Australian Politics Forum - Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation?

muso Gold Member Offline Posts: 13151 Gladstone, Queensland Gender:	Re: Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation Reply #75 - Jan 8^th, 2012 at 2:27pm Soren wrote on Jan 8^th, 2012 at 10:01am: Regarding you, being simply normal creates a sense of superiority, so I share that sense with countless others here. So I take it that you have no issue with my argument since you clearly prefer to speak to dead horse walking (or whatever).
Back to top	1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded Gold Member Offline MediocrityNET: because people died for this! Posts: 26966	Re: Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation Reply #76 - Jan 8^th, 2012 at 5:53pm Soren wrote on Jan 8^th, 2012 at 10:01am: Regarding you, being simply normal creates a sense of superiority, so I share that sense with countless others here. Weakness personified is what you are mate! How 'bout them coal seem fires!??!
Back to top	Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation
Reply #77 - Jan 8^th, 2012 at 8:22pm

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 8^th, 2012 at 5:53pm:

Soren wrote on Jan 8^th, 2012 at 10:01am:

Regarding you, being simply normal creates a sense of superiority, so I share that sense with countless others here.

Weakness personified is what you are mate!

Grin

How 'bout them coal seem fires!??!

Yeah, how about them?

Let's see if you can say anything longer than a line without breaking out in swivel eyes.

Back to top

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation
Reply #78 - Jan 9^th, 2012 at 5:16pm

Soren wrote on Jan 8^th, 2012 at 8:22pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 8^th, 2012 at 5:53pm:

Soren wrote on Jan 8^th, 2012 at 10:01am:

Regarding you, being simply normal creates a sense of superiority, so I share that sense with countless others here.

Weakness personified is what you are mate!

Grin

How 'bout them coal seem fires!??!

Yeah, how about them?

Let's see if you can say anything longer than a line without breaking out in swivel eyes.

YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT UNDERSEA VOLCANOES CONTRIBUTING TO CARBON EMISSIONS YET YOU DON'T KNOW IF THEY CONTRIBUTE MORE OR LESS THAN COAL SEAM FIRES!!

IGNORANCE IS NO EXCUSE!!!

Shocked

fACE IT, YOU'RE CLUTCHING AT STRAWS!!!!

You are simply trying to press the pause button of doubt but when questioned you can't give good reason as to why that doubt should properly exist!

LET'S NOT WORRY ABOUT THE KIDS AY SOREN!!

COUNTING SOMEONE ELSES BOTTOMLINE IS MUCH MORE FUN Roll Eyes

YEH, I SMOKE CRACK AND VOTE LIBERAL WHILST PRETENDING I DON'T TOUCH MYSELF OR MY SHITE DON'T STINK

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

Maqqa

Gold Member

Offline

14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000

Re: Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation
Reply #79 - Jan 11^th, 2012 at 3:03pm

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2012 at 5:50pm:

The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ, Moves on!

Ah no, that was meant to read -
Maqqa having pointed the finger, leaves the discussion, knowing that her mis-direction will take up valuable time, by going over the same information, again & again!

Actually I am not

The essential question remains unanswered - we do not know how in percentage terms much humans contribute to the carbon cycle

all information produced by the climate alarmists focus on how much they think humans emit but never our share of the total emissions

Back to top

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number

IP Logged

Maqqa

Gold Member

Offline

14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000

Re: Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation
Reply #80 - Jan 11^th, 2012 at 3:09pm

Those wishing to valid what I am saying just try to Google "world carbon emissions from all sources" or any other variation of the sentence

All you'll get are links to human emissions rather than total emissions from all sources

You'll get flash pictures and figures but no one will give you a total emission

Back to top

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number

IP Logged

Maqqa Gold Member Offline 14% - that low?! Posts: 16000	Re: Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation Reply #81 - Jan 11^th, 2012 at 3:25pm Even the IPCCC does not contain the information either http://www.ipcc.ch/index.htm
Back to top	Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number IP Logged

Maqqa Gold Member Offline 14% - that low?! Posts: 16000	Re: Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation Reply #82 - Jan 11^th, 2012 at 3:29pm Once you have all your facts - consider that Climate Science is an Observational Science Google "Observational Science" and see the flaws within that system
Back to top	Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation
Reply #83 - Jan 11^th, 2012 at 8:37pm

Maqqa wrote on Jan 11^th, 2012 at 3:29pm:

Once you have all your facts - consider that Climate Science is an Observational Science

Google "Observational Science" and see the flaws within that system

PAUSE BUTTON POLITICS IS MAQQUA!

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation
Reply #84 - Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 10:00am

Maqqa wrote on Jan 11^th, 2012 at 3:03pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2012 at 5:50pm:

The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ, Moves on!

Ah no, that was meant to read -
Maqqa having pointed the finger, leaves the discussion, knowing that her mis-direction will take up valuable time, by going over the same information, again & again!

Actually I am not

The essential question remains unanswered - we do not know how in percentage terms much humans contribute to the carbon cycle

all information produced by the climate alarmists focus on how much they think humans emit but never our share of the total emissions

- and as I said before, your question is loaded. The natural carbon cycle has a net value of ~ zero, because the positive fluxes (land to atmosphere/ocean to atmosphere) balance the negative fluxes (Atmosphere to land/ Atmosphere to ocean).

If you express anthropogenic emissions as a percentage of positive fluxes, and totally ignore the negative fluxes, you are grossly underestimating the effect. Try to understand that point.

The argument that human emissions are a tiny proportion of natural emissions is nothing more than dodgy accounting.

Our "share" of total emissions is greater than 100% as I explained before.

(Highlighted text) - Yes you are. Refer back to my original replies.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 10:09am by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation
Reply #85 - Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 10:35am

Interesting.

Everything in nature seems to have a balance mechanism to deal with change. You walk faster, your heart rate and oxidn intake go up, your temperature increases - so you perspire to keep you cool.
More CO2 - more what? The temperature goes up by how much before the counter mechanism kicks in? What IS th counter-balance mechanism?
More rain, more vegetation (more CO2 absorption)? After all, that's how we got all this coal and oil and gas -massive tropical vegetation.

Mebbe the dinosaurs died out because the jungles, having absorbed all the available CO2, disappeared, giving way to deserts and thus making the dinosaur habitat vanish. Most of the oil and gas and black coal today is in deserts or arid areas.
Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation
Reply #86 - Jan 23^rd, 2012 at 8:30am

Soren wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 10:35am:

Interesting.

Everything in nature seems to have a balance mechanism to deal with change. You walk faster, your heart rate and oxidn intake go up, your temperature increases - so you perspire to keep you cool.
More CO2 - more what? The temperature goes up by how much before the counter mechanism kicks in? What IS th counter-balance mechanism?
More rain, more vegetation (more CO2 absorption)? After all, that's how we got all this coal and oil and gas -massive tropical vegetation.

Mebbe the dinosaurs died out because the jungles, having absorbed all the available CO2, disappeared, giving way to deserts and thus making the dinosaur habitat vanish. Most of the oil and gas and black coal today is in deserts or arid areas.
Wink

Don't hold your breath waiting for that, the way we've been chopping down tropical forests.

- but yes, there is scope for increased planktonic growth in the oceans, and that acts as a carbon sink. You just need to add iron (apparently) because the limiting factor is iron deficiency.

There is no question that nature could compensate.... given enough time. However time is the problem.

There is no evidence that trees absorbed all the CO2 during the Mesozoic period. It wasn't until the late Cenozoic (actually about 40 million years ago) that CO2 levels dropped to levels similar to recent times.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Doctor Jolly

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3808

Re: Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation
Reply #87 - Jan 23^rd, 2012 at 8:36am

Soren wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 10:35am:

Interesting.

Everything in nature seems to have a balance mechanism to deal with change. You walk faster, your heart rate and oxidn intake go up, your temperature increases - so you perspire to keep you cool.
More CO2 - more what? The temperature goes up by how much before the counter mechanism kicks in? What IS th counter-balance mechanism?
More rain, more vegetation (more CO2 absorption)? After all, that's how we got all this coal and oil and gas -massive tropical vegetation.

Mebbe the dinosaurs died out because the jungles, having absorbed all the available CO2, disappeared, giving way to deserts and thus making the dinosaur habitat vanish. Most of the oil and gas and black coal today is in deserts or arid areas.
Wink

You seem to be struggling with the rate of change. Evolution can keep up with changing co2 density if occuring over millions of years. Life evolves to suit the conditions. Over decades, various lifeforms cant adapt and simply die out.

Back to top

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation
Reply #88 - Jan 23^rd, 2012 at 11:20am

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2012 at 8:36am:

Soren wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2012 at 10:35am:

Interesting.

Everything in nature seems to have a balance mechanism to deal with change. You walk faster, your heart rate and oxidn intake go up, your temperature increases - so you perspire to keep you cool.
More CO2 - more what? The temperature goes up by how much before the counter mechanism kicks in? What IS th counter-balance mechanism?
More rain, more vegetation (more CO2 absorption)? After all, that's how we got all this coal and oil and gas -massive tropical vegetation.

Mebbe the dinosaurs died out because the jungles, having absorbed all the available CO2, disappeared, giving way to deserts and thus making the dinosaur habitat vanish. Most of the oil and gas and black coal today is in deserts or arid areas.
Wink

You seem to be struggling with the rate of change. Evolution can keep up with changing co2 density if occuring over millions of years. Life evolves to suit the conditions. Over decades, various lifeforms cant adapt and simply die out.

Oh we've been through all this before, and explained about evolution and lifespans. Obviously you can't get very much adaptation in a few lifespans.

If you were dealing with bacteria though where the reproduction rate and lifespan is much shorter, then they can certainly adapt.

In many cases, you're talking to the faithful (who believe that God will save the world) and their followers. (Not you Soren)

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Soren Gold Member Offline Posts: 25654 Gender:	Re: Fundamental Flaw in Climate explanation Reply #89 - Jan 23^rd, 2012 at 11:27am Just remind me again - what has actually died out since the supposed man made global warming started with 19th century industrialisation.
Back to top	IP Logged