Remember me
▼ Content

Climate change is caused by greenhouse gases



Page 4 of 5<<<2345>
13-09-2022 01:39
James_
★★★★☆
(1099)
I mean seriously, once past Alderwood Mall there was nothing but open road. Traffic from Silver Lake was non-existent. You actually needed to be up into Everett itself. Why I knew it was safe to
go a little faster than what the law allowed for.
And yet I wasn't speeding. It's like when I idled through town at 25 mph I had the police watching me. I think they heard my engine from 3 or 4 blocks away. It literally rocked my car at an idle. And it had the nicest thump to it every time. God those were such good days.
Not to brag while I am bragging but my 67 GTO, it had a Big Block 400 that had some gitty up and go to it. You can cry climate change but some of us still love our cars.
13-09-2022 04:09
James_
★★★★☆
(1099)
C'mon guys, I owned a 67 GTO that wasn't stock. How easy can I make it for you guys? I
loved that car. Haven't you ever owned anything like that? I had fun when I punched it at 30 in 2nd gear. I had a 3 speed automatic 400THM transmission.
Don't disappoint me guys, ya'all had fun, right? Okay, maybe it wasn't 30 but you've had a car like that, right? Seriously speaking, any car buff really needs to drive a car that they can feel vibrating when idling down the street. Then you'll know what power is about. When idling, everyone will be watching you. Listen to a hydroplane race when you're not there. What a few extra horse power allows for.

And seriously speaking, driving that car, God what a ride.

p.s., Seattle, Washington has hydroplane races. They call it the SeaFair Regatta.
Or something like that. How can you feel a motor like a 400 c.i. engine in a GTO?
Why I hate living away from Seattle, the videos suck; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TobLW-lIGtc

Can you imagine no good video of a hydroplane?
Edited on 13-09-2022 04:22
13-09-2022 04:44
James_
★★★★☆
(1099)
As for the muscle car I owned, you guys only wished you owned one. Suck it up little boys.
13-09-2022 05:24
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12584)
James_ wrote:As for the muscle car I owned, you guys only wished you owned one. Suck it up little boys.

You've gotta be kidding. I got a rental car and right now I am cruising around town in a Kia. I drive by the kids in their Mustangs and Chargers and whatever, giving them that "You don't want a piece of this" look. They don't dare challenge to race me for pink slips because I'll call their bluff, and they know it.

The kids in the next neighborhood are always revving their engines to let everyone know that they have cool muscle cars ... until I drive down the street and suddenly they pipe down. They don't want to make me tap my accelerator and advertise what I'm on about.

Now if you're seeing a greenish envy tint in the mirror, I understand.

Don't make me drive over there.

.
15-09-2022 22:28
James_
★★★★☆
(1099)
IBdaMann wrote:
James_ wrote:As for the muscle car I owned, you guys only wished you owned one. Suck it up little boys.

You've gotta be kidding. I got a rental car and right now I am cruising around town in a Kia. I drive by the kids in their Mustangs and Chargers and whatever, giving them that "You don't want a piece of this" look. They don't dare challenge to race me for pink slips because I'll call their bluff, and they know it.

The kids in the next neighborhood are always revving their engines to let everyone know that they have cool muscle cars ... until I drive down the street and suddenly they pipe down. They don't want to make me tap my accelerator and advertise what I'm on about.

Now if you're seeing a greenish envy tint in the mirror, I understand.

Don't make me drive over there.

.



Doesn't Kia stand for Killed in action?
16-09-2022 01:04
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2138)
IBdaMann wrote:
James_ wrote:As for the muscle car I owned, you guys only wished you owned one. Suck it up little boys.

You've gotta be kidding. I got a rental car and right now I am cruising around town in a Kia. I drive by the kids in their Mustangs and Chargers and whatever, giving them that "You don't want a piece of this" look. They don't dare challenge to race me for pink slips because I'll call their bluff, and they know it.

The kids in the next neighborhood are always revving their engines to let everyone know that they have cool muscle cars ... until I drive down the street and suddenly they pipe down. They don't want to make me tap my accelerator and advertise what I'm on about.

Now if you're seeing a greenish envy tint in the mirror, I understand.

Don't make me drive over there.

.


So you have a KIA what?

The one you rented because you cannot get a loan, because you lost your job at Wendy's


This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
16-09-2022 01:14
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12584)
James_ wrote: Doesn't Kia stand for Killed in action?

KIA - Kabul International Airport
16-09-2022 01:50
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2548)
IBdaMann wrote:
James_ wrote: Doesn't Kia stand for Killed in action?

