Remember me
▼ Content

Warming acceleration



Page 1 of 4123>>>
Warming acceleration17-07-2018 05:53
muc82
☆☆☆☆☆
(2)
I doubt that we will ever be able to cut the emmisions. Our civilisation and mentality runs like that. For me cutting the emissions even for 50-60% (which globally will never happen) means nothing, we have still so much that it cause the warming. So here my thinking:
1.) Have more CO2 emmisions will mean warmer earth -> ice will melt, we will have less sun reflection, temperature will rise even faster
2.) We consume more and more energy, we have more buildings and more tarmac roads -> all this things cause more higher temperatures
3.) warmer temperature -> permafrost will melt, methane will strenghten the warming effect, temperature will rise faster
4.) ...
Basically I see here a lot of natural reactions which accelerate the global warming. Everything leads to more and more warm temperatures.
Does anybody know some cooling effect in the nature which starts when the temperature rise and rise? Does something like that exist? Or will we end like Venus in couple of centuries?
17-07-2018 06:52
still learning
★★☆☆☆
(206)
muc82 wrote:
.....Or will we end like Venus in couple of centuries?


Not like Venus.
If you search around for worst-case scenario global warming predictions, not as bad as Venus.
I guess that the folks who run the climate change models don't have very high confidence in them beyond maybe a century, but since the effect of each increment of added CO2 decreases slightly it precludes a Venus runaway at the Earth's distance from the Sun.

8 degrees C rise maybe (14 degrees F), worst case. I've found a reference to that much. That rise would make some places uninhabitable. That rise would play hell with agriculture. Damaged agriculture would have a hard time feeding 7+ billion people. Starving nations might not starve peacefully.

Venus? No, but maybe not a world where your grandchildren or mine could find a place to live.
17-07-2018 07:48
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5741)
muc82 wrote:
I doubt that we will ever be able to cut the emmisions. Our civilisation and mentality runs like that. For me cutting the emissions even for 50-60% (which globally will never happen) means nothing, we have still so much that it cause the warming. So here my thinking:
1.) Have more CO2 emmisions will mean warmer earth -> ice will melt, we will have less sun reflection, temperature will rise even faster

No need to panic. CO2 is incapable of warming the Earth.
muc82 wrote:
2.) We consume more and more energy, we have more buildings and more tarmac roads -> all this things cause more higher temperatures

All the cities combined and all the roadway surfaces combined is an extremely small percentage of the Earth's surface. Any change in the global albedo by these structures is quite minimal.
muc82 wrote:
3.) warmer temperature -> permafrost will melt, methane will strenghten the warming effect, temperature will rise faster

Methane is incapable of warming the Earth also. No gas or vapor is capable of warming the Earth. There is no need to panic.
muc82 wrote:
4.) ...
Basically I see here a lot of natural reactions which accelerate the global warming. Everything leads to more and more warm temperatures.

The Church of Global Warming wants you to believe that so they can complete their agenda of destroying the bourgeoisie. The Church of Global Warming stems from the Church of Karl Marx.
muc82 wrote:
Does anybody know some cooling effect in the nature which starts when the temperature rise and rise? Does something like that exist?

Yup. Space...the final frontier for heat from the Earth. The hotter the Earth gets (for any reason), the greater the heat flow to space.
muc82 wrote:
Or will we end like Venus in couple of centuries?

Venus was never even remotely like Earth, and Earth will never become anything like Venus.

Venus has an extremely long day/night cycle. It has an incredibly thick atmosphere producing 900 times pressure at the surface than we experience on Earth. It is also much closer to the Sun. Mercury is only cooler, even though it is closer to the Sun, because it has very little atmosphere.

Venus is hot because of the thick atmosphere, not because of any special magick gas that composes it. That atmosphere is so good at conducting heat from the surface that despite the extremely long day/night cycle, night temperatures are virtually identical to daytime temperatures on Venus.

BTW, the recent conjunction of the thin crescent Moon against Venus recently was a spectacular sight. I hope you got to see it.


The Parrot Killer
17-07-2018 07:48
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1198)
muc82 wrote:
I doubt that we will ever be able to cut the emmisions. Our civilisation and mentality runs like that. For me cutting the emissions even for 50-60% (which globally will never happen) means nothing, we have still so much that it cause the warming. So here my thinking:
1.) Have more CO2 emmisions will mean warmer earth -> ice will melt, we will have less sun reflection, temperature will rise even faster
2.) We consume more and more energy, we have more buildings and more tarmac roads -> all this things cause more higher temperatures
3.) warmer temperature -> permafrost will melt, methane will strenghten the warming effect, temperature will rise faster
4.) ...
Basically I see here a lot of natural reactions which accelerate the global warming. Everything leads to more and more warm temperatures.
Does anybody know some cooling effect in the nature which starts when the temperature rise and rise? Does something like that exist? Or will we end like Venus in couple of centuries?


Vertually all the ice that can be melted has already done so. The vast majority of the ice on earth is in places that would require a very large increase in temperature to melt it. Like +20c.

Methane has a very short life when it is in the air. It disappears quickly as it reacts with oxygen and goes away.

Permafrost may well melt, but how much? The edges of its' range may well move back a bit but not much given the very cold winter temp[eratures, the slight increase in summer temperatures and the very large range of permafrost in Central Aisia etc.

The cooling effect of heat being radiated away from the earth is very big. Each night when the sun stops warming us we lose lots of temperature as this happens. If it is a little warmer it will cool a little more.

The earth has been much warmer for most of its' history. Lots warmer. It has never ended up like Venus. It will not warm up like that now.
17-07-2018 07:51
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5741)
Tim the plumber wrote:
muc82 wrote:
I doubt that we will ever be able to cut the emmisions. Our civilisation and mentality runs like that. For me cutting the emissions even for 50-60% (which globally will never happen) means nothing, we have still so much that it cause the warming. So here my thinking:
1.) Have more CO2 emmisions will mean warmer earth -> ice will melt, we will have less sun reflection, temperature will rise even faster
2.) We consume more and more energy, we have more buildings and more tarmac roads -> all this things cause more higher temperatures
3.) warmer temperature -> permafrost will melt, methane will strenghten the warming effect, temperature will rise faster
4.) ...
Basically I see here a lot of natural reactions which accelerate the global warming. Everything leads to more and more warm temperatures.
Does anybody know some cooling effect in the nature which starts when the temperature rise and rise? Does something like that exist? Or will we end like Venus in couple of centuries?


Vertually all the ice that can be melted has already done so. The vast majority of the ice on earth is in places that would require a very large increase in temperature to melt it. Like +20c.

Methane has a very short life when it is in the air. It disappears quickly as it reacts with oxygen and goes away.

Permafrost may well melt, but how much? The edges of its' range may well move back a bit but not much given the very cold winter temp[eratures, the slight increase in summer temperatures and the very large range of permafrost in Central Aisia etc.

The cooling effect of heat being radiated away from the earth is very big. Each night when the sun stops warming us we lose lots of temperature as this happens. If it is a little warmer it will cool a little more.

The earth has been much warmer for most of its' history. Lots warmer. It has never ended up like Venus. It will not warm up like that now.


Generally correct, but there is a minor point I should bring up.

A particular spot on Earth loses heat to space 24 hours a day. It only receives heat from the Sun 12 of those hours. Daytime does not stop heat loss to space.


The Parrot Killer
17-07-2018 12:51
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
muc82 wrote:
I doubt that we will ever be able to cut the emmisions. Our civilisation and mentality runs like that. For me cutting the emissions even for 50-60% (which globally will never happen) means nothing, we have still so much that it cause the warming. So here my thinking:
1.) Have more CO2 emmisions will mean warmer earth -> ice will melt, we will have less sun reflection, temperature will rise even faster
2.) We consume more and more energy, we have more buildings and more tarmac roads -> all this things cause more higher temperatures
3.) warmer temperature -> permafrost will melt, methane will strenghten the warming effect, temperature will rise faster
4.) ...
Basically I see here a lot of natural reactions which accelerate the global warming. Everything leads to more and more warm temperatures.
Does anybody know some cooling effect in the nature which starts when the temperature rise and rise? Does something like that exist? Or will we end like Venus in couple of centuries?


I think you have it pretty much right, muc82. Neither do I see the world reversing the warming trend, so I see the world getting hotter and hotter until something happens to stop the warming. Unfortunately, what I see stopping the warming also rearranges our continents a bit, kills most people, and even causes the axis of our planet to slip a little.

The dust from a major super volcano eruption would cool the planet for thousands of years, sending us into another Ice Age, or Glacial Period [Ignore those who say we are already in an Ice Age, because there is a lot of ice in the arctic regions].

I found descriptions of Global Warming in the Bible, like this one:

Isaiah 24:4-6 [NKJV]

4 The earth mourns and fades away,
The world languishes and fades away;
The haughty people of the earth languish.
5 The earth is also defiled under its inhabitants,
Because they have transgressed the laws,
Changed the ordinance,
Broken the everlasting covenant.
6 Therefore the curse has devoured the earth,
And those who dwell in it are desolate.
Therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned,
And few men are left.

That pretty much describes what we are heading into. It says people will burn, because of their pollution.

There is quite a lot of insight about our situation that can be found in the prophecies, for those who are interested. Included is what to do if you find yourself living in that period of time.

