| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Moloth
Coin Operated Boy
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 22713
Local time: 9:44 AM
Location: Warner Robins, GA
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 3:48 pm Post subject: |
  |
|
we had tons of coal smoke..
_________________
-=The Believer is Happy; the Skeptic is Wise=-
www.Moloth.com
Last edited by Moloth on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
gnosis
Forum Leader
Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 1921
Local time: 9:44 AM
Location: California
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Actually, there is some evidence that climate change began far before that. Clear cutting of forests has a huge impact on the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, not only are you eliminating a plant that processes the gas and turns it into oxygen, the decomposing or burning of the wood contributes even more.
We've been clear cutting forests for a long time, long before 1934...
Carbon Dioxide is the main greenhouse gas, not CFCs. I think methane is a close second, but I'm not certain. CFC's are responsible for Ozone Depletion , which causes an increase in the amount of UV radiation which reaches the planet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Knight_of_BAAWA
Jedi Slackmaster
Joined: 08 Mar 2003
Posts: 9658
Local time: 9:44 AM
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ozone depletion causes atmospheric warming/radiative forcing.
_________________
aa #51, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moloth
Coin Operated Boy
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 22713
Local time: 9:44 AM
Location: Warner Robins, GA
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Knight_of_BAAWA wrote: | | Ozone depletion causes atmospheric warming/radiative forcing. |
true, but is that the ONLY thing?
_________________
-=The Believer is Happy; the Skeptic is Wise=-
www.Moloth.com
Last edited by Moloth on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gnosis
Forum Leader
Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 1921
Local time: 9:44 AM
Location: California
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Knight_of_BAAWA wrote: | | Ozone depletion causes atmospheric warming/radiative forcing. |
"The long-wave effects, after adjustment of the stratospheric temperatures to the imposed perturbation, overwhelm the solar effect i.e., the negative long-wave forcing prevails over the positive solar to lead to a net negative radiative forcing of the surface-troposphere system (IPCC, 1992)"
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/223.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Knight_of_BAAWA
Jedi Slackmaster
Joined: 08 Mar 2003
Posts: 9658
Local time: 9:44 AM
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nice how that agrees with what I wrote.
_________________
aa #51, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sal1981
Do you hear me now?
Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 2798
Local time: 2:44 PM
Location: Behind the computer
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I like where this is going.
And I'm not being sarcastic.
_________________
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool" --- Richard P. Feynman
"Why not just make your null hypothesis be that..." - Philosophos |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gnosis
Forum Leader
Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 1921
Local time: 9:44 AM
Location: California
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Knight_of_BAAWA wrote: | | Nice how that agrees with what I wrote. |
With the radiative forcing part, yes. Atmospheric warming, no.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_depletion#Ozone_depletion_and_global_warming
"Conversely, ozone depletion represents a radiative forcing of the climate system. There are two opposing effects: Reduced ozone causes the stratosphere to absorb less solar radiation, thus cooling the stratosphere while warming the troposphere; the resulting colder stratosphere emits less long-wave radiation downward, thus cooling the troposphere. Overall, the cooling dominates; the IPCC concludes that "observed stratospheric O3 losses over the past two decades have caused a negative forcing of the surface-troposphere system"[38] of about −0.15 ± 0.10 watts per square meter (W/m²).[39]"
It must be noted that the gases that cause ozone depletion are themselves greenhouse gases. The incorrect part is that ozone depletion causes atmospheric warming, it isn't the ozone depletion itself that causes this as its net effect is actually negative.
Actually, ozone itself is a greenhouse gas:
http://esl.jrc.it/envind/pf_intro/pf_int06.htm
"reduction of the ozone greenhouse effect: ozone is considered to be a greenhouse gas. A depleted ozone layer may partially dampen the greenhouse effect. Therefore efforts to tackle ozone depletion may result in increased global warming."
Last edited by gnosis on Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:35 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Knight_of_BAAWA
Jedi Slackmaster
Joined: 08 Mar 2003
Posts: 9658
Local time: 9:44 AM
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Knight_of_BAAWA wrote: | | Nice how that agrees with what I wrote. |
| gnosis wrote: | | With the radiative forcing part, yes. Atmospheric warming, no. |
Actually, yes for both.
Hey--if you can get away with still calling 1998 the warmest, I can get away with this. Fair's fair, right? RIGHT?
_________________
aa #51, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gnosis
Forum Leader
Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 1921
Local time: 9:44 AM
Location: California
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Knight_of_BAAWA wrote: | | Knight_of_BAAWA wrote: | | Nice how that agrees with what I wrote. |
| gnosis wrote: | | With the radiative forcing part, yes. Atmospheric warming, no. |
Actually, yes for both.
Hey--if you can get away with still calling 1998 the warmest, I can get away with this. Fair's fair, right? RIGHT? |
LOL, ok KnoB. I'll take that as the closest you'll get to admission of an error. If I ever claimed 1998 was the warmest year, I will accept I was probably wrong. If I linked to a website claiming this, I'll agree it was my error.
This does nothing to change the evidence of an overall warming trend, whether it began in 1934 or 1834.
Last edited by gnosis on Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:39 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Knight_of_BAAWA
Jedi Slackmaster
Joined: 08 Mar 2003
Posts: 9658
Local time: 9:44 AM
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm just showing you your own tactics. Don't you like it?
_________________
aa #51, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gnosis
Forum Leader
Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 1921
Local time: 9:44 AM
Location: California
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Knight_of_BAAWA wrote: | | I'm just showing you your own tactics. Don't you like it? |
  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Knight_of_BAAWA
Jedi Slackmaster
Joined: 08 Mar 2003
Posts: 9658
Local time: 9:44 AM
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You used highly questionable references, and handwaved away the problem that 1934 is really the warmest year so far, and not 1998. It's of course better if 1998 is the warmest so that the AGW Priests can scream "LOOK! IT'S ALL GETTING WARMER NOW! WE MUST DO SOMETHING!"
If you don't like being called on it--don't do it. Period. Ok?
_________________
aa #51, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gnosis
Forum Leader
Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 1921
Local time: 9:44 AM
Location: California
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Knight_of_BAAWA wrote: | You used highly questionable references, and handwaved away the problem that 1934 is really the warmest year so far, and not 1998. It's of course better if 1998 is the warmest so that the AGW Priests can scream "LOOK! IT'S ALL GETTING WARMER NOW! WE MUST DO SOMETHING!"
If you don't like being called on it--don't do it. Period. Ok? |
You're a funny guy KnoB. "Highly questionable references". LOL! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Knight_of_BAAWA
Jedi Slackmaster
Joined: 08 Mar 2003
Posts: 9658
Local time: 9:44 AM
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'll take that as the closest you'll get to an admission of error.
_________________
aa #51, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Live Video and Chat Room
Freethought Videos
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