KIA - Kabul International Airport


Kickass Integrated Afterburner


Studies show that if you force several tubs of peanut butter down the throats of newborns, in some cases it could potentially be toxic. In cities where infant-PB-stuffing is more common, infant deaths increased by over 47% with corresponding increases in dead-infant obesity.. -IBdaMann
16-09-2022 06:54
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12584)
GasGuzzler wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
James_ wrote: Doesn't Kia stand for Killed in action?
KIA - Kabul International Airport
Kickass Integrated Afterburner

Kickass Integrated Afterburner 3.

Afterburner 2 has been discontinued.
25-09-2022 18:46
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(856)
Here is a question I have lately on my mind. I have read that the atmosphere helps to spread the heat all over the world bringing daytime and nighttime temperatures closer together. So am I right to deduce that making atmosphere more thicker would make the overall climate more stable. If we bring down the daytime temperatures we could lower the chances of hurricanes, thornados, heat waves etc that usually are caused by extreme weather conditions( like heat waves). Heat waves also cause a lot of health problems and even death to old people.
I would like to here your opinion on this matter.
25-09-2022 19:26
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19283)
Xadoman wrote:
Here is a question I have lately on my mind. I have read that the atmosphere helps to spread the heat all over the world bringing daytime and nighttime temperatures closer together.

You cannot spread heat. Heat is not contained in anything. Hot air will heat colder air, but that's not how night air is warmer than with a thinner atmosphere.

Air has mass. It takes time to heat it (or cool it). Thicker air has more mass, so yes...it will take more heat to make the air change temperature by a single degree.

The thickness of an atmosphere is generally determined by the size of the planet or moon.

The temperature of the Earth is not just the atmosphere. You cannot separate the atmosphere from the Earth in terms of temperature.

Divisional error fallacy.

Xadoman wrote:
So am I right to deduce that making atmosphere more thicker would make the overall climate more stable.

There is no such thing as a global climate or 'overall' climate. There is no such thing as 'stability' in a climate. No value is associated with any climate.
Xadoman wrote:
If we bring down the daytime temperatures we could lower the chances of hurricanes,

Hurricanes are not caused by high temperatures. They are caused by convective heat. If air is colder than usual at altitude, the air becomes unstable and storms, including hurricanes and tornadoes can form.
Xadoman wrote:
thornados,

Tornadoes are not caused by high temperatures. They are caused by convective heat.
Xadoman wrote:
heat waves etc

You can get a heat wave in the middle of winter, with snow on the ground.
Xadoman wrote:
that usually are caused by extreme weather conditions( like heat waves).

A heat wave is not an extreme weather condition. It is simply temperatures higher than normal in an area for that time of year.
Xadoman wrote:
Heat waves also cause a lot of health problems and even death to old people.

Nah. A heat wave during Christmas one year was strong enough for our family to build a fence under pleasant temperatures. Not a speck of snow. (I live in the northern hemisphere)
Xadoman wrote:
I would like to here your opinion on this matter.

The first thing to understand is what 'heat' is. Heat has no temperature. Heat is not contained in anything. 'Heat waves' is a misnomer. They don't heat anything. What you are really talking about is temperature (average thermal energy) and total thermal energy.

The second thing to understand is that Earth is a unit. Subdividing a unit for thermal energy purposes won't work. No matter what units you subdivide into, total thermal energy remains the same. Localized weather events are NOT the Earth. This kind of false equivalence is popular with devout believers in the Church of Global Warming.

Pointing to a particular weather event, say a hurricane, or even how many hurricanes occur during any given year, has nothing to do with Earth's temperature or even the temperature of Earth's atmosphere. To claim such is ignoring Kirchoff's law of energy nodes, and also forms a divisional error fallacy.

Thirdly, it is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth, or it's atmosphere, or it's oceans. It is also not possible to measure the global atmospheric concentration of CO2, nor the pH of the oceans.

This is because there is simply insufficient data to overcome known variances. Mathematically, the margin of error is so great that any average is quite meaningless. BOTH numbers must be calculated in any statistical summary. Anyone that claims to know any of these values is just making it up.

Thus, the temperature of the Earth is unknown. The pH of the oceans is unknown. The global atmospheric concentration of CO2 is unknown. The total snow and ice content on Earth is unknown. The total precipitation on Earth is unknown. It is not possible to measure any of them.

The Church of Global Warming routinely discards statistical mathematics (as well as probability and random number mathematics). I've even seen quite a few of them discard algebra as well, particularly over a confusion of dependent and independent variables.

Fourthly, it is not possible to adjust the temperature of the atmosphere. There is no thermostat. No gas or vapor (including CO2) has the capability to create or destroy energy. This is in accordance with the 1st law of thermodynamics. You cannot create or destroy energy. Increasing average thermal energy can't happen due to the presence of any gas or vapor.

