|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 13, 2024 7:58:14 GMT
Sandy Pine quotes from a letter to the IPCC about various errors in their AR6 report:
"We regrettably conclude that the IPCC has failed to follow this advice and the AR6 exhibits the same flaws as before, namely biased selection of evidence, failure to reflect genuine controversies and failure to give due consideration to properly documented alternative views."
But isn't this exactly what the IPCC deliberately does? The IPCC isn't a scientific organisation that's looking for the "Truth" by analysing all research and coming to a reasoned judgement. The IPCC's remit is to promote a consistent story to governments to make policy - govts don't want "alternative" views - they just want the same settled view. And the IPCC's settled view is that the world is warming and the cause of the warming is CO2. Any evidence that this is not true (of which there is much) is ignored. Deliberately.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 13, 2024 8:01:33 GMT
Its circular. Co2 causes warming. Warming can release captured Co2 held in soil and ice. Educate yourself. You need to educate yourself zany. CO2 causes warming via the greenhouse effect but it also causes cooling because it promotes photosynthesis in plants (where plants absorb the Sun's energy to create sugars - the precursor of oil). Which effect is larger is dependent on many factors, but the fact that no one has managed to empirically demonstrate CO2 warming on Earth (except in conditions like deserts) indicates strongly that the cooling effect of CO2 is (at least) of the same order as the greenhouse effect. See what I mean about stuck record. We discussed this at length. THe Photosynthesis effect does not negate the warming effect on planet earth. THe earth is warming. And its due to Co2 concentrations. You endlessly copy pasting from a clickbait blog will not change that. Its why I wont engage with you. You just go away forget what was said and start the record over again. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 13, 2024 8:08:32 GMT
You need to educate yourself zany. CO2 causes warming via the greenhouse effect but it also causes cooling because it promotes photosynthesis in plants (where plants absorb the Sun's energy to create sugars - the precursor of oil). Which effect is larger is dependent on many factors, but the fact that no one has managed to empirically demonstrate CO2 warming on Earth (except in conditions like deserts) indicates strongly that the cooling effect of CO2 is (at least) of the same order as the greenhouse effect. See what I mean about stuck record. We discussed this at length. THe Photosynthesis effect does not negate the warming effect on planet earth. THe earth is warming. And its due to Co2 concentrations. You endlessly copy pasting from a clickbait blog will not change that. Its why I wont engage with you. You just go away forget what was said and start the record over again. Where is the research that indicates that is the case that Earth is warming due to CO2 concentrations? It is oft quoted as a conclusion, as you do here every chance you get, but like all scientific investigations the whole panoply of information and theories is subject to some form of verification and unfortunately much of the raw data does not stand up well and this seriously affects the theories and thus the conclusions. |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 13, 2024 8:14:04 GMT
You need to educate yourself zany. CO2 causes warming via the greenhouse effect but it also causes cooling because it promotes photosynthesis in plants (where plants absorb the Sun's energy to create sugars - the precursor of oil). Which effect is larger is dependent on many factors, but the fact that no one has managed to empirically demonstrate CO2 warming on Earth (except in conditions like deserts) indicates strongly that the cooling effect of CO2 is (at least) of the same order as the greenhouse effect. See what I mean about stuck record. We discussed this at length. THe Photosynthesis effect does not negate the warming effect on planet earth. THe earth is warming. And its due to Co2 concentrations. You endlessly copy pasting from a clickbait blog will not change that. Its why I wont engage with you. You just go away forget what was said and start the record over again. It's called science zany. You have to find empirical evidence to support your theories. So where's your evidence that CO2 is is the (main) cause of warming? Attempts to demonstrate this warming on Earth have failed to show it - and you can find very similar warming periods (Early Twentieth Century Warm period) in our history which occurred with NO increase in CO2. I'm not looking at clickbait blogs - I'm reading stuff by bona fide scientists - NOT stuff by the IPCC which is NOT a scientific organisation and does NO research.. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 13, 2024 8:17:17 GMT
See what I mean about stuck record. We discussed this at length. THe Photosynthesis effect does not negate the warming effect on planet earth. THe earth is warming. And its due to Co2 concentrations. You endlessly copy pasting from a clickbait blog will not change that. Its why I wont engage with you. You just go away forget what was said and start the record over again. Where is the research that indicates that is the case that Earth is warming due to CO2 concentrations? It is oft quoted as a conclusion, as you do here every chance you get, but like all scientific investigations the whole panoply of information and theories is subject to some form of verification and unfortunately much of the raw data does not stand up well and this seriously affects the theories and thus the conclusions. Are you really saying you are interested in this subject but can find no evidence of the link between Co2 and global temperature? That's truly shocking. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 13, 2024 8:19:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 13, 2024 8:22:29 GMT
Where is the research that indicates that is the case that Earth is warming due to CO2 concentrations? It is oft quoted as a conclusion, as you do here every chance you get, but like all scientific investigations the whole panoply of information and theories is subject to some form of verification and unfortunately much of the raw data does not stand up well and this seriously affects the theories and thus the conclusions. Are you really saying you are interested in this subject but can find no evidence of the link between Co2 and global temperature? That's truly shocking. There is a difference between a 'link' and what you said which was that the earth is warming due to CO2 concentrations. The earth is warming, agreed. To what level and why are uncertain at best with a multitude of factors having an input. CO2 is a factor it is not by any means shown to be the cause. |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 13, 2024 8:35:38 GMT
You're very confused zany. You just don't even begin to understand this subject. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 13, 2024 8:39:24 GMT
Are you really saying you are interested in this subject but can find no evidence of the link between Co2 and global temperature? That's truly shocking. There is a difference between a 'link' and what you said which was that the earth is warming due to CO2 concentrations. The earth is warming, agreed. To what level and why are uncertain at best with a multitude of factors having an input. CO2 is a factor it is not by any means shown to be the cause. Its logical. If you agree greenhouse gasses maintain Earths temperature. Then more greenhouse gas means higher temperature, less means lower temperature. Further: Correllation supports this. We are seeing increased Co2 concentrations and we are seeing increasing temperatures. Further: There are no other shown causes that could come close to the amount of energy needed to causes the energy increases we are seeing. Your argument of "Prove it" is a lie for the deniers to cling to. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 13, 2024 8:39:49 GMT
You're very confused zany. You just don't even begin to understand this subject. And that's your only rebuttal. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 13, 2024 8:48:14 GMT
There is a difference between a 'link' and what you said which was that the earth is warming due to CO2 concentrations. The earth is warming, agreed. To what level and why are uncertain at best with a multitude of factors having an input. CO2 is a factor it is not by any means shown to be the cause. Its logical. If you agree greenhouse gasses maintain Earths temperature. Then more greenhouse gas means higher temperature, less means lower temperature. Further: Correllation supports this. We are seeing increased Co2 concentrations and we are seeing increasing temperatures. Further: There are no other shown causes that could come close to the amount of energy needed to causes the energy increases we are seeing. Your argument of "Prove it" is a lie for the deniers to cling to. I did not say 'prove it' I asked for the evidence as regards your clear statement that earth was warming due to CO2 concentrations. There are co-relations of all sorts of things in the atmosphere and effects as regards sunlight, gases, energy, air movement, volcanic activity, cloud cover, heat exchange, ocean currents etc but you are adamant that CO2 is rising and the temperature is rising and the two are directly related in a cause and effect specifically as regards the earth. |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 13, 2024 9:07:36 GMT