I have a discussion group in its starting phase, that examines the biblical prophecies of Global Warming.
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php

As you can tell, most of the people in here are deniers, and don't even know that it is getting hotter. One of them even thinks he can prove that CO2 can't warm the planet. He reminds me of the guy I used to work for that would not fly. He was a mechanical engineer, and he said that he could prove that an airplane could not fly, because it was too heavy, lol.

The solution to our problem is not that pleasant. You have it right, we aren't going to stop polluting our environment, just because a bunch of scientists think we are causing it to get hotter and that we're all going to die. So we will continue polluting, until we all start dying. Then it's too late to do anything about it. Well, actually, it already is. It will continue to grow warmer for hundreds of years after we reach zero emissions of CO2. So in our current situation, everything dies, unless something like a super volcano eruption occurs, to cool things off.

So, best thing to do is prepare for it to get warmer each year. That means move to a higher elevation as far north as possible [or south if you are in the southern hemisphere]. Dig in and build your fire proof, mostly underground dwelling. Stock up on a lot of food, because when the volcanic eruption occurs, we will go through a volcanic winter, for a few years.

And most importantly, do something on a personal level to reduce your CO2 footprint.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
17-07-2018 13:27
James___
★★★☆☆
(666)
muc82 wrote:
I doubt that we will ever be able to cut the emmisions. Our civilisation and mentality runs like that. For me cutting the emissions even for 50-60% (which globally will never happen) means nothing, we have still so much that it cause the warming. So here my thinking:
1.) Have more CO2 emmisions will mean warmer earth -> ice will melt, we will have less sun reflection, temperature will rise even faster
2.) We consume more and more energy, we have more buildings and more tarmac roads -> all this things cause more higher temperatures
3.) warmer temperature -> permafrost will melt, methane will strenghten the warming effect, temperature will rise faster
4.) ...
Basically I see here a lot of natural reactions which accelerate the global warming. Everything leads to more and more warm temperatures.
Does anybody know some cooling effect in the nature which starts when the temperature rise and rise? Does something like that exist? Or will we end like Venus in couple of centuries?



...Hi muc82,
.. It's best to ignore itn. He's not here to debate anything.
.I have my own pet theory. We don't know yet the actual effect that CO2 and H2O vapor have on storing / trapping heat. It might not be that much.
.I'll give you an example of why, okay ?

Average High - 663/8 = 82.875° F. = 301.4139K
Average Low - 529/ 8 = 66.125° F. = 292.1083K
= 9.3309K

This link shows that 1° C. = 1 Kelvin.
This link (http://mc-computing.com/Science_Facts/Temperature_Conversions.html)
shows that about 0.0067 w.m^2 = 9.3309K of °C.

You'll need to enter 0.01 so it will read Power 0.01 W/m2
.That's 24.12 w/hr during the HOTTEST part of the day.

..That is a very small change in the amount of energy needed to warm
.the atmosphere the next day. Needless to say I think our planet is well insulated from the space in the universe around us.

.The temperatures are for Lexington, Ky. from 07/16/2018 to 07/24/2018.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/Tx8xRqXBcTtLkoVZ8
Edited on 17-07-2018 13:40
17-07-2018 14:37
James___
★★★☆☆
(666)
p.s., when the tropopause altitude increases during the day this could draw heat through the tropopause into the troposphere (what we live in). This is where a lot of research is needed to document the flow of heat into and out of our atmosphere as well as moving from one region on our planet to another. And this is what would influence how the wind flows as well because of high and low pressure systems. This only shows that our atmosphere is complex. And I didn't even mention atmospheric forcing and mixing. There's just that much to consider.
Edited on 17-07-2018 14:37
17-07-2018 18:28
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5741)
GreenMan wrote:
muc82 wrote:
I doubt that we will ever be able to cut the emmisions. Our civilisation and mentality runs like that. For me cutting the emissions even for 50-60% (which globally will never happen) means nothing, we have still so much that it cause the warming. So here my thinking:
1.) Have more CO2 emmisions will mean warmer earth -> ice will melt, we will have less sun reflection, temperature will rise even faster
2.) We consume more and more energy, we have more buildings and more tarmac roads -> all this things cause more higher temperatures
3.) warmer temperature -> permafrost will melt, methane will strenghten the warming effect, temperature will rise faster
4.) ...
Basically I see here a lot of natural reactions which accelerate the global warming. Everything leads to more and more warm temperatures.
Does anybody know some cooling effect in the nature which starts when the temperature rise and rise? Does something like that exist? Or will we end like Venus in couple of centuries?


I think you have it pretty much right, muc82. Neither do I see the world reversing the warming trend, so I see the world getting hotter and hotter until something happens to stop the warming.

Here it comes...yet another Church of Global Warming prophecy of doom and gloom.
GreenMan wrote:
Unfortunately, what I see stopping the warming also rearranges our continents a bit, kills most people, and even causes the axis of our planet to slip a little.

Where is all this energy coming from? The Sun hasn't changed much.
GreenMan wrote:
The dust from a major super volcano eruption would cool the planet for thousands of years, sending us into another Ice Age, or Glacial Period [Ignore those who say we are already in an Ice Age, because there is a lot of ice in the arctic regions].

Ice ages occur on a fairly regular basis. They are caused by the normal variations in Earth's orbit. We are currently moving away from such conditions.
GreenMan wrote:
I found descriptions of Global Warming in the Bible, like this one:

Isaiah 24:4-6 [NKJV]

4 The earth mourns and fades away,
The world languishes and fades away;
The haughty people of the earth languish.
5 The earth is also defiled under its inhabitants,
Because they have transgressed the laws,
Changed the ordinance,
Broken the everlasting covenant.
6 Therefore the curse has devoured the earth,
And those who dwell in it are desolate.
Therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned,
And few men are left.

That pretty much describes what we are heading into. It says people will burn, because of their pollution.

This passage is not about global warming.
GreenMan wrote:
There is quite a lot of insight about our situation that can be found in the prophecies, for those who are interested. Included is what to do if you find yourself living in that period of time.
Especially when you decide to rewrite scripture.
GreenMan wrote:
I have a discussion group in its starting phase, that examines the biblical prophecies of Global Warming.
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php

Advertisement noted.
GreenMan wrote:
As you can tell, most of the people in here are deniers, and don't even know that it is getting hotter.
It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. The Sun hasn't changed much. There is no other source of significant energy.
GreenMan wrote:
One of them even thinks he can prove that CO2 can't warm the planet.

It can't. No gas or vapor can warm the Earth.
GreenMan wrote:
He reminds me of the guy I used to work for that would not fly.

I do fly. I build, maintain, and fly aircraft. Even something as ungainly looking as a helicopter can fly, and very well.
GreenMan wrote:
He was a mechanical engineer, and he said that he could prove that an airplane could not fly, because it was too heavy, lol.

He's a lousy mechanical engineer then.
GreenMan wrote:
The solution to our problem is not that pleasant. You have it right, we aren't going to stop polluting our environment,

Void argument. Please describe the pollution you are concerned about.
GreenMan wrote:
just because a bunch of scientists think we are causing it to get hotter and that we're all going to die. So we will continue polluting, until we all start dying.

No, people clean up their messes eventually.
GreenMan wrote:
Then it's too late to do anything about it. Well, actually, it already is.

Rather fatalistic, don't you think?
GreenMan wrote:
It will continue to grow warmer for hundreds of years after we reach zero emissions of CO2.

The Sun isn't changing much. Where is all this energy coming from?
GreenMan wrote:
So in our current situation, everything dies, unless something like a super volcano eruption occurs, to cool things off.

Bet you can hardly wait.
GreenMan wrote:
So, best thing to do is prepare for it to get warmer each year. That means move to a higher elevation as far north as possible [or south if you are in the southern hemisphere]. Dig in and build your fire proof, mostly underground dwelling. Stock up on a lot of food, because when the volcanic eruption occurs, we will go through a volcanic winter, for a few years.

Enjoy your bunker. The rest of us clean up pollutions and enjoy the beauty of the Earth for what it is.
GreenMan wrote:
And most importantly, do something on a personal level to reduce your CO2 footprint.

CO2 is not capable of warming the Earth. No gas or vapor is capable of warming the Earth.


The Parrot Killer
17-07-2018 18:34
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5741)
James___ wrote:
muc82 wrote:
I doubt that we will ever be able to cut the emmisions. Our civilisation and mentality runs like that. For me cutting the emissions even for 50-60% (which globally will never happen) means nothing, we have still so much that it cause the warming. So here my thinking:
1.) Have more CO2 emmisions will mean warmer earth -> ice will melt, we will have less sun reflection, temperature will rise even faster
2.) We consume more and more energy, we have more buildings and more tarmac roads -> all this things cause more higher temperatures
3.) warmer temperature -> permafrost will melt, methane will strenghten the warming effect, temperature will rise faster
4.) ...
Basically I see here a lot of natural reactions which accelerate the global warming. Everything leads to more and more warm temperatures.
Does anybody know some cooling effect in the nature which starts when the temperature rise and rise? Does something like that exist? Or will we end like Venus in couple of centuries?



...Hi muc82,
.. It's best to ignore itn. He's not here to debate anything.
.I have my own pet theory. We don't know yet the actual effect that CO2 and H2O vapor have on storing / trapping heat. It might not be that much.

It's none. Zero. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth.
James___ wrote:
.I'll give you an example of why, okay ?