No gas or vapor can reduce entropy either. It is not possible to trap or slow heat. Heat only goes one way...from hot to cold...never the reverse. You cannot heat a warmer surface using colder air.

No gas or vapor can prevent light from leaving Earth as well. You cannot trap light. ALL substances (including air) convert thermal energy to electromagnetic energy (light) depending on temperature. As temperature increases, the more light the substance radiates. It is never the inverse. This is in accordance with the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

The Church of Global Warming routinely denies and discards each of these three laws.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 25-09-2022 19:40
25-09-2022 19:36
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12584)
Xadoman wrote:Here is a question I have lately on my mind. I have read that the atmosphere helps to spread the heat all over the world

You mean "spreads the thermal energy around," yes? ... or do you need to learn what "heat" is?

Convection spreads heat around.

Xadoman wrote:bringing daytime and nighttime temperatures closer together

Yes. I have written much on that topic.

Xadoman wrote:So am I right to deduce that making atmosphere more thicker would make the overall climate more stable.

What is "the Climate"?

Xadoman wrote: If we bring down the daytime temperatures we could lower the chances of hurricanes,

Why are you using the Marxist "we"? About whom do you speak?

I believe the answer to your question is "No.". Increasing the atmosphere increases all of those things. Eliminating the atmosphere is the only way to eliminate those things.

The Earth's temperature is not a factor in any of that.

.
25-09-2022 19:51
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(856)
Yes. I have written much on that topic.


So having a really thick atmosphere would make our days much cooler and nights warmer? Can not we then say that the overall "climate" is more stable?

If we look for example a water in the lake we can say the climate down there is pretty stable durning the day and night. The temperature is quite similar.

So in overall adding more and more so called "greenhouse gases" to the atmosphere we are heading towards more stable "climate". Am I right?
25-09-2022 20:56
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12584)
Xadoman wrote:So having a really thick atmosphere would make our days much cooler and nights warmer?

Having a lot more of our existing atmosphere would have these effects on the bottom of the atmosphere:

1. Nighttime and daytime temperatures would be closer.
2. Nighttime and daytime temperatures would be somewhat higher.
3. There would be the same weather, just somewhat more pronounced.

Xadoman wrote:Can not we then say that the overall "climate" is more stable?

Would you extend the courtesy of defining "climate" and "stable"?
.
25-09-2022 21:32
Robert Wagner
☆☆☆☆☆
(36)
Xadoman wrote:
Yes. I have written much on that topic.


So having a really thick atmosphere would make our days much cooler and nights warmer? Can not we then say that the overall "climate" is more stable?

If we look for example a water in the lake we can say the climate down there is pretty stable durning the day and night. The temperature is quite similar.

So in overall adding more and more so called "greenhouse gases" to the atmosphere we are heading towards more stable "climate". Am I right?


You could just look up conditions on Venus. Very heavy CO2 atmosphere.
25-09-2022 21:46
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19283)
Xadoman wrote:
Yes. I have written much on that topic.


So having a really thick atmosphere would make our days much cooler and nights warmer? Can not we then say that the overall "climate" is more stable?

If we look for example a water in the lake we can say the climate down there is pretty stable durning the day and night. The temperature is quite similar.

So in overall adding more and more so called "greenhouse gases" to the atmosphere we are heading towards more stable "climate". Am I right?

No, for the reasons I have already described. RQAA.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
25-09-2022 21:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19283)
Robert Wagner wrote:
Xadoman wrote:
Yes. I have written much on that topic.


So having a really thick atmosphere would make our days much cooler and nights warmer? Can not we then say that the overall "climate" is more stable?

If we look for example a water in the lake we can say the climate down there is pretty stable durning the day and night. The temperature is quite similar.

So in overall adding more and more so called "greenhouse gases" to the atmosphere we are heading towards more stable "climate". Am I right?


You could just look up conditions on Venus. Very heavy CO2 atmosphere.


Venus has no oceans. If you were to stand at the bottom of where our oceans are, assuming no oceans, you would experience higher temperatures. Venus has a very heavy atmosphere due to it being almost entirely CO2, resulting in surface air pressure some 900 times that of Earth.

The atmosphere of Venus is colder than it's surface. You cannot heat a warmer surface using a colder gas. See the 2nd law of thermodynamics, which you seem to be ignoring.

The temperature of air in the troposphere decreases with altitude, dude.
The total thermal energy in any given parcel of air decreases with altitude as well, even where a temperature inversion occurs, such as in the stratosphere.

