Global Warming?

[Moraff]

Just out of curiosity does anybody know what the green house gas that has the largest effect on the climate is?

Depends on how you want to look at it. CO2 has the highest concentration in the atmosphere than all the others (except for water vapour).

On a "per molecule" basis the top gas would be methane. It is 10x more effective than CO2 at trapping heat. And the largest contributor of methane is natural animal emissions. Perhaps humans aren't the main culprit after all...

 

[papasmerf]

Depends on how you want to look at it. CO2 has the highest concentration in the atmosphere than all the others (except for water vapour).

On a "per molecule" basis the top gas would be methane. It is 10x more effective than CO2 at trapping heat. And the largest contributor of methane is natural animal emissions. Perhaps humans aren't the main culprit after all...

then in the spirit of the sky is falling WEMUST KIL ALL THE ANIMALS

 

[train]

then you are begining to see the problem

Ride a horse to work.

Nah....Gore says they fart too much releasing damaging methane. The most ecofriendly way to travel is to copy him and go by private jet.

 

[landscaper]

The largest contributing gas to global warming is water vapour ,, clouds in other words. It dwarfs the effects of all the greenhouse gases combined.

The climate models that predict global warming do not include it in their models because it is to complex to model.

The largest factor possibly affecting climate change and it is not included in models because no one can predict its effects.


Hmmm he says

 

[landscaper]

Come on landscaper, with your handle, you should be hoping for a couple extra months of summer.

A couple of more months of summer would be nice specifically following last winter . I can say that now but I am not currently installing interlock or flagstone at 30+ degrees .

Just thinking about that makes me sweat

 

[red]

The largest contributing gas to global warming is water vapour ,, clouds in other words. It dwarfs the effects of all the greenhouse gases combined.

The climate models that predict global warming do not include it in their models because it is to complex to model.

The largest factor possibly affecting climate change and it is not included in models because no one can predict its effects.


Hmmm he says

so then, the climate models are understating the problem?

 

[landscaper]

so then, the climate models are understating the problem?

No body is sure that is the big problem the water vapour in the air could be a moderating factor in the climate or as you point out the models could be understateing the problem.

My main point through this whole thing is that we don't know .

If as the climate change people claim the science is finished why worry when people look into the situation. If they are right all the study will do is confirm there theories.

If on the other hand the climate change is due to solar activity then there is more study to be done.

People must remember that the climate is an ongoing process it temperature goes up and down on a regular basis.

800 years ago the vikings populated Greenland lived and farmed crops there.]

Now I am guessing that Grenland is not a Remax marketing ploy so something changed. The question is what and is it happening again?



That is why we need the science.

 

[red]

No body is sure that is the big problem the water vapour in the air could be a moderating factor in the climate or as you point out the models could be understateing the problem..

sorry I could have sworn you said this:

The largest contributing gas to global warming is water vapour ,, clouds in other words. It dwarfs the effects of all the greenhouse gases combined.

The climate models that predict global warming do not include it in their models because it is to complex to model.

The largest factor possibly affecting climate change and it is not included in models because no one can predict its effects.


Hmmm he says

hmmm

 

[a 1 player]

The way I see it...

People have been polluting the environment since the beginning of time without fearing the consequences of the future. In the past 15 years or so, we have made remarkable advancements. We have banned CFC's, leaded gasoline, have started recycling programs and countless other things. The 'Green" age is still in its infancy. Things are bound to get better, especially as new advancements are made. Hell, even entire industries are being built around green and recycling.

The real challenge is whether less developed countries jump on board with the movement.

 

[landscaper]

sorry I could have sworn you said this:







hmmm

Yes I did say that , but the science behind climate change and global warming is still in its infancy. The experts really don't know what is happening. More study is required before we go charging off into the sunset.

 

[landscaper]

The way I see it...

People have been polluting the environment since the beginning of time without fearing the consequences of the future. In the past 15 years or so, we have made remarkable advancements. We have banned CFC's, leaded gasoline, have started recycling programs and countless other things. The 'Green" age is still in its infancy. Things are bound to get better, especially as new advancements are made. Hell, even entire industries are being built around green and recycling.

The real challenge is whether less developed countries jump on board with the movement.

You have just put your finger on the biggest problem with Kyoto and so of Kyoto et al. There are no required controls on third world countries.
The less developed countries insis climate change is the problem caused by the industrialzed nations and they should not be penalized for developing.

To a certain extent they are correct. The remaining question is how effective would any Kyoto type program be when what ever you do is instantly cancelled out because China is building a coal fired generating plant a month with no environmental controls on them?

This is a problem thre Kyoto fanatics refuse to deal with. If they are so sure they are right why not go to China and correct the Chinese government on their environment transgressions?

 

[landscaper]

Just found another article that is interesting.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120847988943824973.html?mod=djemEditorialPage

 

[Herodotus]

Just found another article that is interesting.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120847988943824973.html?mod=djemEditorialPage

Three points that should be noted:

1. The Wall Street Journal is almost completely against environmentalism and in particular, the concept of climate change. Just a little bias.

2. The author is not a climatologist, which you felt should be the yardstick by which those experts who comment on "global warming" are judged. His climatological work centred on agribusiness, and by his standards, "global warming" is a good thing, because it means a longer growing season.

3. The Cato Institute is an organization of pseudo-civil libertarians (think Ayn Rand) who have in the past, accepted large donations from the corporate sector, such as the tobacco industry and lobby and then have had their public statements mirror those of their benefactors. In addition, their "expertise" is limited, at best and is entirely based on the idea that humans and business should do whatever they want, with no market controls or legislation.

Some of their work is actually quite good. Other stuff, unfortunately, borders on fanaticism and lobbying-for-hire.

 

[Papi Chulo]

Depends on how you want to look at it. CO2 has the highest concentration in the atmosphere than all the others (except for water vapour).

On a "per molecule" basis the top gas would be methane. It is 10x more effective than CO2 at trapping heat. And the largest contributor of methane is natural animal emissions. Perhaps humans aren't the main culprit after all...

And the funny thing with about methane is that as the arctic warms and the permafrost defrosts, there are GIGATONS of methane that will be released into the atmosphere.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2005/aug/11/science.climatechange1

 

[frasier]

why is that critics of global warming will say there are not enough studies to support the global warming theory but jump at any global cooling theories?

Because guys like you have jumped the same way on the global warming wagon without asking why...and thinking for yourself..what goes around comes around

 

[onehunglow]

Before man could have any affect on the environment we had periods of extreme heat and cooling. I have never seen any of this explained.

 

[cypherpunk]

Before man could have any affect on the environment we had periods of extreme heat and cooling. I have never seen any of this explained.

Uhhh really? I'm sure it's on the History Channel weekly. What you're talking about is generally well documented, well understood, and not controversial.

 

[Herodotus]

Before man could have any affect on the environment we had periods of extreme heat and cooling. I have never seen any of this explained.

Not at the hyper-accelerated rate that we are currently experiencing. But periods of extreme volcanic activity were thought to play a part in it, along with the "asteroids/meteors" explanation that I am not 100% sold on.

Geologists can confirm both of these events.

 

[Garrett]

Yes I did say that , but the science behind climate change and global warming is still in its infancy. The experts really don't know what is happening. More study is required before we go charging off into the sunset.

What are your credentials as a scientist to state this? People think they can have an opinion on this subject because everyone experiences weather. Usually their opinions are about as valid as if they were to discuss advanced mathematics (I briefly worked in predictive climate models for a government agency, and it was all based on mathematics).

 

[landscaper]

my credentials are not as a climatologist , what I do is actually question people and theroies instead of just taking the word of who ever published the gata.

I also corespond with the authors of the papers and question the theories from both sides.

My big problem is junk science, ie; not properly or completly researched. And yes I have spoken and coresponded with climatologists both in and out of Canada regarding climate predictions. The concensus actually pretty much universal is we don not hnow how to model climate change.