Average High - 663/8 = 82.875° F. = 301.4139K
Average Low - 529/ 8 = 66.125° F. = 292.1083K
= 9.3309K

This link shows that 1° C. = 1 Kelvin.

Oooooo. You can convert Fahrenheit to Kelvin!
James___ wrote:
This link (http://mc-computing.com/Science_Facts/Temperature_Conversions.html)
shows that about 0.0067 w.m^2 = 9.3309K of °C.

Oh...sorry...you cheated and used a website to do it.
James___ wrote:
You'll need to enter 0.01 so it will read Power 0.01 W/m2
.That's 24.12 w/hr during the HOTTEST part of the day.

You don't know the emissivity of Earth. Argument from randU fallacy.
James___ wrote:
..That is a very small change in the amount of energy needed to warm
.the atmosphere the next day.

The atmosphere does not have that much ballast. That's why it cools off so quickly when the Sun goes down at night.
James___ wrote:
Needless to say I think our planet is well insulated from the space in the universe around us.

Think so? Gee...I guess the Earth isn't in space then! LOL
James___ wrote:
.The temperatures are for Lexington, Ky. from 07/16/2018 to 07/24/2018.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/Tx8xRqXBcTtLkoVZ8

I think you're drinking more than whiskey.


The Parrot Killer
17-07-2018 20:14
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5741)
James___ wrote:
p.s., when the tropopause altitude increases during the day this could draw heat through the tropopause into the troposphere (what we live in).

You can't make heat flow backwards.
James___ wrote:
This is where a lot of research is needed to document the flow of heat into and out of our atmosphere as well as moving from one region on our planet to another.

Planes routinely fly in the tropopause and troposphere. We know what happens there.
James___ wrote:
And this is what would influence how the wind flows as well because of high and low pressure systems.

Buzzword extension.
James___ wrote:
This only shows that our atmosphere is complex.

Not particularly.
James___ wrote:
And I didn't even mention atmospheric forcing and mixing.

There is no such thing as atmosphere 'forcing'.
James___ wrote:
There's just that much to consider.

Try reading a book on physics.


The Parrot Killer
18-07-2018 00:22
James___
★★★☆☆
(666)
I keep flushing the d@mned toilet but it seems that itn has found a log to hold on to. Might be why it smells in here.

.itn, you do make it a waste of time to post in here.
Edited on 18-07-2018 00:23
18-07-2018 15:52
James___
★★★☆☆
(666)
James___ wrote:
I keep flushing the d@mned toilet but it seems that itn has found a log to hold on to. Might be why it smells in here.

.itn, you do make it a waste of time to post in here.


...I thought I'd let you know that I did some math on how many watts/meter^2 it takes to warm our atmosphere.
I'll give you an example of Conserved Energy. If it's 86° F./ 30 ° C. during the day then cools to 68° F./ 20° C. at night then to warm the atmosphere back to 86° F. / 30° C., it will take only 86 watts per square meter (w/m^2). The Solar Constant is the rate at which energy reaches the earth's surface from the sun, usually taken to be 1,388 watts per square meter.
This calculator shows it is about 86 w/m^2; http://mc-computing.com/Science_Facts/Temperature_Conversions.html

The energy generated on our planet; https://yearbook.enerdata.net/total-energy/world-consumption-statistics.html
It's about 14,000 mtoe.


MTOE is the acronym for Million tonnes of Oil Equivalent. It is a unit to quantify the amount of energy which is released by the burning of a million tonnes of crude oil. Different fuels have different MTOE values. The OECDdefines one tonne of energy equivalent for crude oil to be 11,630 kWh.


This equals about 14,000 x 1 million x 31.86 a day = 14 billion tonnes of crude oil x 31.86 kWh.
Surface Area of Earth: 510,072,000 square kilometres and 1 million square meters in a square kilometer is 510,072,000,000,000.
If you have some check these numbers and divide 14 x 10^9 kWh / 51 x 10^13 m^2 = ?
then you'll have a starting point for how much energy (heat) that we are putting in our atmosphere.

The end result is in kWh. divide that by 3,600 and it become kWseconds which would show if the 86 w/m^2 is achieved or not. As I mentioned, this would only be a starting point to see how the heat that we're generating might influence climate change. And the projections for future energy usage; https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=26212

..@All,
.I'll do the math later to see if 86 w/m^2 is reached. This would only be a starting point to understand how the energy we're using might influence climate change. And this is why I think a much improved solar panel is important.
18-07-2018 16:14
James___
★★★☆☆
(666)
..@All,
..The math so far;

14 x 10^9/ 51 x 10^13 m^2 =
14 x 10 / 51 x 10^4 m^2 =
140 / 51 x 100,000 = w/m^2
7,140 / 5,100,000 = 0.0014 tonnes /m^2

..The 0.0014 tonnes of oil will give us kWh which when divided by 3,600
will give us w/m^2. I need to take a break before finishing the math problem. A lot of work does go into it.
Edited on 18-07-2018 16:15
18-07-2018 16:22
James___
★★★☆☆
(666)
1 metric ton is 1000 kilograms:

139.908821536 / 1000 = 7.1475121
You are currently converting energy units from barrel of oil equivalent to kilowatt hour
1 boe = 1628.2 kWh

7.1475121 * 1628.2 kWh = 11,637
11.637 * 0.0014 = 16.2925 w/m^2 is what we're contributing to warming our atmosphere.

edited to add; a lot of big numbers but do feel good about the results because I went 1 step at a time. Still, I'll go over the math a few more times to ensure I got it right.
Edited on 18-07-2018 16:44
18-07-2018 17:12
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5741)
James___ wrote:
James___ wrote:
I keep flushing the d@mned toilet but it seems that itn has found a log to hold on to. Might be why it smells in here.

.itn, you do make it a waste of time to post in here.


...I thought I'd let you know that I did some math on how many watts/meter^2 it takes to warm our atmosphere.
I'll give you an example of Conserved Energy. If it's 86° F./ 30 ° C. during the day then cools to 68° F./ 20° C. at night then to warm the atmosphere back to 86° F. / 30° C., it will take only 86 watts per square meter (w/m^2). The Solar Constant is the rate at which energy reaches the earth's surface from the sun, usually taken to be 1,388 watts per square meter.
This calculator shows it is about 86 w/m^2; http://mc-computing.com/Science_Facts/Temperature_Conversions.html

You don't know the emissivity of Earth.

The atmosphere does not 'conserve' energy. You can't trap heat. You can't trap thermal energy. See the 1st law of thermodynamics.

Argument from randU fallacy. Argument of the stone fallacy.
James___ wrote:
The energy generated on our planet; https://yearbook.enerdata.net/total-energy/world-consumption-statistics.html
It's about 14,000 mtoe.


MTOE is the acronym for Million tonnes of Oil Equivalent. It is a unit to quantify the amount of energy which is released by the burning of a million tonnes of crude oil. Different fuels have different MTOE values. The OECDdefines one tonne of energy equivalent for crude oil to be 11,630 kWh.


This equals about 14,000 x 1 million x 31.86 a day = 14 billion tonnes of crude oil x 31.86 kWh.
Surface Area of Earth: 510,072,000 square kilometres and 1 million square meters in a square kilometer is 510,072,000,000,000.
If you have some check these numbers and divide 14 x 10^9 kWh / 51 x 10^13 m^2 = ?
then you'll have a starting point for how much energy (heat) that we are putting in our atmosphere.

Any oil we burn to produce heat is dissipated into space just like everything else...or perhaps you think lighting a campfire is going to destroy the world.
James___ wrote:
The end result is in kWh. divide that by 3,600 and it become kWseconds which would show if the 86 w/m^2 is achieved or not. As I mentioned, this would only be a starting point to see how the heat that we're generating might influence climate change. And the projections for future energy usage; https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=26212

Define 'climate change' without using circular definitions. Meaningless buzzwords render your conclusion pointless. You are still ignoring the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

You can't trap heat.

You can't trap thermal energy. There is always heat.

James___ wrote:
..@All,
.I'll do the math later to see if 86 w/m^2 is reached. This would only be a starting point to understand how the energy we're using might influence climate change. And this is why I think a much improved solar panel is important.

Go build one, if you think it's so important.

Let's see if you can outdo nature's little solar panels, a plant.


The Parrot Killer
18-07-2018 17:13
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5741)
James___ wrote:
..@All,
..The math so far;

14 x 10^9/ 51 x 10^13 m^2 =
14 x 10 / 51 x 10^4 m^2 =
140 / 51 x 100,000 = w/m^2
7,140 / 5,100,000 = 0.0014 tonnes /m^2

..The 0.0014 tonnes of oil will give us kWh which when divided by 3,600
will give us w/m^2. I need to take a break before finishing the math problem. A lot of work does go into it.


You haven't even started. You have a math error. You are starting with random numbers.


The Parrot Killer
18-07-2018 20:55
James___
★★★☆☆
(666)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
..@All,
..The math so far;

14 x 10^9/ 51 x 10^13 m^2 =
14 x 10 / 51 x 10^4 m^2 =
140 / 51 x 100,000 = w/m^2
7,140 / 5,100,000 = 0.0014 tonnes /m^2

..The 0.0014 tonnes of oil will give us kWh which when divided by 3,600
will give us w/m^2. I need to take a break before finishing the math problem. A lot of work does go into it.


You haven't even started. You have a math error. You are starting with random numbers.