The temperature of Venus does not change because of the atmosphere. Not even by one degree.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of Venus. It is not possible to measure the temperature of Earth.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 25-09-2022 21:57
25-09-2022 22:04
Robert Wagner
☆☆☆☆☆
(36)
Into the Night wrote:

Venus has no oceans. If you were to stand at the bottom of where our oceans are, assuming no oceans, you would experience higher temperatures. Venus has a very heavy atmosphere due to it being almost entirely CO2, resulting in surface air pressure some 900 times that of Earth.


Fail. Surface air pressure of Venus is only about 92 times that of earth.
25-09-2022 22:45
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19283)
Robert Wagner wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

Venus has no oceans. If you were to stand at the bottom of where our oceans are, assuming no oceans, you would experience higher temperatures. Venus has a very heavy atmosphere due to it being almost entirely CO2, resulting in surface air pressure some 900 times that of Earth.


Fail. Surface air pressure of Venus is only about 92 times that of earth.

Typo.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
25-09-2022 22:56
Robert Wagner
☆☆☆☆☆
(36)
Into the Night wrote:
Robert Wagner wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

Venus has no oceans. If you were to stand at the bottom of where our oceans are, assuming no oceans, you would experience higher temperatures. Venus has a very heavy atmosphere due to it being almost entirely CO2, resulting in surface air pressure some 900 times that of Earth.


Fail. Surface air pressure of Venus is only about 92 times that of earth.

Typo.


But nouns HAVE to be capitalized, right?
25-09-2022 23:19
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(856)
2. Nighttime and daytime temperatures would be somewhat higher.



The surface would be cooler? The overall temperature could not change as much as I understand.
25-09-2022 23:27
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12584)
Xadoman wrote:
2. Nighttime and daytime temperatures would be somewhat higher.
The surface would be cooler?

What do you mean by "the surface"? Do you mean "the bottom of the atmosphere"?

So, you owe me three definitions:

1. "the climate"
2. "stable"
3. "surface"

Xadoman wrote:[quote]The overall temperature could not change as much as I understand.

The planet's average temperature would not change. The bottom of the atmosphere would become warmer.
26-09-2022 00:04
Robert Wagner
☆☆☆☆☆
(36)
Nice little video.

https://fb.watch/fMuCkTbUJn/
26-09-2022 01:02
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12584)
Robert Wagner wrote:Nice little video.
[crap video link deleted]

That guy is often good at clearly explaining some otherwise difficult math concepts ... but he is just another gullible fool who OBEYS when he is ordered to believe crap with no rational basis.
26-09-2022 09:39
Robert Wagner
☆☆☆☆☆
(36)
IBdaMann wrote:
Robert Wagner wrote:Nice little video.
[crap video link deleted]

That guy is often good at clearly explaining some otherwise difficult math concepts ... but he is just another gullible fool who OBEYS when he is ordered to believe crap with no rational basis.


You start well, than you talk about yourself again.
26-09-2022 10:45
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(856)
Do you mean "the bottom of the atmosphere"?


Why would it be warmer?

ITN, do you agree with it?
26-09-2022 12:28
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12584)
Xadoman wrote:Why would it be warmer?

Now you owe me four definitions:

1. "it"
2. "the climate"
3. "stable"
4. "surface"

Xadoman wrote:ITN, do you agree with it?

I wouldn't be surprised if he were to ask you to define your terms as well.
26-09-2022 18:03
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2138)
IBdaMann wrote:
Xadoman wrote:Why would it be warmer?

Now you owe me four definitions:

1. "it"
2. "the climate"
3. "stable"
4. "surface"

Xadoman wrote:ITN, do you agree with it?

I wouldn't be surprised if he were to ask you to define your terms as well.


Actually no one owes you anything


This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
26-09-2022 18:43
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19283)
Robert Wagner wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Robert Wagner wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

Venus has no oceans. If you were to stand at the bottom of where our oceans are, assuming no oceans, you would experience higher temperatures. Venus has a very heavy atmosphere due to it being almost entirely CO2, resulting in surface air pressure some 900 times that of Earth.


Fail. Surface air pressure of Venus is only about 92 times that of earth.

Typo.


But nouns HAVE to be capitalized, right?

Illiteracy.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
26-09-2022 18:44
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19283)
Xadoman wrote:
2. Nighttime and daytime temperatures would be somewhat higher.



The surface would be cooler? The overall temperature could not change as much as I understand.

It wouldn't change at all. The temperature of the Earth is constant, assuming a constant output from the Sun.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
26-09-2022 18:45
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19283)
Robert Wagner wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Robert Wagner wrote:Nice little video.
[crap video link deleted]

That guy is often good at clearly explaining some otherwise difficult math concepts ... but he is just another gullible fool who OBEYS when he is ordered to believe crap with no rational basis.


You start well, than you talk about yourself again.

Fallacy fallacy. Inversion fallacy.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
26-09-2022 18:46
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19283)
Xadoman wrote:
Do you mean "the bottom of the atmosphere"?


Why would it be warmer?

ITN, do you agree with it?

RQAA. I have already answered this question.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
26-09-2022 18:47
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19283)
IBdaMann wrote:
Xadoman wrote:Why would it be warmer?

Now you owe me four definitions:

1. "it"
2. "the climate"
3. "stable"
4. "surface"

Xadoman wrote:ITN, do you agree with it?

I wouldn't be surprised if he were to ask you to define your terms as well.

I already did. He seems to forget a lot and is now asking the same repetitive question I've already answered.

Quite mindless.

Don't expect any definition from this guy. Expect evasion after evasion.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
26-09-2022 18:48
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19283)
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Xadoman wrote:Why would it be warmer?

Now you owe me four definitions:

1. "it"
2. "the climate"
3. "stable"
4. "surface"

Xadoman wrote:ITN, do you agree with it?

I wouldn't be surprised if he were to ask you to define your terms as well.


Actually no one owes you anything


Evasion. If he wants to ask these question, he MUST define these terms. If he does not, the questions are void and meaningless.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 26-09-2022 18:49
27-09-2022 00:10
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(856)
RQAA. I have already answered this question.


Do you agree with IBdaMann that with thicker atmosphere( for example more co2) the nighttime and daytime temperatures of the air( bottom layer of atmosphere) would get higher?

I need an explanation how the overall temperature would be the same. My guess is that the surface of the earth would get cooler. Am I right?
27-09-2022 01:12
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(19283)
Xadoman wrote:
RQAA. I have already answered this question.


Do you agree with IBdaMann that with thicker atmosphere( for example more co2) the nighttime and daytime temperatures of the air( bottom layer of atmosphere) would get higher?

I need an explanation how the overall temperature would be the same. My guess is that the surface of the earth would get cooler. Am I right?

RQAA


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
27-09-2022 01:45
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12584)
Xadoman wrote:I need an explanation how the overall temperature would be the same. My guess is that the surface of the earth would get cooler. Am I right?

You still haven't defined anything.
27-09-2022 03:37
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(2138)
Into the Night wrote:
Robert Wagner wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Robert Wagner wrote:Nice little video.
[crap video link deleted]

That guy is often good at clearly explaining some otherwise difficult math concepts ... but he is just another gullible fool who OBEYS when he is ordered to believe crap with no rational basis.


You start well, than you talk about yourself again.

Fallacy fallacy. Inversion fallacy.


You are clearly the reason for abortions


This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
27-09-2022 04:43
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2548)
Swan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Robert Wagner wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Robert Wagner wrote:Nice little video.
[crap video link deleted]

That guy is often good at clearly explaining some otherwise difficult math concepts ... but he is just another gullible fool who OBEYS when he is ordered to believe crap with no rational basis.


You start well, than you talk about yourself again.

Fallacy fallacy. Inversion fallacy.


You are clearly the reason for abortions


You are clearly the result of Viagra.


Studies show that if you force several tubs of peanut butter down the throats of newborns, in some cases it could potentially be toxic. In cities where infant-PB-stuffing is more common, infant deaths increased by over 47% with corresponding increases in dead-infant obesity.. -IBdaMann
27-09-2022 06:22
Xadoman
★★★☆☆
(856)
You still haven't defined anything.


Surface of the earth - soil, water etc etc.

The atmosphere is like a heat shield - without it the surface of the earth would be much warmer. The more thicker the atmosphere becomes, the more it is going to absorb the energy directly from the sun, leaving less energy to reach to the surface of the earth.
If bottom layer of the atmosphere would get warmer, as you say, then something needs to get cooler. Otherwise there would be the violation of the conservation of energy.
Page 4 of 5<<<2345>





Join the debate Climate change is caused by greenhouse gases:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Nitrate Reduction - Powerful Greenhouse Gas Emission AND Alkalinity8812-05-2022 03:11
Is warming caused by increased spectrum usage.1829-04-2021 16:14
Oilfield Greenhouse Gas Emissions3424-03-2021 16:22
Understanding Earth Map: Global Warming Climate Change Caused By Humans Stupid Activities507-08-2020 12:25
Global Warming (not necessarily caused by people) will release nasty extinct viruses from tens of thousan101-05-2020 05:04
▲ 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 © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact