Now that is self effacing humor right there folks.
I linked to the mainstream take on it since the actual report will get way too sciencey for the denialists who don’t understand science.
INB4:
Wellnow, that report is by weather people, not climatologists, so they’re dumb and know nothing about sciencebitch.
Also, it doesn’t talk about why it’s cold outside in the winter, so something something sciencebitch it’s dumb.
Sure it does. The fact that warm air can hold more water vapor than cold air, for example, is just basic physics.
Now, the question of exactly how much and in what way the water vapor feedback phenomenon actually contributes to global warming in the highly complex system of global climate is certainly far from thoroughly understood. But just because something isn’t thoroughly understood doesn’t mean it’s bullshit or devoid of scientific content.
I’m baffled as to why you would even make such a nutty claim, just as I’m baffled why anybody would make the nutty claim that “there’s no such thing as global climate”. That’s not science, it’s not even a critique of science, it’s just an attempt to troll science. Why would anybody even bother?
i.e. you are unable to actually back up your vague claims with specifics and it makes you angry when that fact starts to surface.
i.e. you are unable to actually back up your vague claims with specifics and it makes you angry when that fact starts to surface.
i.e. you are unable to actually back up your vague claims with specifics and it makes you angry when that fact starts to surface.
Thanks. What’s funny is that if some TV psychic predicted “extreme weather” for next year, they would immediately see there’s a problem with the prediction. It’s like predicting that there will be a “big surprise in Hollywood next year.”
But when the Church of Global Warming engages in the same shenanigans, it seems perfectly fine to them. Until someone points it out and then they start getting angry.
“Water vapor is a feedback. Period.”
Water vapor is the gaseous phase of a compound, damn, did any of you take chemistry? Thermodynamic feedback mechanisms involve [gulp] thermodynamics. It’s sad that the “We’re fucked” Alarmists throw this around like it makes their point … it doesn’t … the statement quoted above is just stupid.
Water has both a fairly high specific heat and high latent heat of deposition, as well as having “asymmetric distribution of electric charge” in trumps (meaning it’s polar). These three plus it is the most common surface feature on Earth makes it the primary thermodynamic driver, bar none.
As long as your statements violate U[sub]f[/sub] - U[sub]i[/sub] = Q - W, where U = internal energy, Q = heat and W = work, then you’re living in the wrong universe.
I think you’re over-estimating the value of your time.
I think you missed wolfpup’s point. “Water vapor is a feedback” doesn’t mean that that’s how water vapor is defined, it means that water vapor acts as a feedback mechanism in greenhouse-gas-caused atmospheric heating.
But the routine physics concept of water vapor feedback doesn’t violate this or any other principle of thermodynamics. What makes you think it does?
As I said in my previous post, I’m baffled why anti-science types are picking on this very unremarkable bit of climate science to make a fuss about on the internet.
Wait, are we up to denying that water vapour is a greenhouse gas, now? Or are we saying it’s a forcing? So the hydrological cycle is a lie? I’m having trouble keeping up with the stupid.
The anti-science meme of the moment seems to be to deny that water vapor is a feedback in atmospheric warming (and cooling too, for that matter: its amplifying effect on temperature change is independent of whether the temperature change is positive or negative). Or rather, not so much to “deny” it as to arbitrarily attack the whole concept as being somehow scientifically meaningless and/or entirely unsupported.
Which is absurd. As I pointed out above, there is of course a lot of legitimate scientific debate as to the precise amount of impact water vapor has on present-day global warming. But that doesn’t mean that the concept itself isn’t scientifically valid.
AIUI, in simplest language the phenomenon can basically be described as “warmer air holds more water vapor, more water vapor absorbs more radiation, thus warming the air further, repeat”. (The cooling counterpart is “colder air holds less water vapor, sheds excess water vapor as precipitation, resulting drier atmosphere absorbs less radiation, thus cooling the air further, repeat”.)
In slightly less simple language, temperature increase quasi-exponentially raises what’s known as the “saturation vapor pressure” or approximately the maximum partial pressure of vapor, beyond which the vapor starts to condense and precipitate out. (The precise relationship between saturation vapor pressure and temperature is given by the so-called Clausius-Clapeyron equation.) And, of course, increasing that saturation pressure means that more water vapor can stay in the atmosphere without precipitating out. And water vapor in the atmosphere absorbs thermal radiation, i.e., acts as a greenhouse gas, causing further temperature increase. So you end up with hotter moister air than you would have had just from the initial temperature increase alone.
Well I think he would prefer to spend his time pretending to be morally and intellectually superior. As opposed to actually thinking critically.
On a side note, if anyone was curious, the recent snowfall in Atlanta doesn’t crack the top 10 in the past 65 years.
…said the racist crazy person.
I would advise all the fuckhead trolls, who only post insults, that "the Pit is NOT a free-for-all - you don’t have to be nice, but you do have to be reasonably civil. "
If you only drop in to post insulting idiocy, and have nothing to add, much less anything to say, then you are violating the spirit of the place.
Ah, Junior Modding. Not too surprised you’d go there, really. Per the well-known 2001 case of Pot v. Kettle, accusing others of trolling is the “last resort of the skilled troll.”
I challenge you to support your position that MrDibble was posting “solely to get a rise out of” brazil.
Quick, tell me the rules about junior modding next, oh wise one!
brazil is provably a racist and a crazy person, as shown by his postings on race-related topics and his crazy personal “ignore list”. Which speaks to his grasp of science, as well. He understands genetics about as well as he understands thermodynamics i.e not at all.
If you don’t like the company your own anti-science lunacy forces you to keep, well, tough shit. There you are, in the ball pit with the other crazies. Try not to get too much drool in there.
Now now, GIGO might be dumber than a rock, but he isn’t really anti-science or a lunatic. OK he might be a lunatic, but he is, in his heart, a scientific person.
I find a gentle reminder of the posted rules more civil than hitting the report button. I always feel like a goddamn narc if I report anything.
So FX is not just an anti-science lunatic, but thinks “I know you are, but what am I?” is the most sophisticated of comedy? That …well, that seems about right, actually.