...And all you are showing people IMO is that you're nothing more than an idiot.

.@All, that seems to be the purpose of this forum, for itn to make an ass out of himself. Just shows what a sad, pathetic individual he. He's in a science type forum to promote his philosophy of NOTHINGNESS. It's all he has.
.And itn, I've got other things I can be doing. You obviously like no one including yourself.
Edited on 18-07-2018 21:26
18-07-2018 22:05
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5741)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
..@All,
..The math so far;

14 x 10^9/ 51 x 10^13 m^2 =
14 x 10 / 51 x 10^4 m^2 =
140 / 51 x 100,000 = w/m^2
7,140 / 5,100,000 = 0.0014 tonnes /m^2

..The 0.0014 tonnes of oil will give us kWh which when divided by 3,600
will give us w/m^2. I need to take a break before finishing the math problem. A lot of work does go into it.


You haven't even started. You have a math error. You are starting with random numbers.



...And all you are showing people IMO is that you're nothing more than an idiot.

.@All, that seems to be the purpose of this forum, for itn to make an ass out of himself. Just shows what a sad, pathetic individual he. He's in a science type forum to promote his philosophy of NOTHINGNESS. It's all he has.
.And itn, I've got other things I can be doing. You obviously like no one including yourself.


Hey...I'm not the one that made the math error.

Your paradox is noted.


The Parrot Killer
19-07-2018 01:38
James___
★★★☆☆
(666)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
..@All,
..The math so far;

14 x 10^9/ 51 x 10^13 m^2 =
14 x 10 / 51 x 10^4 m^2 =
140 / 51 x 100,000 = w/m^2
7,140 / 5,100,000 = 0.0014 tonnes /m^2

..The 0.0014 tonnes of oil will give us kWh which when divided by 3,600
will give us w/m^2. I need to take a break before finishing the math problem. A lot of work does go into it.


You haven't even started. You have a math error. You are starting with random numbers.



...And all you are showing people IMO is that you're nothing more than an idiot.

.@All, that seems to be the purpose of this forum, for itn to make an ass out of himself. Just shows what a sad, pathetic individual he. He's in a science type forum to promote his philosophy of NOTHINGNESS. It's all he has.
.And itn, I've got other things I can be doing. You obviously like no one including yourself.


Hey...I'm not the one that made the math error.

Your paradox is noted.


...ITN,
..Now you're sounding like a 14 year old who's been in his daddies liquor cabinet more than you should be. Since you consider math to be random numbers how could you tell the difference ? Your ignorance precedes you.
19-07-2018 06:09
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5741)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
..@All,
..The math so far;

14 x 10^9/ 51 x 10^13 m^2 =
14 x 10 / 51 x 10^4 m^2 =
140 / 51 x 100,000 = w/m^2
7,140 / 5,100,000 = 0.0014 tonnes /m^2

..The 0.0014 tonnes of oil will give us kWh which when divided by 3,600
will give us w/m^2. I need to take a break before finishing the math problem. A lot of work does go into it.


You haven't even started. You have a math error. You are starting with random numbers.



...And all you are showing people IMO is that you're nothing more than an idiot.

.@All, that seems to be the purpose of this forum, for itn to make an ass out of himself. Just shows what a sad, pathetic individual he. He's in a science type forum to promote his philosophy of NOTHINGNESS. It's all he has.
.And itn, I've got other things I can be doing. You obviously like no one including yourself.


Hey...I'm not the one that made the math error.

Your paradox is noted.


...ITN,
..Now you're sounding like a 14 year old who's been in his daddies liquor cabinet more than you should be. Since you consider math to be random numbers how could you tell the difference ? Your ignorance precedes you.

Actually, there is a branch of mathematics about random numbers themselves. Most people don't need it. Probability math or statistical math (both of which just use random numbers) is fine for most.

But you can't just take random numbers out of the air and do a power calculation with it.


The Parrot Killer
19-07-2018 18:16
James___
★★★☆☆
(666)
Into the Night wrote:

Actually, there is a branch of mathematics about random numbers themselves. Most people don't need it. Probability math or statistical math (both of which just use random numbers) is fine for most.

But you can't just take random numbers out of the air and do a power calculation with it.



..Why don't you enlighten us by giving us an example ? I think that'd really help us to understand when numbers aren't random but do have a specific meaning.
20-07-2018 05:51
muc82
☆☆☆☆☆
(2)
It is nice to see so much data in the post.

@James
I also think that the energy that we produce (producing more and more with the years) is making an significant factor to heat up the earth. With all the actions we do in our civilisation we are only warming the environment - also with air condition you produce more heat as you are able to cool the air.
I also think that the population number is an factor. If you place 10 people in a single room you don't need heating in winter for that room. I think the same is on the earth. Yes, it is not an significant factor, but...

@Into the night
I am interrested in your opinion. What are the reasons for rise of the temperatures in last decades according your point of view?
20-07-2018 06:54
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5741)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

Actually, there is a branch of mathematics about random numbers themselves. Most people don't need it. Probability math or statistical math (both of which just use random numbers) is fine for most.

But you can't just take random numbers out of the air and do a power calculation with it.



..Why don't you enlighten us by giving us an example ? I think that'd really help us to understand when numbers aren't random but do have a specific meaning.


Making up numbers out of the air has no meaning.


The Parrot Killer
20-07-2018 06:56
Into the Night
★★★★★
(5741)
muc82 wrote:
It is nice to see so much data in the post.

@James
I also think that the energy that we produce (producing more and more with the years) is making an significant factor to heat up the earth. With all the actions we do in our civilisation we are only warming the environment - also with air condition you produce more heat as you are able to cool the air.
I also think that the population number is an factor. If you place 10 people in a single room you don't need heating in winter for that room. I think the same is on the earth. Yes, it is not an significant factor, but...

@Into the night
I am interrested in your opinion. What are the reasons for rise of the temperatures in last decades according your point of view?


We don't know if the global temperature is rising, falling, or just staying the same. It is likely just generally staying the same, since the output of the Sun hasn't changed significantly.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. We don't have enough instruments to do it.


The Parrot Killer
25-07-2018 23:15
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Into the Night wrote:
muc82 wrote:
It is nice to see so much data in the post.

@James
I also think that the energy that we produce (producing more and more with the years) is making an significant factor to heat up the earth. With all the actions we do in our civilisation we are only warming the environment - also with air condition you produce more heat as you are able to cool the air.
I also think that the population number is an factor. If you place 10 people in a single room you don't need heating in winter for that room. I think the same is on the earth. Yes, it is not an significant factor, but...

@Into the night
I am interrested in your opinion. What are the reasons for rise of the temperatures in last decades according your point of view?


We don't know if the global temperature is rising, falling, or just staying the same. It is likely just generally staying the same, since the output of the Sun hasn't changed significantly.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. We don't have enough instruments to do it.


The only way you will ever relinquish that strategy would be if they put a thermometer on every square inch of the planet. And then you would still squabble about the accuracy of so many thermometers, lol.

You are a joke, Parrot.

Families just died in Greece. Parents covering their children, as the fire roared through them. They burned, just like the prophecy I quoted earlier.

We have record temperatures on the west coast, and major flooding from the downpours on the east [which I'm sitting in].

Are you really going to continue making a fool of yourself?


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
26-07-2018 02:07
James___
★★★☆☆
(666)
muc82 wrote:
It is nice to see so much data in the post.

@James
I also think that the energy that we produce (producing more and more with the years) is making an significant factor to heat up the earth. With all the actions we do in our civilisation we are only warming the environment - also with air condition you produce more heat as you are able to cool the air.
I also think that the population number is an factor. If you place 10 people in a single room you don't need heating in winter for that room. I think the same is on the earth. Yes, it is not an significant factor, but...

@Into the night
I am interrested in your opinion. What are the reasons for rise of the temperatures in last decades according your point of view?



...Thanks muc82. The 2 graphs shows that world population mimics Global Warming. Basically it could be said to suggest that population growth + urbanization + industrialization = https://photos.app.goo.gl/cmnPMsBfxbtqcwsb6

..I did let a reporter where I live know that if my experiment works then we might be able to cool the eastern seaboard. I think it's funny in a way because I'd be talking about creating jobs, improving the economy and the environment.
..I think people prefer a Fire Sale. With the flooding on the east coast he might take some interest in what I've been on about.

p.s., just look at 1900 on.
Attached image:


Edited on 26-07-2018 02:08
26-07-2018 05:34
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1046)
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
muc82 wrote:
It is nice to see so much data in the post.

@James
I also think that the energy that we produce (producing more and more with the years) is making an significant factor to heat up the earth. With all the actions we do in our civilisation we are only warming the environment - also with air condition you produce more heat as you are able to cool the air.
I also think that the population number is an factor. If you place 10 people in a single room you don't need heating in winter for that room. I think the same is on the earth. Yes, it is not an significant factor, but...

@Into the night
I am interrested in your opinion. What are the reasons for rise of the temperatures in last decades according your point of view?


We don't know if the global temperature is rising, falling, or just staying the same. It is likely just generally staying the same, since the output of the Sun hasn't changed significantly.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. We don't have enough instruments to do it.


The only way you will ever relinquish that strategy would be if they put a thermometer on every square inch of the planet. And then you would still squabble about the accuracy of so many thermometers, lol.

You are a joke, Parrot.

