Re: Consensus or senseless con?



"Scout" <me4guns@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:hJl1k.5508$jX.5378@xxxxxxxxxxx

"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:6am11uF36ne90U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9AB2A05454D03Sandman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:6alsafF3947caU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:



"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9AB293D425B33Sandman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:6aj8i0F38dob8U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:



"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:Xns9AB169922242FSandman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:6aghskF37juq0U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:



"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:Xns9AB068D8F38CFSandman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:6aen4lF37khr6U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:



"Gray Ghost" <grey_ghost471-newsgroups@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message
news:Xns9AAFDBE0D37AAWereofftoseethewizrd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Let's make this simple enough even for you:

Do you believe that the sun has any effect on the heating or
cooling of the
earth?

**Of course. There are many contributors to global warming. The
Sun is the largest single influence. The heat from the molten
rock beneath the surface is another. The contribution of humans
is yet another.

Whose impact has not been truly determined.

**Adding extra energy into a semi-closed system (ie: The Earth)
may cause a temperature rise.

I agree, however, to what degree has yet to be determined. For
example, the symbol of global warming, that poor little polar bear,
has doubled in population since 1960. The estimate then was
12,000, today it is over 25,000.

**That would be a disingenuous and highly misleading use of
statistics.

In what way? Are folks raising them back home? Are they all in
zoos?

And you damned well know it. Need I explain the reasons to
you?

Yep.

**Because hunting of Polar Bears was not illegal.

Hunting of polar bears is not illegal everywhere. Not everyone has
signed up.

**Indeed. The numbers being hunted has fallen substantially however.


They were hunted
almost to extinction, prior to 1973. Since that time, their numbers
increased, due to the cessation of hunting. Now, their numbers are in
decline, due to global warming.


The Polar Bear is a threatened species,

The polar bear is classified as a threatened species. It may or may
not be.

**The people who study Polar Bears say they are threatened. What
evidence do you have to suggest otherwise?

What is happening may well be a regular cycle of warming and
cooling.

**And yet, the vast majority of the planet's experts in such matters
say otherwise. I've seen a handful of people (George W Bush, some
fossil fuel proponents and John Lott Jnr) say otherwise. I've not seen
any properly credentialled people deny the fact of anthropogenic
global warming. Of course, if you're willing to place your faith in
the towering scientific genius of George W Bush, be my guest.

I don't accept much from him or Lott, however, in this thread you
apparently discarded some evidence contrary to your beliefs by claiming
that such and such was not their field of expertise.

**I'm still waiting for some contrary evidence. I've seen nothing to
explain the following:

* Why CO2 levels are higher than at any time in the last 400,000 years
due to human activity.

Simple, 400,000 years ago there wasn't much human activity to produce CO2
levels. Oddly enough however, they still manage to reach levels that today
you blame on humanity. Care to explain the mechanism by which these known
levels were reached without human activity and by what manner we can
eliminate such natural causes from the current trends?

**They've well and truly surpassed those levels. Human activity is the only
possible cause. As for how high levels of CO2 were reached in the past, I've
explained that to you before. If the planet warms (for whatever reason),
then dissolved CO2 from the oceans will vent into the atmosphere. Warming
and CO2 levels are linked. One drives the other.


I didn't think you could.

**Wait for the answer.



* That CO2 is not a greenhouse gas.

It is a greenhouse gas, but it's interaction with the enviroment
(specifically in enhancing plant growth, which has a lower absorbtion rate
than bare ground or less plant growth) is still under investigation.

**Sure, but certain things about CO2 are well understood. It's effect as a
greenhouse as, for instance. It's effects on plant growth are still being
investigated. What has been determined is that more CO2 does not promote
more plant growth in all species. More importantly, perhaps, is that leaf
production may increase, but seed production may fall.

See,
when CO2 goes up, plants grow better, when they grow better they have
larger, bigger, and greener foliage and the number of plants tends to
increase, which reduces the absorbtion of radiant heat. Water vapor is
also a green house gas, and as temperatures increase so does cloud cover,
which also reflects more solar energy. Just saying that X or Y is a
greenhouse gas doesn't answer the issue until ALL the variables are
considered.

**Here's some facts accompanied by a brief scenario:

* Water vapour is a major greenhouse gas.
* CO2 is a major greenhouse gas, but causes less effect than water vapour.
* Methane is a major greenhouse gas, but causes less effect than CO2.

As CO2 levels increase, the planet warms up.
As the planet warms up, water evaporates from the world's oceans, lakes,
rivers and other places.
As more water vapour enters the atmosphere, the effects of greenhouse
becomes more pronounced.
As the effects of greenhouse becomes more pronounced, the oceans warm.
As the oceans warm, more CO2 dissolves out of the oceans.
The planet warms further still.

Thermal runnaway ensues.


* The reasons why the temperature rise has been so rapid in the last 100
years. Apart from the influence of humans.

Could be natural causes, certainly such rates of change are not unknown in
the historical data. So why should we automatically assume this time that
it's different or special?

**There are no natural effects which explain the high levels of CO2 we are
now experiencing.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Waaay OT: Global warming. Idle thoughts of an idle fellow.
    ... > influence on global warming. ... *The* greenhouse gas, and the only one that really ... CO2 sinks are one way to counteract the CO2 we put ...
    (rec.crafts.textiles.needlework)
  • Re: ( OT) Global Warming, a primer . .
    ... greenhouse gas and that water vapor constitutes 95% of the greenhouse ... gases in the atmosphere. ... great deal of atmospheric CO2 as their temperatures change, ... 800 Years -and- The False CO2 Claims for Global Warming ...
    (rec.radio.shortwave)
  • Re: Indictment of credulous doomsayers
    ... global warming events can be triggered by factors other than CO2 ... levels will continue to rise long after the initial trigger event has ended. ... known greenhouse gas, from acting as a greenhouse gas? ...
    (uk.rec.audio)
  • Re: Tories concern for the environment?
    ... Or have they in addition some meaningful proposals to limit ... You want proof of how the government misleads the public on global warming? ... From the 2nd paragraph, Carbon Dioxide is NOT the main greenhouse gas, CO2 makes up 0.038% of the atmosphere, water vapour IS the main greenhouse gas and makes up between 2 and 4%. ...
    (uk.politics.misc)
  • Re: Tories concern for the environment?
    ... Or have they in addition some meaningful proposals to limit ... You want proof of how the government misleads the public on global warming? ... From the 2nd paragraph, Carbon Dioxide is NOT the main greenhouse gas, CO2 makes up 0.038% of the atmosphere, water vapour IS the main greenhouse gas and makes up between 2 and 4%. ...
    (uk.politics.misc)