Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Trevor Wilson Newsgroups: sci.physics,talk.politics.guns Subject: Re: Climate Change causing eruptions in Hawaii Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 10:55:48 +1000 Lines: 259 Message-ID: References: <7n0hfdhuu2loauffdppim28s9tefkhkukk@4ax.com> <59ikfdpddkgi84n93f49cubugk8dag5jkp@4ax.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net SEwD/FKOYyRP+Ss0za60pgT6Vrp73guonGHQRYBVfyDPhuxSk2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:Nhj5SBN7jwoVTbu5BZ/Bct8Pjo8= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 180517-0, 17/05/2018), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Xref: csiph.com sci.physics:686061 talk.politics.guns:1086530 On 18/05/2018 10:06 AM, Scout wrote: > > > "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message > news:fm6a70FrrcmU1@mid.individual.net... >> On 17/05/2018 4:59 PM, Scout wrote: >>> >>> >>> "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message >>> news:fm3jl6F9f9aU1@mid.individual.net... >>>> On 16/05/2018 11:58 AM, Scout wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message >>>>> news:fm18loFo1suU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>> On 15/05/2018 11:58 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/15/2018 2:47 AM, Scout wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" wrote in >>>>>>>> message news:flvcveFb1hcU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>> On 15/05/2018 4:08 PM, Scout wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" wrote in >>>>>>>>>> message news:flvak3Fai9hU1@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>> On 15/05/2018 2:50 PM, Wally W. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 15 May 2018 13:50:49 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 15/05/2018 12:46 PM, Wally W. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 15 May 2018 11:45:49 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 15/05/2018 11:17 AM, Scout wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" wrote >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:flrob5FhajbU2@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 14/05/2018 4:28 AM, Wally W. wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 14 May 2018 04:20:55 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 13/05/2018 3:53 PM, Sergio wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/13/2018 12:18 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 13/05/2018 2:56 PM, Libor Striz wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sergio Wrote in message: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/12/2018 8:23 PM, benj wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> With Hawaii half underwater from rising sea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> levels, a new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> threat has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emerged with Global Warming creating volcanic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eruptions that are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engulfing the Big Island and have residents >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running for their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lives! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Whole neighborhoods have been eaten alive but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still nobody takes >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> climate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change seriously! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/category/326542/climate-change-in-hawaii >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that pesky 0.1 C temperature rise from 1920 to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2018 has caused >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [.....] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> US has its anti climate change  trolls as Russia >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has its political >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>       ones. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> **With one, major, difference. The Russians are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> very clever. The US >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trolls,....not so much. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> russian trolls get payed, not much, but you can buy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> food with it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> US trolls are NSA and CIA and FBI >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> **You work for the NSA, CIA or FBI? I call bullshit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Somewhere, the logic train went off the track. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> **Nope. Segio is a troll. Sergio claimed that trolls >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worked for NSA, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CIA or FBI. I call bullshit on that. Sergio is a moron. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I doubt that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those organisations employ morons like Sergio. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Poutnik said something about "anti climate change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trolls," possibly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implying that alarmist climate-FUD trolls are okay. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then Sergio generalized about US trolls. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> **Sergio is a US troll. The link has been made. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then you jumped to reaction of some kind. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It isn't usual for an alarmist's logic train to go off >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the track. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> **Since Sergio is a troll and he claimed that US trolls >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are employed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by NSA, CIA or FBI, it is reasonable to assume that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sergio is employed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by one of these organisations. I call bullshit, because >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sergio is stupid. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I call bullshit on your unsupported and unproven >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assumption..... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> **As is your right to do so. Sergio made the insane >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> claim. I merely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> carried it to its logical conclusion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now, to drag it back onto topic: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you think global warming is occurring? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you think it is a potential problem? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Potential* problem, or "the single biggest threat to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> life, security >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and prosperity on Earth?" >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> **It is a problem right now, for various places and peoples >>>>>>>>>>>>> on the >>>>>>>>>>>>> planet, along with various critters and flora. In the >>>>>>>>>>>>> future, it >>>>>>>>>>>>> promises to be a MUCH bigger problem. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Yep ... come the [next] tipping point. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> **What "next" tipping point would that be? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The general consensus is that the 'tipping point' will occur >>>>>>>>>>> at approximately 500ppm of CO2 concentration. We presently at >>>>>>>>>>> a little over 410ppm. That said, a minority of climatologists >>>>>>>>>>> believe we have already passed the tipping point. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> really? I remember when it was 350...and then later 400.... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> **Cite where you saw such a thing. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sorry, but I'm not here to try and solve your ignorance. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Until we can watch that tipping point come and go without >>>>>>>>>>>> consequence >>>>>>>>>>>> (like all the others before it), there are bigger fish to fry. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> **Well, if the predictions about the tipping point are >>>>>>>>>>> correct, there won't be any fish left to fry. So to speak. >>>>>>>>>>> What "bigger fish" are you referring to? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Well, if that's the tipping point there is NOTHING man can do >>>>>>>>>> to stop it or prevent it. our sum total amounts to a fraction >>>>>>>>>> of one percent of that released from natural processes. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> **Approximately 440 X 10^9 Tonnes of CO2 is produced by natural >>>>>>>>> processes. Humans are responsible for another 40 X 10^9 Tonnes. >>>>>>>>> That's around 9%. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> CO2 makes around 0.039% of the atmosphere >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What's 9% of 0.039%? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So, 0.00351% of all Green House Gases are from man's release of >>>>>>>> CO2. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yep, I can certainly see where man is in control of Earth's >>>>>>>> climate......  N O T >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So, now I have corrected your misconception, what do you have >>>>>>>>> to say? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You're still ignorant, but maybe you just learned something? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And again, you are WAY out of your depth in this discussion. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yea. 0.00351% is certainly out of my depth. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Your knowledge of AGW theory is severely and chronically lacking. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Oh, so now you want to talk THEORIES....well I can make guesses >>>>>>>> as well. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> How about, the Earth has been subject to regular cycles of >>>>>>>> global warming and cooling. An Ice Age is denoted as an extended >>>>>>>> period of extensive global cooling. An interglacial period is an >>>>>>>> period between Ice Ages denoted by an extended period of >>>>>>>> extensive global warming. These have occurred multiple times >>>>>>>> before man was even an actor on the stage and operate via >>>>>>>> natural processes neither caused by man nor involving man. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> My theory is that in an interglacial period we can expect to >>>>>>>> see........wait for it.....GLOBAL WARMING which is a normal and >>>>>>>> natural process of the global climate of the planet. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> How's that for a THEORY for you? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Which, of course, begs the question: Why are you so certain >>>>>>>>> there is no problem, if you are so ignorant of the facts? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I would ask you the same question. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Wait a minute, Scout. One can't tax normal and natural processes! >>>>>>> So that means that Trevor must call you ignorant and stupid! OK? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> **That you failed to spot Scout's basic mistake in his >>>>>> calculations is not surprising. You are, after all, a stupid, >>>>>> yappy lap-dog. >>>>> >>>>> Doesn't really matter. It's still an all but insignificant percentage. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> **Ah, here we finally arrive at the real problem. You appear to >>>> think that, just because CO2 represents a minute fraction of the >>>> atmospheric gases, that it's effect is similarly minute. That is a >>>> really, REALLY dumb mistake. >>> >>> Compared to the sum total of the naturally occurring green house gas >>> emissions, it is a minuscule portion of the total. >> >> **Wrong. Humans are responsible for around 9% of all CO2 emissions. 9% >> is significant. >> >>> >>> But somehow that all but insignificant result is somehow enough to >>> drive the climate for the entire planet. >> >> **Well, yes, it is. > > Sorry, I thought you said you weren't an expert. > > So what exactly is your expertise to make such an assertion? **I've read the premier scientific documents about the theory. Have you? -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au