Families just died in Greece. Parents covering their children, as the fire roared through them. They burned, just like the prophecy I quoted earlier.

We have record temperatures on the west coast, and major flooding from the downpours on the east [which I'm sitting in].

Are you really going to continue making a fool of yourself?


Well if it isn't Greenthing resurfacing! Must be all that record rain....

I haven't posted in a couple months, but just can't resist congratulating you on your typical left wing looney liberal response...you know, politicizing a tragedy. Although you may actually have a point. After all fire was not invented until just a few decades ago.

Hey, can you clarify record temps for me please? Is it highest temps ever? or is it highest ever recorded temps? There's is a BIG difference but I keep hearing these climate change nutjobs saying it's the hottest ever. How do they know that?

One other thing there Redman, I've put up the current surface analysis. I see a Pacific ridge and a Midwest trough, a fairly strong high out west and a bit of low pressure in the eastern Midwest, but nothing too strong or out of the ordinary. Can you show me which feature on this map is due to global warming?
Thanks bro, and good to hear from you again! Stick around for a while, we'll have some fun

Attached image:

26-07-2018 13:35
James___
★★★☆☆
(666)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Can you show me which feature on this map is due to global warming?



...You may or not may find this interesting. The jet stream is basically staying north of the North American continent. I don't know if this is unusual but always thought the jest stream went across B.C., Canada by places like Banff and Calgary. Most of the U.S. is affected by a high pressure system and there really doesn't seem to be much of a low or high pressure front anywhere. I think that's usually what a normally located jet stream allows for.
..The jet stream map is interactive, you can rotate and reposition the globe.

https://www.netweather.tv/charts-and-data/global-jetstream#2018/07/26/0600Z/jetstream/surface/level/overlay=jetstream/orthographic=-101.49,17.69,409

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/01/12/577688119/scientists-say-a-fluctuating-jet-stream-may-be-causing-extreme-weather-events

..GasGuzzler,
.This might've been over looked if not for your posting weather systems, Thanks !

Edited on 26-07-2018 13:38
26-07-2018 15:48
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
GasGuzzler wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
muc82 wrote:
It is nice to see so much data in the post.

@James
I also think that the energy that we produce (producing more and more with the years) is making an significant factor to heat up the earth. With all the actions we do in our civilisation we are only warming the environment - also with air condition you produce more heat as you are able to cool the air.
I also think that the population number is an factor. If you place 10 people in a single room you don't need heating in winter for that room. I think the same is on the earth. Yes, it is not an significant factor, but...

@Into the night
I am interrested in your opinion. What are the reasons for rise of the temperatures in last decades according your point of view?


We don't know if the global temperature is rising, falling, or just staying the same. It is likely just generally staying the same, since the output of the Sun hasn't changed significantly.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. We don't have enough instruments to do it.


The only way you will ever relinquish that strategy would be if they put a thermometer on every square inch of the planet. And then you would still squabble about the accuracy of so many thermometers, lol.

You are a joke, Parrot.

Families just died in Greece. Parents covering their children, as the fire roared through them. They burned, just like the prophecy I quoted earlier.

We have record temperatures on the west coast, and major flooding from the downpours on the east [which I'm sitting in].

Are you really going to continue making a fool of yourself?


Well if it isn't Greenthing resurfacing! Must be all that record rain....

I haven't posted in a couple months, but just can't resist congratulating you on your typical left wing looney liberal response...you know, politicizing a tragedy. Although you may actually have a point. After all fire was not invented until just a few decades ago.

Hey, can you clarify record temps for me please? Is it highest temps ever? or is it highest ever recorded temps? There's is a BIG difference but I keep hearing these climate change nutjobs saying it's the hottest ever. How do they know that?

One other thing there Redman, I've put up the current surface analysis. I see a Pacific ridge and a Midwest trough, a fairly strong high out west and a bit of low pressure in the eastern Midwest, but nothing too strong or out of the ordinary. Can you show me which feature on this map is due to global warming?
Thanks bro, and good to hear from you again! Stick around for a while, we'll have some fun


Hey Gassy, nice to see you up and around. Not really. I looked at your color weather radar map, and didn't see anything recognizable. Looked like a map of the US with a bunch of numbers and squiggles all over it. But there wasn't a legend to tell me what the numbers and squiggles represented. Sorry, trying to say squigglies, but the spell checker keeps fixing it.

I think when they say record temperature, they mean since temperature was recorded. The previous Interglacial Period exceeded the current average temperature by about 5C. So it's not the hottest ever.

The reason for pointing out that people are starting to burn up is because it's something we need to be aware of. Fire is a natural thing, that we didn't invent. It happens when a combustible material reaches its ignition temperature. Sometimes things, including people, just spontaneously combust, without any source of heat. But that fire that killed all those people in Greece was started by some nut job, apparently.

Nice of you to point out that I am politicizing the fire in Greece. Global Warming shouldn't be a political issue at all, because politicians are really smart enough to understand it. They should just react to what the smart scientists are telling them. But instead, the majority of them appear to have their fingers crammed in their ears.

The events we are seeing now are because of Climate Change. It's getting hotter, so we have more frequent fires, droughts, and floods. It would be easier if we didn't have to figure out why there's a drought in the west, and a monsoon in the east, but that's the way it is. I think the droughts are caused by lack of water, and the monsoons are caused by too much water. Both are caused by more heat than what is normal.

But of course, you don't care, because the fire didn't come roaring down on you. Maybe next time?


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
26-07-2018 17:36
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1198)
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
muc82 wrote:
It is nice to see so much data in the post.

@James
I also think that the energy that we produce (producing more and more with the years) is making an significant factor to heat up the earth. With all the actions we do in our civilisation we are only warming the environment - also with air condition you produce more heat as you are able to cool the air.
I also think that the population number is an factor. If you place 10 people in a single room you don't need heating in winter for that room. I think the same is on the earth. Yes, it is not an significant factor, but...

@Into the night
I am interrested in your opinion. What are the reasons for rise of the temperatures in last decades according your point of view?


We don't know if the global temperature is rising, falling, or just staying the same. It is likely just generally staying the same, since the output of the Sun hasn't changed significantly.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. We don't have enough instruments to do it.


The only way you will ever relinquish that strategy would be if they put a thermometer on every square inch of the planet. And then you would still squabble about the accuracy of so many thermometers, lol.

You are a joke, Parrot.

Families just died in Greece. Parents covering their children, as the fire roared through them. They burned, just like the prophecy I quoted earlier.

We have record temperatures on the west coast, and major flooding from the downpours on the east [which I'm sitting in].

Are you really going to continue making a fool of yourself?


Well if it isn't Greenthing resurfacing! Must be all that record rain....

I haven't posted in a couple months, but just can't resist congratulating you on your typical left wing looney liberal response...you know, politicizing a tragedy. Although you may actually have a point. After all fire was not invented until just a few decades ago.

Hey, can you clarify record temps for me please? Is it highest temps ever? or is it highest ever recorded temps? There's is a BIG difference but I keep hearing these climate change nutjobs saying it's the hottest ever. How do they know that?

One other thing there Redman, I've put up the current surface analysis. I see a Pacific ridge and a Midwest trough, a fairly strong high out west and a bit of low pressure in the eastern Midwest, but nothing too strong or out of the ordinary. Can you show me which feature on this map is due to global warming?
Thanks bro, and good to hear from you again! Stick around for a while, we'll have some fun


Hey Gassy, nice to see you up and around. Not really. I looked at your color weather radar map, and didn't see anything recognizable. Looked like a map of the US with a bunch of numbers and squiggles all over it. But there wasn't a legend to tell me what the numbers and squiggles represented. Sorry, trying to say squigglies, but the spell checker keeps fixing it.

I think when they say record temperature, they mean since temperature was recorded. The previous Interglacial Period exceeded the current average temperature by about 5C. So it's not the hottest ever.

The reason for pointing out that people are starting to burn up is because it's something we need to be aware of. Fire is a natural thing, that we didn't invent. It happens when a combustible material reaches its ignition temperature. Sometimes things, including people, just spontaneously combust, without any source of heat. But that fire that killed all those people in Greece was started by some nut job, apparently.

Nice of you to point out that I am politicizing the fire in Greece. Global Warming shouldn't be a political issue at all, because politicians are really smart enough to understand it. They should just react to what the smart scientists are telling them. But instead, the majority of them appear to have their fingers crammed in their ears.

The events we are seeing now are because of Climate Change. It's getting hotter, so we have more frequent fires, droughts, and floods. It would be easier if we didn't have to figure out why there's a drought in the west, and a monsoon in the east, but that's the way it is. I think the droughts are caused by lack of water, and the monsoons are caused by too much water. Both are caused by more heat than what is normal.

But of course, you don't care, because the fire didn't come roaring down on you. Maybe next time?


Just thought I would point out that the weather map is very easy to understand if you wentto school and did geography.

The ines are isobars. They link places with equal atmospheric pressure at nominal sea level.

The squiggles are various fronts. This is where the is a vertical movenet of air causing a vortex to happen. The front bit is where the hotter air is rising over cooler air. Generally this means rain.
26-07-2018 18:39
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Tim the plumber wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
muc82 wrote:
It is nice to see so much data in the post.

@James
I also think that the energy that we produce (producing more and more with the years) is making an significant factor to heat up the earth. With all the actions we do in our civilisation we are only warming the environment - also with air condition you produce more heat as you are able to cool the air.
I also think that the population number is an factor. If you place 10 people in a single room you don't need heating in winter for that room. I think the same is on the earth. Yes, it is not an significant factor, but...

