sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) (sci.geo.meteorology) For the discussion of meteorology and related topics.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old January 6th 08, 09:26 PM posted to sci.geo.meteorology
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by Weather-Banter: Jul 2007
Posts: 193
Default 0.08% = Human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere.

0.08% = Human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere.

If all humans on Earth went 'green' right this second it wouldn't stop
or even slow down global warming. Global warming is simply a cycle
that the Earth has experience about a dozen times BEFORE man even
existed.





  #2   Report Post  
Old January 8th 08, 04:00 PM posted to sci.geo.meteorology
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by Weather-Banter: Nov 2007
Posts: 83
Default 0.08% = Human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Crackles McFarly wrote:
0.08% = Human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere.

If all humans on Earth went 'green' right this second it wouldn't stop
or even slow down global warming. Global warming is simply a cycle
that the Earth has experience about a dozen times BEFORE man even
existed.





No such cycle has been found yet. Do you have anything resembling evidence?
  #3   Report Post  
Old January 8th 08, 04:31 PM posted to sci.geo.meteorology
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by Weather-Banter: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,814
Default 0.08% = Human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere.

David wrote:

Crackles McFarly wrote:
0.08% = Human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere.

If all humans on Earth went 'green' right this second it wouldn't stop
or even slow down global warming. Global warming is simply a cycle
that the Earth has experience about a dozen times BEFORE man even
existed.





No such cycle has been found yet. Do you have anything resembling
evidence?



A study of 700,000 years data was published in 1975. The cycles reported by
that study do not match the trends of the past thirty years. Although it
showed we should now be on a rising curve of global temperatures, the rise
started about twenty years early. It also "forecast" that the peak of
global temperatures achieved in the 1940s would not be reached again until
the 2030s. In fact, that maximum was passed around 1980 and we're now 0.5C
above the 40s peak.

--
Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks., UK. E-mail: newsman, not newsboy.
"What use is happiness? It can't buy you money." [Chic Murray, 1919-85]
  #4   Report Post  
Old January 8th 08, 07:23 PM posted to sci.geo.meteorology
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by Weather-Banter: Jul 2007
Posts: 193
Default 0.08% = Human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere.

On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:00:37 -0800, David sayd
the following:

Crackles McFarly wrote:
0.08% = Human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere.

If all humans on Earth went 'green' right this second it wouldn't stop
or even slow down global warming. Global warming is simply a cycle
that the Earth has experience about a dozen times BEFORE man even
existed.





No such cycle has been found yet. Do you have anything resembling evidence?



I read the 0.08% from a scientific article once, perhaps less than 6
months ago. I read a lot of things and don't make bookmarks or photo
copies of everything I read, sorry.

This was NOT some political speech, article or tv show either.

Why can't we agree ALL SCIENCE is science?

Seems people are taking the science that 'fits' climate change and
throwing the rest away as some political conspiracy.


I will LOOK for the quote again if you'd be willing to read it?


  #5   Report Post  
Old January 8th 08, 07:24 PM posted to sci.geo.meteorology
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by Weather-Banter: Jul 2007
Posts: 193
Default 0.08% = Human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere.

On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 16:31:18 +0000, Graham P Davis
sayd the following:

David wrote:

Crackles McFarly wrote:
0.08% = Human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere.

If all humans on Earth went 'green' right this second it wouldn't stop
or even slow down global warming. Global warming is simply a cycle
that the Earth has experience about a dozen times BEFORE man even
existed.





No such cycle has been found yet. Do you have anything resembling
evidence?



A study of 700,000 years data was published in 1975. The cycles reported by
that study do not match the trends of the past thirty years. Although it
showed we should now be on a rising curve of global temperatures, the rise
started about twenty years early. It also "forecast" that the peak of
global temperatures achieved in the 1940s would not be reached again until
the 2030s. In fact, that maximum was passed around 1980 and we're now 0.5C
above the 40s peak.



What does this have to do with the CO2 human contribution to our
atmosphere?

Just asking is all.




  #6   Report Post  
Old January 8th 08, 08:43 PM posted to sci.geo.meteorology
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by Weather-Banter: Nov 2007
Posts: 83
Default 0.08% = Human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Crackles McFarly wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:00:37 -0800, David sayd
the following:

Crackles McFarly wrote:
0.08% = Human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere.

If all humans on Earth went 'green' right this second it wouldn't stop
or even slow down global warming. Global warming is simply a cycle
that the Earth has experience about a dozen times BEFORE man even
existed.




No such cycle has been found yet. Do you have anything resembling evidence?



I read the 0.08% from a scientific article once, perhaps less than 6
months ago. I read a lot of things and don't make bookmarks or photo
copies of everything I read, sorry.

This was NOT some political speech, article or tv show either.

Why can't we agree ALL SCIENCE is science?

Seems people are taking the science that 'fits' climate change and
throwing the rest away as some political conspiracy.


I will LOOK for the quote again if you'd be willing to read it?



The immediate question is what cycle are you talking about? You'll lose
me fast with numbers.
  #7   Report Post  
Old January 8th 08, 08:47 PM posted to sci.geo.meteorology
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by Weather-Banter: Nov 2007
Posts: 83
Default 0.08% = Human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Crackles McFarly wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 16:31:18 +0000, Graham P Davis
sayd the following:

David wrote:

Crackles McFarly wrote:
0.08% = Human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere.

If all humans on Earth went 'green' right this second it wouldn't stop
or even slow down global warming. Global warming is simply a cycle
that the Earth has experience about a dozen times BEFORE man even
existed.




No such cycle has been found yet. Do you have anything resembling
evidence?


A study of 700,000 years data was published in 1975. The cycles reported by
that study do not match the trends of the past thirty years. Although it
showed we should now be on a rising curve of global temperatures, the rise
started about twenty years early. It also "forecast" that the peak of
global temperatures achieved in the 1940s would not be reached again until
the 2030s. In fact, that maximum was passed around 1980 and we're now 0.5C
above the 40s peak.



What does this have to do with the CO2 human contribution to our
atmosphere?

Just asking is all.


You stated that "Global warming is simply a cycle
that the Earth has experience about a dozen times BEFORE man even
existed". Since h. sapiens has been around for ca. 1,000,000 years, and
the ice-cores only go back 700,000 years, you must be talking about
geological evidence.

We're dying to hear your report.
  #8   Report Post  
Old January 10th 08, 02:12 PM posted to sci.geo.meteorology
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by Weather-Banter: Jul 2007
Posts: 193
Default 0.08% = Human contribution of CO2 in the atmosphere.

On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 12:47:17 -0800, David sayd
the following:

We're dying to hear your report.


I'm still looking. I'm serious when I say I am not trying to make some
political point with all of this. Just trying to learn about these
things.

It was a quote I read online, I will try to find the quote some more.

Please bear with me.




Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[OT] the quest to determine Antarctica's contribution to sea-level change Alastair McDonald[_2_] uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) 3 May 13th 15 07:59 PM
Ocean Acidification Consensus: All Peer-Reviewed Reseach Indicates Human CO2 Will Not Turn Oceans Acid Eric Gisin[_2_] sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) 1 January 8th 10 05:04 PM
CO2 Residence Time in Atmosphere 5 To 15 Years Only Roger Coppock sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) 0 April 17th 09 07:31 AM
Excess CO2 from Venus is reaching our atmosphere [breaking researchnews] Enough Already sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) 3 January 26th 09 05:34 AM
Photo Contribution++ Ian Collins uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) 1 December 16th 07 07:31 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:47 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 Weather Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Weather"

 

Copyright © 2017