that mean its now ok to implement a thermal maximum because it happened millions of years ago as well?

It is arrogant of mankind to think that they can control the forces of nature

Its also arrogant to claim that mankind is not influencing the climate and environment of the planet.
Its not about control but forcing change.

 

[Frankfooter]

defining one triatomic black body radiator differently than another triatomic black body radiator in order to fit a false narrative is not science

You think all triatomic molecules act the same?
Do you think they all have the same forcing and feedback effects?

 

[Adam_hadam]

Judging by how lush my garden is this year, its getting warmer eg lilacs are almost done for the year, they're usually coming out at the beginning of June. Everything is blooming sooner, I avoid the Scotts miracle gro.

 

[JohnLarue]

You think all triatomic molecules act the same?
Do you think they all have the same forcing and feedback effects?

provide the scientific rational to distinguish between CO2 and H2) ?
they both are capable of absorbing infrared radiation , although water vapour absorbs at far more frequencies


defining one triatomic black body radiator differently than another triatomic black body radiator in order to fit a false narrative is not science

Decoupling CO2 from Climate Change
This study determines if there is a correlation between rising carbon dioxide levels and global warming. Historical data were reviewed from three different time periods spanning 500 million years. It showed that the curves and trends were too dissimilar to establish a connection. Observations...

www.scirp.org

5. Why Was Water Vapor Excluded from Consideration in the Climate Change-CO2 Hypothesis?

The IPCC excludes water vapor and clouds for reasons other than science.

The statement by the IPCC on page xv of the Executive Summary identifies the purpose of excluding water vapor [3]. “Two important greenhouse gases, water vapour, and ozone, are not included in this table. Water vapour has the largest greenhouse effect, but its concentration in the troposphere is determined internally within the climate system, and, on a global scale, is not affected by human sources and sinks.” Emphasis added. “It was agreed at the first meeting of the IPCC that a new assessment of the whole issue of anthropogenic climate change should be prepared.” [23] Emphasis added.

They excluded Ozone from consideration for a different reason. The IPCC [3] stated at page xv of the Executive Summary that reason to be: “The concentration of ozone is changing both in the stratosphere and the troposphere due to human activities, but it is difficult to quantify the changes from present observations.” Hence, ozone was excluded because it was too difficult to quantify.

exclude the largest contributor to the greenhouse effect (water vapor) because it does not fit their false narrative ?????
exclude clouds because they can not model cloud formation ???????
exclude ozone because it was too difficult to quantify ?????

yet they claim this is settled science
pseudoscience .........pure and simple


and frankfooter will never be able to figure this out..................

1. because he dropped out of high school
2. because he does not want to figure it out

 

[Frankfooter]

provide the scientific rational to distinguish between CO2 and H2) ?
they both are capable of absorbing infrared radiation , although water vapour absorbs at far more frequencies

larue, I can explain it again but you're not smart enough to understand.
This is as simple as I can make it, even skoob could understand this.
Feedback vs forcing

Water vapour levels change with the amount of heat in the atmosphere - more heat = more water vapour the atmosphere can hold. Water vapour is feedback effect, it reacts to more heat. Put more water vapour in the atmosphere and it will hit a saturation point and become rain, leaving the atmosphere.

Put more CO2 in the atmosphere and it works like a blanket trapping heat. CO2 is a forcing effect. Adding more heat to the atmosphere won't increase CO2 levels, unlike water vapour.

Do I need to link to the Ontario science program, NASA and the IPCC yet again?
Will you ever figure out the difference?

 

[JohnLarue]

larue, I can explain it again but you're not smart enough to understand.

this will be entertaining, however not scientific

Water vapour levels change with the amount of heat in the atmosphere - more heat = more water vapour the atmosphere can hold.

Water vapour is feedback effect, it reacts to more heat.

there is no reaction
no chemical bonds are formed or broken

water / water vapour are natures universal temperature moderators

Put more water vapour in the atmosphere and it will hit a saturation point and become rain, leaving the atmosphere.

convection / condensation energy transfers are orders of magnitude greater than any incremental radiative energy transfer.
you are very confused by scale

Put more CO2 in the atmosphere and it works like a blanket trapping heat.

a blanket @ 400 parts per million ?
now that is a a very loose and ineffective weave



you are very confused about scale

CO2 is a feedback effect.

????
you previously defined CO2 as a forcing molecule and defined water vapor as a feedback only molecule
now you have this ass backward
you are a clueless clown

Adding more heat to the atmosphere won't increase CO2 levels, unlike water vapour.

adding heat to the oceans will increase CO2 release into the atmosphere from the ocean ( recall it is a global warming theory)
CO2 solubility in water is inversely proportional to temperature
the natural cycle of CO2 is 50 X what man produces

Do I need to link to the Ontario science program, NASA and the IPCC yet again?

no you need to enroll in https://www.ilc.org/pages/what-we-offer-ossd

Earn a High School Diploma and Change Your Life

Will you ever figure out the difference?

determining the difference between a person who has scientific training vs. a pathological lair who dropped out of high school is not that challenging

5. Why Was Water Vapor Excluded from Consideration in the Climate Change-CO2 Hypothesis?

The IPCC excludes water vapor and clouds for reasons other than science.

The statement by the IPCC on page xv of the Executive Summary identifies the purpose of excluding water vapor [3]. “Two important greenhouse gases, water vapour, and ozone, are not included in this table. Water vapour has the largest greenhouse effect, but its concentration in the troposphere is determined internally within the climate system, and, on a global scale, is not affected by human sources and sinks.” Emphasis added. “It was agreed at the first meeting of the IPCC that a new assessment of the whole issue of anthropogenic climate change should be prepared.” [23] Emphasis added.

They excluded Ozone from consideration for a different reason. The IPCC [3] stated at page xv of the Executive Summary that reason to be: “The concentration of ozone is changing both in the stratosphere and the troposphere due to human activities, but it is difficult to quantify the changes from present observations.” Hence, ozone was excluded because it was too difficult to quantify.

exclude the largest contributor to the greenhouse effect (water vapor) because it does not fit their false narrative ?????
exclude clouds because they can not model cloud formation ???????
exclude ozone because it was too difficult to quantify ?????

yet they claim this is settled science
pseudoscience .........pure and simple


and frankfooter will never be able to figure this out..................

1. because he dropped out of high school
2. because he does not want to figure it out

 

[Frankfooter]

water / water vapour are natures universal temperature moderators
convection / condensation energy transfers are orders of magnitude greater than any incremental radiative energy transfer.

Yes, water vapour is a moderator, its a feedback effect.
Add more heat and more water vapour can be absorbed by the atmosphere.
Add more water vapour and it falls out of the sky as rain/snow.

That's the first part.
The next is understanding that CO2 is a forcing effect.
For some reason you think that trace elements can't effect larger bodies, like trace amounts of aspirin, alcohol or cyanide effecting humans.

Those same amounts of ink in water can effect the amount of light passing through, so why do you think every single scientist in the world is wrong about this and you are right?

 

[JohnLarue]

Yes, water vapour is a moderator, its a feedback effect.

nope
it absorbs IR as CO2 does
it absorbs at many more frequencies / wavelengths

what part of 90 to 96% contribution to the greenhouse effect confuses you so much ?

Add more heat and more water vapour can be absorbed by the atmosphere.
Add more water vapour and it falls out of the sky as rain/snow.

Again convection / condensation energy transfers are orders of magnitude greater than any incremental radiative energy transfer.
you are very confused by scale

That's the first part.
The next is understanding that CO2 is a forcing effect.
For some reason you think that trace elements can't effect larger bodies, like trace amounts of aspirin, alcohol or cyanide effecting humans.

those are chemical effects, not physical effects
this has been explained to you numerous times

a very telling trait of high school drop outs - they just do not learn

you will repeat your nonsense again in the future

5. Why Was Water Vapor Excluded from Consideration in the Climate Change-CO2 Hypothesis?

The IPCC excludes water vapor and clouds for reasons other than science.

The statement by the IPCC on page xv of the Executive Summary identifies the purpose of excluding water vapor [3]. “Two important greenhouse gases, water vapour, and ozone, are not included in this table. Water vapour has the largest greenhouse effect, but its concentration in the troposphere is determined internally within the climate system, and, on a global scale, is not affected by human sources and sinks.” Emphasis added. “It was agreed at the first meeting of the IPCC that a new assessment of the whole issue of anthropogenic climate change should be prepared.” [23] Emphasis added.

They excluded Ozone from consideration for a different reason. The IPCC [3] stated at page xv of the Executive Summary that reason to be: “The concentration of ozone is changing both in the stratosphere and the troposphere due to human activities, but it is difficult to quantify the changes from present observations.” Hence, ozone was excluded because it was too difficult to quantify.

exclude the largest contributor to the greenhouse effect (water vapor) because it does not fit their false narrative ?????
exclude clouds because they can not model cloud formation ???????
exclude ozone because it was too difficult to quantify ?????

yet they claim this is settled science
pseudoscience .........pure and simple


and frankfooter will never be able to figure this out..................

1. because he dropped out of high school
2. because he does not want to figure it out

 

[Frankfooter]

nope
it absorbs IR as CO2 does
it absorbs at many more frequencies / wavelengths

That's not the point, larue.
You missed it again.

The IPCC knows water vapour is part of the climate and absorbs IR but the point is that its a feedback effect.
You're also still lying about the IPCC not discussing water vapour, its an incredibly stupid lie.

Why can't you understand such a simple concept as feedback and forcing effects, larue?
Are you really that stupid?

 

[bver_hunter]

This video explains in a very concise manner what is occurring in several Asian Nations. Thankfully it has subtitles, otherwise I would have needed someone to translate:

 

[Frankfooter]

This video explains in a very concise manner what is occurring in several Asian Nations. Thankfully it has subtitles, otherwise I would have needed someone to translate:

Mexico too, right now.
Both places are close to wet bulb temperature.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/mexico-heat-wave-1.7214308