@Into the night
I am interrested in your opinion. What are the reasons for rise of the temperatures in last decades according your point of view?


We don't know if the global temperature is rising, falling, or just staying the same. It is likely just generally staying the same, since the output of the Sun hasn't changed significantly.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. We don't have enough instruments to do it.


The only way you will ever relinquish that strategy would be if they put a thermometer on every square inch of the planet. And then you would still squabble about the accuracy of so many thermometers, lol.

You are a joke, Parrot.

Families just died in Greece. Parents covering their children, as the fire roared through them. They burned, just like the prophecy I quoted earlier.

We have record temperatures on the west coast, and major flooding from the downpours on the east [which I'm sitting in].

Are you really going to continue making a fool of yourself?


Well if it isn't Greenthing resurfacing! Must be all that record rain....

I haven't posted in a couple months, but just can't resist congratulating you on your typical left wing looney liberal response...you know, politicizing a tragedy. Although you may actually have a point. After all fire was not invented until just a few decades ago.

Hey, can you clarify record temps for me please? Is it highest temps ever? or is it highest ever recorded temps? There's is a BIG difference but I keep hearing these climate change nutjobs saying it's the hottest ever. How do they know that?

One other thing there Redman, I've put up the current surface analysis. I see a Pacific ridge and a Midwest trough, a fairly strong high out west and a bit of low pressure in the eastern Midwest, but nothing too strong or out of the ordinary. Can you show me which feature on this map is due to global warming?
Thanks bro, and good to hear from you again! Stick around for a while, we'll have some fun


Hey Gassy, nice to see you up and around. Not really. I looked at your color weather radar map, and didn't see anything recognizable. Looked like a map of the US with a bunch of numbers and squiggles all over it. But there wasn't a legend to tell me what the numbers and squiggles represented. Sorry, trying to say squigglies, but the spell checker keeps fixing it.

I think when they say record temperature, they mean since temperature was recorded. The previous Interglacial Period exceeded the current average temperature by about 5C. So it's not the hottest ever.

The reason for pointing out that people are starting to burn up is because it's something we need to be aware of. Fire is a natural thing, that we didn't invent. It happens when a combustible material reaches its ignition temperature. Sometimes things, including people, just spontaneously combust, without any source of heat. But that fire that killed all those people in Greece was started by some nut job, apparently.

Nice of you to point out that I am politicizing the fire in Greece. Global Warming shouldn't be a political issue at all, because politicians are really smart enough to understand it. They should just react to what the smart scientists are telling them. But instead, the majority of them appear to have their fingers crammed in their ears.

The events we are seeing now are because of Climate Change. It's getting hotter, so we have more frequent fires, droughts, and floods. It would be easier if we didn't have to figure out why there's a drought in the west, and a monsoon in the east, but that's the way it is. I think the droughts are caused by lack of water, and the monsoons are caused by too much water. Both are caused by more heat than what is normal.

But of course, you don't care, because the fire didn't come roaring down on you. Maybe next time?


Just thought I would point out that the weather map is very easy to understand if you wentto school and did geography.

The ines are isobars. They link places with equal atmospheric pressure at nominal sea level.

The squiggles are various fronts. This is where the is a vertical movenet of air causing a vortex to happen. The front bit is where the hotter air is rising over cooler air. Generally this means rain.


Oh, that's the problem then. I didn't went to school or did geography. No wonder everything seems so challenging for me. Do you think that if I went to school and did geometry that I could act as dumb as some of the Deniers in here?

By the way. What does a color weather radar map have to do with Earth's Climate?

Oh yeah, that's right. It has nothing to do with Earth's Climate. There's a BIG difference between weather and climate.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
26-07-2018 21:26
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1046)
GreenMan wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
muc82 wrote:
It is nice to see so much data in the post.

@James
I also think that the energy that we produce (producing more and more with the years) is making an significant factor to heat up the earth. With all the actions we do in our civilisation we are only warming the environment - also with air condition you produce more heat as you are able to cool the air.
I also think that the population number is an factor. If you place 10 people in a single room you don't need heating in winter for that room. I think the same is on the earth. Yes, it is not an significant factor, but...

@Into the night
I am interrested in your opinion. What are the reasons for rise of the temperatures in last decades according your point of view?


We don't know if the global temperature is rising, falling, or just staying the same. It is likely just generally staying the same, since the output of the Sun hasn't changed significantly.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. We don't have enough instruments to do it.


The only way you will ever relinquish that strategy would be if they put a thermometer on every square inch of the planet. And then you would still squabble about the accuracy of so many thermometers, lol.

You are a joke, Parrot.

Families just died in Greece. Parents covering their children, as the fire roared through them. They burned, just like the prophecy I quoted earlier.

We have record temperatures on the west coast, and major flooding from the downpours on the east [which I'm sitting in].

Are you really going to continue making a fool of yourself?


Well if it isn't Greenthing resurfacing! Must be all that record rain....

I haven't posted in a couple months, but just can't resist congratulating you on your typical left wing looney liberal response...you know, politicizing a tragedy. Although you may actually have a point. After all fire was not invented until just a few decades ago.

Hey, can you clarify record temps for me please? Is it highest temps ever? or is it highest ever recorded temps? There's is a BIG difference but I keep hearing these climate change nutjobs saying it's the hottest ever. How do they know that?

One other thing there Redman, I've put up the current surface analysis. I see a Pacific ridge and a Midwest trough, a fairly strong high out west and a bit of low pressure in the eastern Midwest, but nothing too strong or out of the ordinary. Can you show me which feature on this map is due to global warming?
Thanks bro, and good to hear from you again! Stick around for a while, we'll have some fun


Hey Gassy, nice to see you up and around. Not really. I looked at your color weather radar map, and didn't see anything recognizable. Looked like a map of the US with a bunch of numbers and squiggles all over it. But there wasn't a legend to tell me what the numbers and squiggles represented. Sorry, trying to say squigglies, but the spell checker keeps fixing it.

I think when they say record temperature, they mean since temperature was recorded. The previous Interglacial Period exceeded the current average temperature by about 5C. So it's not the hottest ever.

The reason for pointing out that people are starting to burn up is because it's something we need to be aware of. Fire is a natural thing, that we didn't invent. It happens when a combustible material reaches its ignition temperature. Sometimes things, including people, just spontaneously combust, without any source of heat. But that fire that killed all those people in Greece was started by some nut job, apparently.

Nice of you to point out that I am politicizing the fire in Greece. Global Warming shouldn't be a political issue at all, because politicians are really smart enough to understand it. They should just react to what the smart scientists are telling them. But instead, the majority of them appear to have their fingers crammed in their ears.

The events we are seeing now are because of Climate Change. It's getting hotter, so we have more frequent fires, droughts, and floods. It would be easier if we didn't have to figure out why there's a drought in the west, and a monsoon in the east, but that's the way it is. I think the droughts are caused by lack of water, and the monsoons are caused by too much water. Both are caused by more heat than what is normal.

But of course, you don't care, because the fire didn't come roaring down on you. Maybe next time?


Just thought I would point out that the weather map is very easy to understand if you wentto school and did geography.

The ines are isobars. They link places with equal atmospheric pressure at nominal sea level.

The squiggles are various fronts. This is where the is a vertical movenet of air causing a vortex to happen. The front bit is where the hotter air is rising over cooler air. Generally this means rain.


Oh, that's the problem then. I didn't went to school or did geography. No wonder everything seems so challenging for me. Do you think that if I went to school and did geometry that I could act as dumb as some of the Deniers in here?

By the way. What does a color weather radar map have to do with Earth's Climate?

Oh yeah, that's right. It has nothing to do with Earth's Climate. There's a BIG difference between weather and climate.


Well Redman, you've proven my point yet again. People who can't tell the difference between a surface analysis map and a color radar should probably not be regurgitating the lies of "climate scientists" who are pretending to be meteorologists.

The surface analysis is a exactly as Tim said it is. Is is also very basic and does not include any of the more specific details that go into making weather exactly what it is. A radar, on the other hand, shows where rain and flooding are occurring and COOLING that region for long periods of time. Yep, rain actually cools the air!! So more floods should mean a cooling "climate", RIGHT?


By the way, climate is the average of all weather over a period of time. Therefore climate has EVERYTHING to do with weather.
26-07-2018 22:06
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
GasGuzzler wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
muc82 wrote:
It is nice to see so much data in the post.

@James
I also think that the energy that we produce (producing more and more with the years) is making an significant factor to heat up the earth. With all the actions we do in our civilisation we are only warming the environment - also with air condition you produce more heat as you are able to cool the air.
I also think that the population number is an factor. If you place 10 people in a single room you don't need heating in winter for that room. I think the same is on the earth. Yes, it is not an significant factor, but...

@Into the night
I am interrested in your opinion. What are the reasons for rise of the temperatures in last decades according your point of view?


We don't know if the global temperature is rising, falling, or just staying the same. It is likely just generally staying the same, since the output of the Sun hasn't changed significantly.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. We don't have enough instruments to do it.


The only way you will ever relinquish that strategy would be if they put a thermometer on every square inch of the planet. And then you would still squabble about the accuracy of so many thermometers, lol.

You are a joke, Parrot.

Families just died in Greece. Parents covering their children, as the fire roared through them. They burned, just like the prophecy I quoted earlier.

We have record temperatures on the west coast, and major flooding from the downpours on the east [which I'm sitting in].

Are you really going to continue making a fool of yourself?


Well if it isn't Greenthing resurfacing! Must be all that record rain....

I haven't posted in a couple months, but just can't resist congratulating you on your typical left wing looney liberal response...you know, politicizing a tragedy. Although you may actually have a point. After all fire was not invented until just a few decades ago.

Hey, can you clarify record temps for me please? Is it highest temps ever? or is it highest ever recorded temps? There's is a BIG difference but I keep hearing these climate change nutjobs saying it's the hottest ever. How do they know that?

One other thing there Redman, I've put up the current surface analysis. I see a Pacific ridge and a Midwest trough, a fairly strong high out west and a bit of low pressure in the eastern Midwest, but nothing too strong or out of the ordinary. Can you show me which feature on this map is due to global warming?
Thanks bro, and good to hear from you again! Stick around for a while, we'll have some fun


Hey Gassy, nice to see you up and around. Not really. I looked at your color weather radar map, and didn't see anything recognizable. Looked like a map of the US with a bunch of numbers and squiggles all over it. But there wasn't a legend to tell me what the numbers and squiggles represented. Sorry, trying to say squigglies, but the spell checker keeps fixing it.

I think when they say record temperature, they mean since temperature was recorded. The previous Interglacial Period exceeded the current average temperature by about 5C. So it's not the hottest ever.

The reason for pointing out that people are starting to burn up is because it's something we need to be aware of. Fire is a natural thing, that we didn't invent. It happens when a combustible material reaches its ignition temperature. Sometimes things, including people, just spontaneously combust, without any source of heat. But that fire that killed all those people in Greece was started by some nut job, apparently.

Nice of you to point out that I am politicizing the fire in Greece. Global Warming shouldn't be a political issue at all, because politicians are really smart enough to understand it. They should just react to what the smart scientists are telling them. But instead, the majority of them appear to have their fingers crammed in their ears.

The events we are seeing now are because of Climate Change. It's getting hotter, so we have more frequent fires, droughts, and floods. It would be easier if we didn't have to figure out why there's a drought in the west, and a monsoon in the east, but that's the way it is. I think the droughts are caused by lack of water, and the monsoons are caused by too much water. Both are caused by more heat than what is normal.

But of course, you don't care, because the fire didn't come roaring down on you. Maybe next time?


Just thought I would point out that the weather map is very easy to understand if you wentto school and did geography.

The ines are isobars. They link places with equal atmospheric pressure at nominal sea level.

The squiggles are various fronts. This is where the is a vertical movenet of air causing a vortex to happen. The front bit is where the hotter air is rising over cooler air. Generally this means rain.


Oh, that's the problem then. I didn't went to school or did geography. No wonder everything seems so challenging for me. Do you think that if I went to school and did geometry that I could act as dumb as some of the Deniers in here?

By the way. What does a color weather radar map have to do with Earth's Climate?

Oh yeah, that's right. It has nothing to do with Earth's Climate. There's a BIG difference between weather and climate.


Well Redman, you've proven my point yet again. People who can't tell the difference between a surface analysis map and a color radar should probably not be regurgitating the lies of "climate scientists" who are pretending to be meteorologists.

The surface analysis is a exactly as Tim said it is. Is is also very basic and does not include any of the more specific details that go into making weather exactly what it is. A radar, on the other hand, shows where rain and flooding are occurring and COOLING that region for long periods of time. Yep, rain actually cools the air!! So more floods should mean a cooling "climate", RIGHT?


By the way, climate is the average of all weather over a period of time. Therefore climate has EVERYTHING to do with weather.


NOTE: I'm doing this with my pad, and deleting the old posts is cumbersome. Could the next poster please delete the previous posts? They are getting so narrow now that single words are being squished.

Gassy, wasn't saying that climate has nothing to do with weather, duh. Lol.

Said weather maps have nothing to do with climate. Just because your map says everything is fine, it doesn't mean that everything is fine everywhere. And by the way. That map may say everything is fine, to you. However, that was just a snapshot of our weather. Not sure if the numbers were highs, averages, current, or what. Sorry, missed that in weather class. I don't think they had that in my school back then. They probably don't explain freaking weather charts even today. Graduating class was around 150. P.O. Dunk to say the least.

And I know the difference in a color weather radar map, and your priceless whatever the **** it is. I was making fun of you for posting it. Apparently it went over your head.

And that's because you didn't get to see the color radar maps they used to show on the radio, down in Greenville, SC.

Nice chatting with you, Gassy. I can't wait to meet your hot ole lady, and much on some of them grilled cheese burgers, and drink your beer. I like Elysian Space Dust IPA. But don't worry, I'm a lightweight, and a six pack will put me right out [and totally hose the next day]. Let's get together and talk about growing corn after it starts hitting 100 F in the spring. I'm interested in your ideas on this.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
27-07-2018 02:13
James___
★★★☆☆
(666)
GreenMan wrote:

NOTE: I'm doing this with my pad, and deleting the old posts is cumbersome. Could the next poster please delete the previous posts? They are getting so narrow now that single words are being squished.

Gassy, wasn't saying that climate has nothing to do with weather, duh. Lol.

Said weather maps have nothing to do with climate. Just because your map says everything is fine, it doesn't mean that everything is fine everywhere.



...Umm, actually the weather map showed everything isn't fine. The jet stream is basically in the Arctic Circle where it doesn't belong.
..Even though I am a Christian I don't follow prophecy. Simple reason, have a life to live and not sure where being a doom sayer means anything. Even in Jesus' time they called it the end times.

John 3:17 17: For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

John 12:47 47: "If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world.

..Of course Christians might say souls only and create a condition so they can preach disaster which is meant to show us that God loves us.

..This tends to negate John 3:16. And this is why I seldom discuss religion,

23:1 A Psalm of David.

The LORD is my shepherd;
I shall not want.

That Psalm could just as easily mean that a person should live their life and not be concerned with things they can't control like other people.

And this is probably the last time I'll mention religion in here. Why ? This is a climate debate forum so hopefully we can keep prophecy out of here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cXrEPNvRO8

.or

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CkkjiNVoUo
Edited on 27-07-2018 02:27
27-07-2018 04:04
James___
★★★☆☆
(666)
...Now if we looky here http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/charts/synoptic_col.shtml we see Australia. Been there and would like to go back

..If you notice the lows towards Antarctica and highs above the Southern Pacific and Indian Oceans with a low between the 2 ? It's their winter now. It's about 11° South latitude to about 39° South latitude. It's supposed to be warm.
..If it were in the northern hemisphere it'd be below St. Augustine, Fl. which sits at 41° North latitude. That's why places like Perth and Sydney are so far south.
..With me, I think the southern hemisphere, it's not directly related to the north. The biggest temperature swings that our planet has is in the Arctic itself. In Antarctica it's temperatures swings are about 1/2 that of the Arctic and always in the opposite direction.
..That means that if the Arctic rises by 10° C. that Antarctica will cool by 5° C.
..And Antarctica doesn't have a sea with a fault that goes about to the pole itself so it doesn't really have tectonic plate rebound and collapse like the northern hemisphere does.
..And as ITN would say, you can't know it if you haven't been there. I lost a day when I went to Australia. A full 24 hours of time was lost. While physically impossible every device that measures time said that yes indeed we went back in time. Yep, quite impossible but all ships logs said we went back in time.
..Of course if I discuss the work of Joules and Thomson I am also going back in time as well. With their throttling process it's going back to 1852. With Svante Aarhenius, 1896, the French dude who discovered the ozone layer, 1913. And it's these last 2 people who didn't know that their work might be related to the other. Could you guys imagine that ? Different people in science doing work and not realizing that their work has something in common ?
..Of course that's where me and the Chapman cycle come into play. I think the Chapman cycle came about in the 1930's. This kind of means that there's been about an 80 year gap of no new work that has to do with our atmosphere.
..I guess that's why I've got one he11 of a mountain to climb. Then I can go back to work in a factory or warehouse.
27-07-2018 06:41
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1046)
Redman's quotes

Said weather maps have nothing to do with climate. Just because your map says everything is fine, it doesn't mean that everything is fine everywhere.

Point is, you can't read the simplest of weather maps, yet you're telling us all how factual it is that heat is causing floods. I just want you to explain how. Can you do that?
And by the way. That map may say everything is fine, to you. However, that was just a snapshot of our weather.

Bingo!!! And "hottest global temps ever recorded" which no one actually knows and cannot be accurately measured, are also just a snapshot...a blink in history. Dude, how old is the earth?
Not sure if the numbers were highs, averages, current, or what. Sorry, missed that in weather class.

actually, none of the above.



I don't think they had that in my school back then. They probably don't explain freaking weather charts even today. Graduating class was around 150. P.O. Dunk to say the least.

My school didn't have weather either. I just began to realize how many people spouted off about the weather and how often they were always wrong. I decided to actually learn what I could. Turns out the more I learned the more there was to know. It's a fascinating subject, and even the "expert meteorologists" have significant difficulty producing an accurate forecast 120 hour out. But hold the phone! Redman has created an Algoreism and he can tell us the ENTIRE EARTHS TEMPERATURE 100 years from now!!!
And that's because you didn't get to see the color radar maps they used to show on the radio, down in Greenville, SC.
I can't say I've ever seen anything on the radio.


