Remember me
▼ Content

Is Gore's theory CO2 causes warming false?


Is Gore's theory CO2 causes warming false?07-01-2019 16:42
Tai Hai Chen
★★★☆☆
(526)
His chart shows CO2 causes warming so if CO2 is 55% more than 1850 level of 280 ppm then temperature goes up by 10 C which is fake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JIuKjaY3r4
Edited on 07-01-2019 16:45
07-01-2019 17:53
still learning
★★☆☆☆
(232)
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
His chart shows CO2 causes warming so if CO2 is 55% more than 1850 level of 280 ppm then temperature goes up by 10 C which is fake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JIuKjaY3r4


Where did you get the 10 C?

It was not on or in the video.
Not on the graph. The temperature line is not extended past the present day.
Not in Gore's words. He asked: "What will the temperature be?"

You came up with the 10 C. You jumped to a conclusion.

It's not "Gore's theory" either.
07-01-2019 19:11
Wake
★★★★★
(3624)
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
His chart shows CO2 causes warming so if CO2 is 55% more than 1850 level of 280 ppm then temperature goes up by 10 C which is fake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JIuKjaY3r4


Instead watch this. Lord Moncton shows the math errors made by the IPCC and how the change in temperature will be barely measurable.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=An+Inconvenient+lie+Lord+Moncton&view=detail&mid=0AF37481465AD69EF7660AF37481465AD69EF766&FORM=VIRE
07-01-2019 19:20
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6284)
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
His chart shows CO2 causes warming so if CO2 is 55% more than 1850 level of 280 ppm then temperature goes up by 10 C which is fake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JIuKjaY3r4


Since it's not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth, any chart using iti is fake.

CO2 has no capability to warm the Earth. Giving this Magick Holy Gas any capability of that sort violates the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.


The Parrot Killer
15-01-2019 13:59
BreatheLess
☆☆☆☆☆
(3)
amsterdam.craigslist.org/hab/d/breatheless-the-easy-solution-to/6795323583.html
16-01-2019 02:55
James___
★★★☆☆
(895)
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
His chart shows CO2 causes warming so if CO2 is 55% more than 1850 level of 280 ppm then temperature goes up by 10 C which is fake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JIuKjaY3r4



If the global annual temperature is 58.5 degrees F. or 14.7 degrees C., that's 287.9 degrees kelvin.
1 kelvin = 1 degree C. When the composition of atmospheric gases influences the global annual temperature, it needs to be relative to absolute 0. It warms our planet, right? If so then it's relationship would be relative to absolute 0.
Otherwise the claim would be that for the first 280 degrees kelvin, it's effect is minimal but above 280 degrees kelvin is quite pronounced. This would mean that co2's influence on our atmosphere is not a constant. Even if it went y = x + (x +1) it would be on a curve. This is a basic calculus expression which either Wake or ITN can graph for you. CO2's influence should be able to be graphed in a similar fashion. No scientist has yet to show a logarithm that accounts for CO2's influence on our atmosphere.
However, in the past scientists stated that deep ocean currents predicted global warming 10 years in advance. The IPCC is manipulating data. This is why before 1998 that all temperatures recorded by ships was acceptable. Nothing in science changes in 1 year like that. It's just not possible.
16-01-2019 19:27
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6284)
James___ wrote:
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
His chart shows CO2 causes warming so if CO2 is 55% more than 1850 level of 280 ppm then temperature goes up by 10 C which is fake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JIuKjaY3r4



If the global annual temperature is 58.5 degrees F. or 14.7 degrees C., that's 287.9 degrees kelvin.
1 kelvin = 1 degree C. When the composition of atmospheric gases influences the global annual temperature, it needs to be relative to absolute 0. It warms our planet, right? If so then it's relationship would be relative to absolute 0.
Otherwise the claim would be that for the first 280 degrees kelvin, it's effect is minimal but above 280 degrees kelvin is quite pronounced. This would mean that co2's influence on our atmosphere is not a constant. Even if it went y = x + (x +1) it would be on a curve. This is a basic calculus expression which either Wake or ITN can graph for you. CO2's influence should be able to be graphed in a similar fashion. No scientist has yet to show a logarithm that accounts for CO2's influence on our atmosphere.
However, in the past scientists stated that deep ocean currents predicted global warming 10 years in advance. The IPCC is manipulating data. This is why before 1998 that all temperatures recorded by ships was acceptable. Nothing in science changes in 1 year like that. It's just not possible.


y=x+(x+1) is neither calculus nor draws a curve.

The reason no scientist can draw a graph of CO2's influence on the atmosphere is because CO2 is incapable of warming the Earth using infrared light emitted by the Earth.

Deep ocean currents are cold ones. Warm ocean currents run on the surface. Warm water rises, just like warm air. They are not an indicator of any prediction of Earth's temperature.

The IPCC is not just manipulating data, they are making it up. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth or to measure the global atmospheric CO2 content.


The Parrot Killer
16-01-2019 22:27
HarveyH55
★★☆☆☆
(218)
The best they can ever hope for, is just a rough estimate of temperature, and CO2 levels. I really don't get how they could sell the core principal that they have precise numbers to work with. Even on a clear sunny day, there are going to be other things contributing, much larger margin of error, than the 3 c degrees they predict by 2100. I guess people need something to believe in, some goal to reach for, and tend to ignore reality.




Join the debate Is Gore's theory CO2 causes warming false?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
10 ppm O3 in atmosphere absorb 98% of UV. So what makes you thin first 10 ppm CO2 in the atmosphere don&#114-01-2019 09:11
CO2 and Some transparency6214-01-2019 05:09
10 ppm O3 in atomsphere absorb 98% of UV. 10 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere absorb 98% of IR. So why would 211-01-2019 18:54
A very simple but meaningful fact about CO2, without it1210-01-2019 05:27
Whirlpool theory of ocean deadzones?222-12-2018 15:50
Articles
Theory
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact