|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 20, 2024 19:01:21 GMT
I most certainly did not make any such claim. I know very well what the Milankovitch cycles are, their speed of change is measured in Eons not decades. Further Milankovitch cycles are not caused by the sun as you ignorantly claim here. They are caused by earths tilt and orbit. Global warming is nothing to do with the sun which has not changed in the last decade. For clarity (Because you're all over the place) Virtually all warming on the earth is caused by the sun, global warming is about the amount of heat that escapes the atmosphere. Sorry where are the words Milankovitch cycles in that sentence? But I stand by those words. There is a strong correllation between Co2 levels and increased global temperatures. Milinokovitch cycles may well have contributed to historic temperature rises. They are not responsible for current ones. Yes in that case. If an outside source (getting nearer the sun) (Tilting the northern hemisphere etc) causes the earth to warm then co2 previously trapped in ice and soil can be released following the heating instead of leading it. That Co2 then increases warming further. What has that got to do with the current warming? Its miles ahead of yours. Again, do you deny that Co2 is a greenhouse gas. Please answer so we can move on. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 20, 2024 23:17:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 21, 2024 7:54:56 GMT
Sorry where are the words Milankovitch cycles in that sentence? But I stand by those words. There is a strong correllation between Co2 levels and increased global temperatures. Milinokovitch cycles may well have contributed to historic temperature rises. They are not responsible for current ones. Yes in that case. If an outside source (getting nearer the sun) (Tilting the northern hemisphere etc) causes the earth to warm then co2 previously trapped in ice and soil can be released following the heating instead of leading it. That Co2 then increases warming further. What has that got to do with the current warming? Its miles ahead of yours. Again, do you deny that Co2 is a greenhouse gas. Please answer so we can move on. There is SOMETIMES a correlation between CO2 concentrations and temperature. But to prove your theory (that CO2 causes that warming) you have to show causation too. As always Correlation AND causation is needed. The example of the Vostok ice cores is a good one because we've got a very simple system with the Sun and CO2 and we can see the temperature fluctuating as the two vary. However the CO2 is a passive partner here. The Sun does the warming and, because of this warming, CO2 comes out of solution in the ocean. The CO2 plays no part in the warming. This is a nice example because it's a situation (on Earth) where there are very few factors at play. It's a "control" experiment. The trouble with attempting to deal with the average global temperature is that you bring all the hundreds of factors on Earth into play. In this case unless you can evaluate the separate contribution of each factor it's very difficult to draw any conclusions about the individual attribution of each factor. That's why scientists always try to find simple systems. And here we have shown that CO2 doesn't cause warming - it simply follows the temperature. Is this simple enough? |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 21, 2024 17:13:51 GMT
There is SOMETIMES a correlation between CO2 concentrations and temperature. But to prove your theory (that CO2 causes that warming) you have to show causation too. As always Correlation AND causation is needed. The example of the Vostok ice cores is a good one because we've got a very simple system with the Sun and CO2 and we can see the temperature fluctuating as the two vary. However the CO2 is a passive partner here. The Sun does the warming and, because of this warming, CO2 comes out of solution in the ocean. The CO2 plays no part in the warming. This is a nice example because it's a situation (on Earth) where there are very few factors at play. It's a "control" experiment. The trouble with attempting to deal with the average global temperature is that you bring all the hundreds of factors on Earth into play. In this case unless you can evaluate the separate contribution of each factor it's very difficult to draw any conclusions about the individual attribution of each factor. That's why scientists always try to find simple systems. And here we have shown that CO2 doesn't cause warming - it simply follows the temperature. Is this simple enough? We already agreed that Co2 causes warming, we know that Co2 alongside other gases keep a percentage of the suns heat in the immediate atmosphere and that for hundreds of thousands of years that balance has kept Earths average temperature at 16 degrees. So we KNOW Co2 causes warming, its a fact. (Causation) Correlation in this case is just the observation of that fact. We see Co2 increase, we see temperature increase, we know Co2 traps heat in the atmosphere. It doesn't matter that there are other factors effecting the amount of warming to some small degree, none of that changes the principle. But more importantly all those effects are tiny compared to the trillions of joules needed to raise earths temperature by 1.5 degrees, they are so tiny they can be ignored. Finally, your argument that unless you can identify every component no matter how small and give it a value that you cannot prove the case is ridiculous and no scientist ever does that. You can happily say brakes stop a vehicle without having to prove there are no other tiny influences involved. That's because the overriding factor is the brakes and even though the passengers leaning forward may have had an effect on the vehicles speed its still the brakes that did the stopping. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 22, 2024 4:16:03 GMT
Battle for Growth and Ecology - Future of Tesla's Gigafactory in Limbo as Grünheide Votes 'No'"..... The future of the Tesla Gigafactory expansion in Grünheide is in limbo after citizens voted predominantly against its expansion in a public survey. This event represents a potentially pivotal moment for the further development of the factory and the region. The residents of Grünheide have cast their votes and spoken out against the expansion plans of the American electric car manufacturer Tesla. Of the total of 7,600 eligible voters, 3,499 voted against an extension of the factory premises, while 1,882 supported the project. The high voter turnout of over 70 percent underscores the relevance of the issue to the community.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 22, 2024 7:49:28 GMT
Seems to be some crackpot environmental group going around Germany setting fire to tesla's. I could understand it if they were targeting Chinese cars but they look to be leaving them alone..
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 22, 2024 8:26:12 GMT
There is SOMETIMES a correlation between CO2 concentrations and temperature. But to prove your theory (that CO2 causes that warming) you have to show causation too. As always Correlation AND causation is needed. The example of the Vostok ice cores is a good one because we've got a very simple system with the Sun and CO2 and we can see the temperature fluctuating as the two vary. However the CO2 is a passive partner here. The Sun does the warming and, because of this warming, CO2 comes out of solution in the ocean. The CO2 plays no part in the warming. This is a nice example because it's a situation (on Earth) where there are very few factors at play. It's a "control" experiment. The trouble with attempting to deal with the average global temperature is that you bring all the hundreds of factors on Earth into play. In this case unless you can evaluate the separate contribution of each factor it's very difficult to draw any conclusions about the individual attribution of each factor. That's why scientists always try to find simple systems. And here we have shown that CO2 doesn't cause warming - it simply follows the temperature. Is this simple enough? we know that Co2 alongside other gases keep a percentage of the suns heat in the immediate atmosphere and that for hundreds of thousands of years that balance has kept Earths average temperature at 16 degrees. So we KNOW Co2 causes warming, its a fact. (Causation) Correlation in this case is just the observation of that fact. We see Co2 increase, we see temperature increase, we know Co2 traps heat in the atmosphere. It doesn't matter that there are other factors effecting the amount of warming to some small degree, none of that changes the principle. But more importantly all those effects are tiny compared to the trillions of joules needed to raise earths temperature by 1.5 degrees, they are so tiny they can be ignored. Finally, your argument that unless you can identify every component no matter how small and give it a value that you cannot prove the case is ridiculous and no scientist ever does that. You can happily say brakes stop a vehicle without having to prove there are no other tiny influences involved. That's because the overriding factor is the brakes and even though the passengers leaning forward may have had an effect on the vehicles speed its still the brakes that did the stopping. The bit I put in bold is the only correct bit. However we also know that CO2 causes cooling. We don't know which is greater - unless you can provide empirical evidence or data that covers this. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 22, 2024 19:08:17 GMT
We already agreed that Co2 causes warming, we know that Co2 alongside other gases keep a percentage of the suns heat in the immediate atmosphere and that for hundreds of thousands of years that balance has kept Earths average temperature at 16 degrees. So we KNOW Co2 causes warming, its a fact. (Causation) Correlation in this case is just the observation of that fact. We see Co2 increase, we see temperature increase, we know Co2 traps heat in the atmosphere. It doesn't matter that there are other factors effecting the amount of warming to some small degree, none of that changes the principle. But more importantly all those effects are tiny compared to the trillions of joules needed to raise earths temperature by 1.5 degrees, they are so tiny they can be ignored. Finally, your argument that unless you can identify every component no matter how small and give it a value that you cannot prove the case is ridiculous and no scientist ever does that. You can happily say brakes stop a vehicle without having to prove there are no other tiny influences involved. That's because the overriding factor is the brakes and even though the passengers leaning forward may have had an effect on the vehicles speed its still the brakes that did the stopping. The bit I put in bold is the only correct bit. However we also know that CO2 causes cooling. We don't know which is greater - unless you can provide empirical evidence or data that covers this. Its getting warmer. Enough now. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 22, 2024 19:11:25 GMT
The bit I put in bold is the only correct bit. However we also know that CO2 causes cooling. We don't know which is greater - unless you can provide empirical evidence or data that covers this. Its getting warmer. Enough now. Its fucking pissing down here and has been for the last couple of days... |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 22, 2024 19:40:10 GMT
Its getting warmer. Enough now. Its fucking pissing down here and has been for the last couple of days... Yes that comes with getting warmer. Look up monsoon. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 22, 2024 19:43:07 GMT
Its fucking pissing down here and has been for the last couple of days... Yes that comes with getting warmer. Look up monsoon. Total bollocks...It means winter FFS... |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 22, 2024 20:14:22 GMT
Yes that comes with getting warmer. Look up monsoon. Total bollocks...It means winter FFS... Warmer air means more moisture= rain. Heavy rains and storm conditions across the region this month are leading experts to believe it could be in with a strong chance of beating records that date back to 1836. Dan Holley, a meteorologist and weather forecaster for the eastern regions, said: "February is, climatologically, our third driest month of the year with on average 43mm of rain. However, we've received nearly twice the average amount of rain so far, with still another 10 days to go. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 22, 2024 20:20:50 GMT
Total bollocks...It means winter FFS... Warmer air means more moisture= rain. Heavy rains and storm conditions across the region this month are leading experts to believe it could be in with a strong chance of beating records that date back to 1836. Dan Holley, a meteorologist and weather forecaster for the eastern regions, said: "February is, climatologically, our third driest month of the year with on average 43mm of rain. However, we've received nearly twice the average amount of rain so far, with still another 10 days to go. Have you ever been in a monsoon zany where the rain turns to steam in the hot jungle? Its pissing down here and at the moment we are hovering around the 6 degree mark...There is no comparison... |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 22, 2024 20:36:47 GMT
Warmer air means more moisture= rain. Heavy rains and storm conditions across the region this month are leading experts to believe it could be in with a strong chance of beating records that date back to 1836. Dan Holley, a meteorologist and weather forecaster for the eastern regions, said: "February is, climatologically, our third driest month of the year with on average 43mm of rain. However, we've received nearly twice the average amount of rain so far, with still another 10 days to go. Have you ever been in a monsoon zany where the rain turns to steam in the hot jungle? Its pissing down here and at the moment we are hovering around the 6 degree mark...There is no comparison... Yes warmer air more moisture= more rain. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 22, 2024 20:46:40 GMT
Have you ever been in a monsoon zany where the rain turns to steam in the hot jungle? Its pissing down here and at the moment we are hovering around the 6 degree mark...There is no comparison... Yes warmer air more moisture= more rain. I am not getting dragged into yet another of your prolonged rants on a subject you know jack shit about zany..Do your trolling elsewhere...And stick to the subject.. |
|