There is a difference between a 'link' and what you said which was that the earth is warming due to CO2 concentrations. The earth is warming, agreed. To what level and why are uncertain at best with a multitude of factors having an input. CO2 is a factor it is not by any means shown to be the cause. Its logical. If you agree greenhouse gasses maintain Earths temperature. Then more greenhouse gas means higher temperature, less means lower temperature. Further: Correllation supports this. We are seeing increased Co2 concentrations and we are seeing increasing temperatures. Further: There are no other shown causes that could come close to the amount of energy needed to causes the energy increases we are seeing. This reply is just ridiculous. If anyone needed any more proof that you have no understanding of science this is it. Correlation supports nothing. And the Sun produces ALL of the energy on the planet. The most likely source of warming is the Sun and there are many scientists who believe this is the case - not CO2. Etc. I despair of you zany. After all the debate you seem to have not only learned nothing - you seem to understand even less than you did at the beginning. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 13, 2024 16:29:43 GMT
Its logical. If you agree greenhouse gasses maintain Earths temperature. Then more greenhouse gas means higher temperature, less means lower temperature. Further: Correllation supports this. We are seeing increased Co2 concentrations and we are seeing increasing temperatures. Further: There are no other shown causes that could come close to the amount of energy needed to causes the energy increases we are seeing. Your argument of "Prove it" is a lie for the deniers to cling to. I did not say 'prove it' I asked for the evidence as regards your clear statement that earth was warming due to CO2 concentrations. There are co-relations of all sorts of things in the atmosphere and effects as regards sunlight, gases, energy, air movement, volcanic activity, cloud cover, heat exchange, ocean currents etc but you are adamant that CO2 is rising and the temperature is rising and the two are directly related in a cause and effect specifically as regards the earth. The things you list have all been looked at. Increased Co2 is the only one capable of delivering the 7,516,500,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 joules of energy needed to heat the whole planet 1.5 degrees. Much of the things you list involve Co2 increases Cloud cover, heat exchange are results of warming not causes. Ocean currents can move heat but don't create global increases in temperature. Volcanic activity, not enough. Sunlight the same, in fact slightly less as we are in a solar maunder. You missed alien death rays. Tarmac. Urban sprawl . |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 13, 2024 16:35:19 GMT
Its logical. If you agree greenhouse gasses maintain Earths temperature. Then more greenhouse gas means higher temperature, less means lower temperature. Further: Correllation supports this. We are seeing increased Co2 concentrations and we are seeing increasing temperatures. Further: There are no other shown causes that could come close to the amount of energy needed to causes the energy increases we are seeing. This reply is just ridiculous. If anyone needed any more proof that you have no understanding of science this is it. Correlation supports nothing. And the Sun produces ALL of the energy on the planet. The most likely source of warming is the Sun and there are many scientists who believe this is the case - not CO2. Etc. I despair of you zany. After all the debate you seem to have not only learned nothing - you seem to understand even less than you did at the beginning. You despair of me. Jeez. Ofcourse the heat comes from the sun. But the heat from the sun hitting earth has not increased. So what's causing the heat is the change in the amount leaving the earth after reaching it. That you think its possible that the sun has got hotter or nearer the earth without anyone noticing is staggering in its ignorance. The Milankovitch cycles are very well known and mapped. Please up your game, this is embarrassing. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 13, 2024 21:19:30 GMT
This reply is just ridiculous. If anyone needed any more proof that you have no understanding of science this is it. Correlation supports nothing. And the Sun produces ALL of the energy on the planet. The most likely source of warming is the Sun and there are many scientists who believe this is the case - not CO2. Etc. I despair of you zany. After all the debate you seem to have not only learned nothing - you seem to understand even less than you did at the beginning. You despair of me. Jeez. Ofcourse the heat comes from the sun. But the heat from the sun hitting earth has not increased. So what's causing the heat is the change in the amount leaving the earth after reaching it. That you think its possible that the sun has got hotter or nearer the earth without anyone noticing is staggering in its ignorance. The Milankovitch cycles are very well known and mapped. Please up your game, this is embarrassing. The sunlight arriving at earth has not changed much but is variable within certain parameters. How that sunlight warms the earth and how the earth keeps or emits that heat is of course a very complex series of events with numerous factors affecting it with variable effects as regards the temperature of the world. |
|
