Fading sunspots....

Global warming isn't actually GLOBAL per se for the increase in temperatures vary from one location to the next, which is why people now refer to it as climate change.
 
DeafCaroline said:
Global warming isn't actually GLOBAL per se for the increase in temperatures vary from one location to the next, which is why people now refer to it as climate change.
Click to expand...

I don't know if it applies, but what happens if you put a drop of dye into a glass of water? It gets evenly distributed.
 
Air is not water so you can't really apply that theory.

Ok, in areas where there is a great concentration of greenhouse gases, they rise upwards to the ozone layer where eventually they wear out a hole. through that hole the effects of the sun's temperature increases. Which is why the greatest increases in temperature are where there is greatest concentration of greenhouse gases.

but does it have a ripple effect? Absolutely.
 
DeafCaroline said:
Primary cause of global warming is increased CO2 (aka greenhouse gases) in the air which came from the burning of fossil fuels, i.e. coal-powered plants as one example.

So, yeah, caused by humans.
Click to expand...

Do you know what "ppm" as in "390 ppm" for CO2 concentration in the atmosphere? That’s the current CO2 concentration in our atmosphere which means 390 parts per million. In other words the amount of CO2 volume-wise with the rest of the atmospheric gases make up only .038 percent (or .00038) leaving the rest of the atmospheric gases for a total of 99.96 percent. Heck, water vapor makes up as much as 98% of the atmospheric/greenhouse gases which is 100 times more denser than CO2 and has more influence on cooling and keeping the surface warm (think of clouds as blankets to help keep in the warm on the ground). In fact, the IPCC predicted years ago that we’d be warming at a rate of from 3 to more than 5 Celsius degrees per century but in fact we have been warming up at a rate of 1.5 C/century. And that over the last 11 years we’ve been on a cooling trend as well when the IPCC said we’d be much more warmer by now according to their computer models thinking they've solved a hugely complex climate system.

The Earth’s climate system is quite complex and how it interacts with our landforms and oceans make it even more complicated. Then you have the sun’s energy output, it’s fluctuating magnetic field, and the incoming cosmic rays that influence cloud formation in our atmosphere adds to the complexity and dimension that affects Earth’s climate. If anything, it is Al Gore who wants you to believe that CO2 which amounts to only .039 percent (note carefully the decimal place) of our total atmospheric gases as the main driver and cause of our global warming. That logic is clearly not there and it’s the stuff of fantasy. There may be *some* small contribution by CO2 but certainly not as a major player that *drives* climate change. The sun does that for us. Plus other factors as well.

So, um, no, it's not an anthropogenically caused global warming, climate change or whatever phrase you want to use.
 
DeafCaroline said:
Global warming isn't actually GLOBAL per se for the increase in temperatures vary from one location to the next, which is why people now refer to it as climate change.
Click to expand...

It was first called "global warming" and used extensively by scientists and then to make it more "neutral sounding" they called it "climate change" to get away from that phrase but in reality they're talking about global warming.
 
Beowulf said:
So, you finally admit that global warming is man-made in part?
Click to expand...

kokonut said:
Read again. I don't think "heat islands" matches on a scale to that of "global."
Click to expand...

Beowulf said:
WHAT??? So, you deny the theory of the butterfly effect?
Click to expand...

Ahaha, this just brought a tear to my eye. A man (I think) after my own heart. I'm sorry Kookynuts, but as long as we don't talk about the Bush years, I think I've moved on and found myself someone new. He stirs up emotions long ignored for being silly, which I no longer feel I can hold back.

Also, I never clarified my position because discussing this topic with you is boring and not worth the effort on my part. (It's the combination, if I could be amused, I'll dig into anything trivial, just ask ole' Rollin'.) I haven't presented an opinion or position to be clarified.
 
DeafCaroline said:
Air is not water so you can't really apply that theory.

Ok, in areas where there is a great concentration of greenhouse gases, they rise upwards to the ozone layer where eventually they wear out a hole. through that hole the effects of the sun's temperature increases. Which is why the greatest increases in temperature are where there is greatest concentration of greenhouse gases.

but does it have a ripple effect? Absolutely.
Click to expand...

Air naturally contains H20 which is why we say "humidity."

There is no "hole"...it's a thinner ozone layer. The media or some scientists like to say "hole" for dramatic effect. It's really a misnomer. Look at the pennies' thickness and dime's thickness on an example of thinness of an ozone layer.
Ozone Hole Watch: What is a Dobson Unit?

Ozone has nothing to do with temperature but about the increase in the harmful ultraviolet (B) rays which can can skin cancer. Thinner ozone layer means more harmful UV rays to enter the Earth's atmosphere. Ozone naturally blocks/reduces incoming UV rays.
 
StSapphire said:
Ahaha, this just brought a tear to my eye. A man (I think) after my own heart. I'm sorry Kookynuts, but as long as we don't talk about the Bush years, I think I've moved on and found myself someone new. He stirs up emotions long ignored for being silly, which I no longer feel I can hold back.

Also, I never clarified my position because discussing this topic with you is boring and not worth the effort on my part. (It's the combination, if I could be amused, I'll dig into anything trivial, just ask ole' Rollin'.) I haven't presented an opinion or position to be clarified.
Click to expand...

Ah, well, I tried. Nice excuse, too.
 
that's why to clear up confusion, they refer to it as climate change because while global warming is not exactly global because it varies in degrees from one location to the next, the ripple effect of such hotspots is affecting the climate around the world. So, hence "climate change".
 
DeafCaroline said:
that's why to clear up confusion, they refer to it as climate change because while global warming is not exactly global because it varies in degrees from one location to the next, the ripple effect of such hotspots is affecting the climate around the world. So, hence "climate change".
Click to expand...

Not a confusion. It's simply a mask. If it were a confusion why did it take these "scientists" (if not the media) more than a decade to "clear up the confusion"?

And "climate change/global warming" went out last year when the White House proposed this new phrase "Global Climate Disruption" last year September 2010. Did you get that memo?

Climate has always been changing for millions of years! It's never static. There is no need for the phrase "climate change." It's a politically driven phrase.
 
kokonut said:
Not a confusion. It's simply a mask. If it were a confusion why did it take these "scientists" (if not the media) more than a decade to "clear up the confusion"?

And "climate change/global warming" went out last year when the White House proposed this new phrase "Global Climate Disruption" last year September 2010. Did you get that memo?

Climate has always been changing for millions of years! It's never static. There is no need for the phrase "climate change." It's a politically driven phrase.
Click to expand...

But an accurate one. :cool2:
 
Steinhauer said:
Yup, with a warning that a massive solar flare could knock out all electrical components (including satellite circuitry).
Click to expand...

If that is a possibility, then it might explain why AT&T service here is crap while Verizon remains untouched. Far as I know, anyone using AT&T here in my area can only text. No voice or data service and AT&T hasn't been crediting their customer accounts for it. (Yeah a little far-fetched, but hey AT&T *could* use it as an excuse for having poor service quality when compared to Verizon, :lol:)
 
Back
Top