Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) (sci.geo.meteorology) For the discussion of meteorology and related topics. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
[OT] the quest to determine Antarctica's contribution to sea-level change | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
Ocean Acidification Consensus: All Peer-Reviewed Reseach Indicates Human CO2 Will Not Turn Oceans Acid | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
CO2 Residence Time in Atmosphere 5 To 15 Years Only | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
Excess CO2 from Venus is reaching our atmosphere [breaking researchnews] | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
Photo Contribution++ | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) |