Nice chatting with you, Gassy.

You too Redman!
I can't wait to meet your hot ole lady,

I would have no problem with that, she'll kick your ass!
and much on some of them grilled cheese burgers, and drink your beer.

Typical liberal...can't even bring his own beer. Isn't the guest supposed to bring a bottle of wine or something like that?
I like Elysian Space Dust IPA. But don't worry, I'm a lightweight, and a six pack will put me right out [and totally hose the next day].

Good for you...buy some.
Let's get together and talk about growing corn after it starts hitting 100 F in the spring.

That sounds wonderful after last spring! We had snow on April 15th! Yep, bad day! Paid my damn taxes and it snowed.
I'm interested in your ideas on this.

Really? OK. From what I understand the more heat the better for getting that corn going early. Get the plants up and get that canopy closed quick to hold more moisture in the soil. Also a benefit when you have a later freeze date...allows for a bigger yield producing variety seed, which takes a week or two more, and no worries about an early freeze before the crop is mature.

What are your thoughts Redman?
27-07-2018 14:34
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
James___ wrote:
GreenMan wrote:

NOTE: I'm doing this with my pad, and deleting the old posts is cumbersome. Could the next poster please delete the previous posts? They are getting so narrow now that single words are being squished.

Gassy, wasn't saying that climate has nothing to do with weather, duh. Lol.

Said weather maps have nothing to do with climate. Just because your map says everything is fine, it doesn't mean that everything is fine everywhere.



...Umm, actually the weather map showed everything isn't fine. The jet stream is basically in the Arctic Circle where it doesn't belong.
..Even though I am a Christian I don't follow prophecy. Simple reason, have a life to live and not sure where being a doom sayer means anything. Even in Jesus' time they called it the end times.

John 3:17 17: For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

John 12:47 47: "If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world.

..Of course Christians might say souls only and create a condition so they can preach disaster which is meant to show us that God loves us.

..This tends to negate John 3:16. And this is why I seldom discuss religion,

23:1 A Psalm of David.

The LORD is my shepherd;
I shall not want.

That Psalm could just as easily mean that a person should live their life and not be concerned with things they can't control like other people.

And this is probably the last time I'll mention religion in here. Why ? This is a climate debate forum so hopefully we can keep prophecy out of here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cXrEPNvRO8

.or

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CkkjiNVoUo


People usually add a few words to that Psalm of David that you quoted. "For anything," is what they add. Those words are giving us a clue about how to identify the Lord, when he shows up. Those words say that we won't want him around. The Lord is my Shepherd, I shall not want. I know it doesn't make sense, because everyone thinks they want the Lord to show up. But it's not really like that. When he shows up, he's gonna be spanking some people. Yeah though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I shall fear no evil, because I'm the baddest mofo in the valley. I like to add those words, to the end of it, lol.

The prophecy is about Climate Change, as I have pointed out, so it is appropriate to discuss it in here. Well ok, some think the prophecy is about Jesus, and going to the spirit in the sky, but it's not. Jesus is included, and he will send a bunch of people to the spirit in the sky. But he is just one of the players. His mission is described by Ezekiel, and what he says isn't good for us, because it's his job to take down the super power that is supporting the evil people that take over Jerusalem.

Jesus referred to the End of the World, just like Christians today. But he, and they are wrong. It's not about the End of the Word, or the End of Time. The expression given by the earlier prophets was The End of Days, as it is currently translated into Engrish. The Hebrew word that is translated to "Days," actually means the warm part of a cycle, and can also be translated into summer, depending on the context. And it can also be translated into Interglacial Period, because an Interglacial Period is the warm part of a Glacial Cycle, which we are currently in. So the prophecies about the End of the World are really about the end of this Interglacial Period.

And the prophecies say that it will got very hot, like it is starting to do now. And most people will perish, and go to the spirit in the sky. That's what happened the last time it got a warmer than it is now. It happened about 135,000 years ago. And if you study the ice core data from EPICA Dome C, you can see the CO2 concentration stop increasing and then begin to rapidly decrease. That's the fingerprint of a massive die off of animal life, because animals used to be the primary variable source of CO2. Animals multiply and CO2 increases. Animals die off, and CO2 decreases.

Oh yeah, after the animals die off and CO2 starts dropping, then the temperature starts dropping with it. The climate model I created shows it quite clearly.

So basically, what happens is it gets too hot to live, then it's going to start getting cold. Very cold. Fortunately, it will take thousands of years to get cold again. Well, maybe not, if my suspicions are correct. I think there will be a major volcanic eruption, that will spray a lot of dust into the atmosphere. That should cool things down very quickly, and is probably what will kill the most people.

And oh yeah. I should mention that Christiandom is in the prophecies as well. But it was called Babylon. And Jesus was described quite clearly, also. But he was called Lucifer, the Bright and Morning Star. He is the king of Babylon. And because of him, people will burn up the world. We can see that happening now, as Christian dominated countries lead the world in CO2 pollution, with no remorse. Why should they be concerned? After all, when they are through destroying the world, Jesus is going to restore it, right?


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
27-07-2018 15:45
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1046)
Redman wrote:
though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I shall fear no evil, because I'm the baddest mofo in the valley.


Though I think your interpretation of the Bible is quite twisted, this is actually really funny shit!! LAMO!!
27-07-2018 17:30
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Redman's quotes

Said weather maps have nothing to do with climate. Just because your map says everything is fine, it doesn't mean that everything is fine everywhere.

Point is, you can't read the simplest of weather maps, yet you're telling us all how factual it is that heat is causing floods. I just want you to explain how. Can you do that?
And by the way. That map may say everything is fine, to you. However, that was just a snapshot of our weather.

Bingo!!! And "hottest global temps ever recorded" which no one actually knows and cannot be accurately measured, are also just a snapshot...a blink in history. Dude, how old is the earth?
Not sure if the numbers were highs, averages, current, or what. Sorry, missed that in weather class.

actually, none of the above.



I don't think they had that in my school back then. They probably don't explain freaking weather charts even today. Graduating class was around 150. P.O. Dunk to say the least.

My school didn't have weather either. I just began to realize how many people spouted off about the weather and how often they were always wrong. I decided to actually learn what I could. Turns out the more I learned the more there was to know. It's a fascinating subject, and even the "expert meteorologists" have significant difficulty producing an accurate forecast 120 hour out. But hold the phone! Redman has created an Algoreism and he can tell us the ENTIRE EARTHS TEMPERATURE 100 years from now!!!
And that's because you didn't get to see the color radar maps they used to show on the radio, down in Greenville, SC.
I can't say I've ever seen anything on the radio.


Nice chatting with you, Gassy.

You too Redman!
I can't wait to meet your hot ole lady,

I would have no problem with that, she'll kick your ass!
and much on some of them grilled cheese burgers, and drink your beer.

Typical liberal...can't even bring his own beer. Isn't the guest supposed to bring a bottle of wine or something like that?
I like Elysian Space Dust IPA. But don't worry, I'm a lightweight, and a six pack will put me right out [and totally hose the next day].

Good for you...buy some.
Let's get together and talk about growing corn after it starts hitting 100 F in the spring.

That sounds wonderful after last spring! We had snow on April 15th! Yep, bad day! Paid my damn taxes and it snowed.
I'm interested in your ideas on this.

Really? OK. From what I understand the more heat the better for getting that corn going early. Get the plants up and get that canopy closed quick to hold more moisture in the soil. Also a benefit when you have a later freeze date...allows for a bigger yield producing variety seed, which takes a week or two more, and no worries about an early freeze before the crop is mature.

What are your thoughts Redman?


I see one problem that you are having, Gassy. You apparently don't know the difference between weather and climate, so you think they are the same. Yes, they are related, but they are not the same thing. Weather is what's around you today. Your weather today might include rain, or sunshine. Climate is a summary of what the weather has been like over a period of time.

And yes, I can tell you that the earth's average surface temperature will be about 3C warmer in 100 years, if nothing happens to reverse the warming trend we are currently experiencing. But I have no idea if it will be raining or not on 07/27/2118. Whether it's raining or not is a weather forecast. How hot the average temperature of the planet will be is a climate forecast.

You think a warmer spring and a later frost will actually help your corn grow. And it will, if your corn can handle the heat of the summer. I'm not sure if irrigation is the answer to that or not. The prophecies indicate clearly that food will become scarce, so I suspect there will be a problem that irrigation can't fix.

You asked how a warmer climate can cause flooding. That's easy. Evaporation is caused by heat. More heat means more evaporation. More evaporation means more rain. So in areas that have a lot of water nearby, like the east coast of the US, we should see more flooding. And we are seeing more flooding. There isn't a lot of water in the mid-west, so we aren't seeing a lot of flooding there. Instead, we are seeing a lot of drought, because the mountains block the moisture. Lake Mead for example, is constantly dropping. I flew over it a couple of years ago, and you can clearly see how much it has dropped from when it was full. I doubt it will be full again for quite a while.

I'll try to swing by your place in a few years, to see how you and your grain fed ole lady are holding out. I'll bring my own beer, and have a couple cases for you. I'm thinking you are a Bud Light kind of guy. Is that right?


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
Page 1 of 4123>>>





Join the debate Warming acceleration:

Remember me

▲ 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 © 2009-2017 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact