That isn’t an answer to the question.
When you see a graphic showing the different GhGs absorptions, and the solar and terrestrial radiation, are they showing you the possible absorption , or a measurement of what is actually happening in the atmosphere?
When you see something like thishttp://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/EnergyBalance/images/CO2_H2O_absorption.png
do you think that is a scientific view of the bands that can be absorbed , or is it a view of what actually happens in the atmosphere?
Like this one
Do you think that represents the technical aspects of what could happen?
Or is showing what does happen?
Are you claiming Nitrogen (N2) absorbs IR? And that it overlaps with CO2?
Farin
February 5, 2014, 4:18am
444
FXMastermind:
That isn’t an answer to the question.
When you see a graphic showing the different GhGs absorptions, and the solar and terrestrial radiation, are they showing you the possible absorption , or a measurement of what is actually happening in the atmosphere?
When you see something like thishttp://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/EnergyBalance/images/CO2_H2O_absorption.png
do you think that is a scientific view of the bands that can be absorbed , or is it a view of what actually happens in the atmosphere?
Since the answer to your question was in my post, I can only assume you are trying to drive to a point that you’d like me to stumble into.
So, please enlighten us: What is your point?
How long until the next “GW is going faster than predicted” thread? I’ll bet June, because it’s the NH summer and, then, any high temperature becomes the final nail in the conffin.
Farin
February 5, 2014, 4:56am
446
Aji_de_Gallina:
How long until the next “GW is going faster than predicted” thread? I’ll bet June, because it’s the NH summer and, then, any high temperature becomes the final nail in the conffin.
If you want high temperatures, wouldn’t that be best served by waiting until August?
Uh, no.
Wow this is easy. I should have adopted the BrainGlutton method of debate ages ago. :rolleyes:
“And, as a last resort, there’s always the weather report for Australia.”
Priceless. If all else fails, point to the weather in one small part of the southern hemisphere, that should shut those anti-science fools up. Nothing says “I know more than you about climate science” than using a weather report to prove global warming.
Also, nothing says “I are smart” like linking to a Salon article.
See? I win. Game over man, game over.
It is just about game over really for Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, Mike Huckabee and other Republicans that deny the science.
And here I only see once again a furious attempt at denying that many out there do rely on sources like Skeptical Science. The intention from contrarians is to always discourage looking at the links regarding where Salon and others are getting what they are claiming.
andros
February 13, 2014, 10:11pm
452
FXMastermind:
Priceless. If all else fails, point to the weather in one small part of the southern hemisphere, that should shut those anti-science fools up. Nothing says “I know more than you about climate science” than using a weather report to prove global warming.
Because you sure wouldn’t do anything like that! :rolleyes:
If it gets a laugh, I will do all kinds of things.
FXMastermind:
Also, nothing says “I are smart” like linking to a Salon article.
See? I win. Game over man, game over.
Of course, that’s merely referencing the main scientific model available for explaining the current phenomena… But I’m not surprised that you’d scoff at it.
If this thread is dribbling down into nothing more than personal shots, I will be happy to move it to The BBQ Pit for you folks.
If you actually wish to discuss the topic, then discuss it without all the silly cheap jabs.
[ /Moderating ]
Church Of England Takes On ‘Giant Evil’ Of Climate Change:
On Wednesday, the Church of England’s parliamentary body announced that it was considering redirecting its investments in an effort to battle climate change. The motion put forward, which called for the Church to recognize “the damage being done to the planet through the burning of fossil fuels,” received overwhelming support.
“Climate Change is a moral issue because the rich world has disproportionately contributed to it and the poor world is disproportionately suffering,” Canon Goddard said.
According to the Church of England’s official statement, the passing of the motion makes clear that the Church’s investment policies are “aligned with the theological, moral and social priorities” of the Church on climate change.
“The threat of climate change is a giant evil, a great demon of our day,” said the Right Reverend Stephen Croft. “The damage this great demon will do to this beautiful earth if unchecked, is unimaginable.”
The U.K. is currently experiencing the worst rainfall for this time of year in 250 years of records, which has lead to widespread flooding and over 130 severe flood warnings this year. This has inundated homes and communities, cut off transportation links, and may lead to an outbreak in bacterial diseases that thrive in damp conditions.
The Church Commissioners manage around £5.2 billion, or $8.5 billion, in investments. Royal Dutch Shell, BP, BHB Billiton, a mining and petroleum company, and Rio Tinto, another mining company, are all in their top ten investments. The Church’s Ethical Investment Advisory Group aims to keep these investments in align with the broader ethical considerations of the Church.
FWIW.
Who the hell is Marsha Blackburn and why should I care?
Congresscritter and denier.
This Sunday, “Meet the Press,” the renowned televised political news forum, will host a discussion of climate change — perhaps the single most pressing issue of our time — featuring a professional children’s entertainer and a Republican member of Congress. Yes, David Gregory will be refereeing a “debate” — their word — between “Bill Nye ‘The Science Guy’ and Tennessee Republican Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn, Vice Chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.” Nye will be arguing the pro (climate change is real and bad) and Blackburn will be arguing the anti (climate change is made up and not bad). By the end, America will be just a little bit more stupid and doomed.
I watched the “debate”. Twice.
