Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #585966

Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Followups directed to: sci.misc

Show all headers | View raw

Wally W.  wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 15:43:34 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Wally W.  wrote:
>>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:56:52 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>>> Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. wrote:
>>>>> [?]  Are you one of the nut cases who believes the propaganda
>>>>> that CO2 rises first and then temperature rises because of it?
>>>>> 
>>>>> If you are then you are misinformed because that's not what
>>>>> happens. Ice core samples prove that FIRST the temperature
>>>>> increases and then it is FOLLOWED by increased levels of
>>>>> atmospheric CO2.
>>>>That is an extraordinary claim.
>>> How so?
>> There has to be a reason why the atmospheric temperature rises.
> 
> Why does there have to be **a** reason?
> 
> Why can't there be more than one?

You have yet to come up with one.
 
>> So, what do you think is the reason?  Denial is not enough in science;
>> you have to come with a *sound* *alternative* theory in order to be taken
>> seriously.
> 
> Only if the theory spewed by the media is credible.

It is _not_ such a theory, and it has been confirmed by observation.
  
>>> It is merely contrary to a greenie mantra.
>>
>>No, it is an unfounded assertion based on spurious interpretation of
>>incomplete data, as is shown below.
> 
> Where was the interpretation shown to be spurious?

The argument was made by the proponent that it would not matter that the 
rise in CO₂ follows the rise in temperature based on a graph that featured 
no CO₂ data back to where the temperature data started.  Also, the graphs 
conveniently ended long before the rise of the Homo sapiens.
  
>>> And it is a fact.
>> Cite evidence.
> 
> Already done. You didn't like it.

No, I did not take it seriously because the facts were bent to fit the 
theory.  Big difference.
  
>>>> Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evivence.  Cite that
>>>> evidence.
> 
> Your claim that it is an **extraordinary** claim seems to be tinged by
> an agenda.

Not at all.  The physics of the greenhouse effect is well understood by now.

> Wiki is **so** nuetral on the topic of "climate change," isn't it?
> /sarc

The unfounded opinion of a few science cranks does not change the 
observations.
 
>> The greenhouse effect is a scientific *fact* (most prominently observed 
>> on Venus, and the opposite of it on Mars) not disputed even by those who
>> deny global warming: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect>
> 
> Most of the elevated temperature on Venus is due to the high
> atmospheric pressure.

No, it is not.

> See "adiabatic compression."

Fallacy.  Venus is not an isolated system.

> Mars has 95 CO2.

Mars’ *atmosphere* is composed of ca. _96_ % _CO₂_.

> Why isn't it hot there?

I give you a hint: Humans need a *spacesuit* to survive on Mars.  Why?
 
>>>> F'up2 sci.physics
>>> Global warming bullshit is not physics. It is propaganda.
>> Spoken like a true propagandist and Usenet troll; not like a scientist.
> 
> And you are?

I am not a person who claims other people’s opinions are “bullshit”.
I am not a person who continues to crosspost across alt.ALL and the Big 8 
*without* Followup-to despite F'up2 being set.
 
>> Of the newsgroups crossposted to, sci.physics is the most fitting one in
>> the Big 8 (I do not read alt.ALL if I can avoid it).  Actually, though,
>> this belongs in sci.geo.ALL; unfortunately, that hierarchy does not have 
>> a .misc; that leaves only sci.misc.
>>
>> BTW, your newsreader is either misconfigured or broken.  There was a
>> properly encoded subscript 2 (for “CO?”) in the Subject header field
>> value and your newsreader mangled it.  I have restored it now; please
>> do not mangle it again.
> 
> My newsreader was chosen for my convenience.

So, to you, your needs are more important than those of the rest of the 
world.  That is *precisely* the kind of irresponsible behavior that has 
brought this planet to this state.
 
> Not everyone is a coding purist.

This has nothing to do with coding; it has to do with your violating network 
standards, and making discussions harder for everyone else, by using broken 
software (despite being notified of that).

F'up2 sci.misc

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Uh-oh, spaghettio kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:19 -0400
  Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2016-06-18 12:57 -0400
    Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2016-06-18 17:58 +0000
      Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-18 14:15 -0400
      Leave It To a Denierrrrr... AlleyCat <al@aohell.com> - 2016-06-18 17:01 -0500
      Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-06-20 11:23 -0500
    Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2016-06-18 19:34 +0000
    Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂ (was: Uh-oh, spaghettio) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-06-20 10:57 +0200
      Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂ Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-06-20 10:49 -0500
    Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO? (was: Uh-oh, spaghettio) Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-20 08:46 -0400
      Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-06-20 15:43 +0200
        Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO? Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-20 20:41 -0400
        Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO? Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-06-20 20:53 -0400
          Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-06-21 11:25 +0200
    Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO2 (was: Uh-oh, spaghettio) AlleyCat <al@aohell.com> - 2016-06-20 16:51 -0500
      Re: Greenhouse effect: Influence of atmospheric CO₂ Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-06-21 00:57 +0200
  Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio "Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, DoW #1" <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-06-19 06:46 +0200
    Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2016-06-19 20:47 +0000
      Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio "Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, DoW #1" <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-06-20 07:07 +0200
        Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2016-06-21 01:22 +0000
          Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio "Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, DoW #1" <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-06-21 05:37 +0200
            Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2016-06-21 20:51 +0000
              Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio "Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, DoW #1" <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-06-22 05:35 +0200
              Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-06-22 06:40 -0400
  Re: Uh-oh, spaghettio Boris Mohar <borism_void_@sympatico.ca> - 2016-06-21 06:05 -0400

csiph-web