![Libtards are really bad at logic. [750x1072 - 120KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/x6Szhv.jpg){kind=link}
Clearly we have different data sets.
this seems to be an ongoing problem, few people understand this at the level required (including me) and what looks like conflicting data is sometimes both concepts being right (like the methane figure of 84, is also 25)
The problem for Poal is that they only listen to the handful of people who oppose this, and not the thousands of scientists who say this is basically irrefutable at this point. Poal's response is always something like "tRuSt thE sCieNcE" and thus the conversation goes nowhere :|
MIT says water vapor is 97% of greenhouse gas. Makes sense because co2 only Makes up. 036% of the atmosphere. 1/120th of water vapor content.
using percentages is misleading. water vapour isn't directly affected by what humans do, the climate is reacting to increasing CO2/methane levels and heat load, therefore water vapour isn't causing an imbalance.
There is a limit to how much water vapour the atmosphere can hold, but CO2 is a non-condensable gas so there is no limit
If CO2 hadn't increased, then water vapour would have remained stable, this is the positive feedback loop
claims that co2 absorbs heat therefore is a greenhouse gas is bullshit.
https://byjus.com/questions/why-does-carbon-dioxide-absorb-infrared-radiation/ "CO2 is a good absorber of infrared radiation ()" "the molecule gives up this extra energy by emitting another infrared photon. Once the extra energy has been removed by the emitted photon, the carbon dioxide molecule stops vibrating."
Water absorbs IR by getting hotter, but doesn't re-emit it like CO2
methane absorbs IR at a higher wavelength (but yes overlapping) to CO2 https://aip.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/1.1746366 Methane accounts for about 20% of the heating effects by all of the greenhouse gases
water vapour persists until it rains Methane persists in the atmosphere 12 years, CO2 persists for 300 to 1,000 years, methane is more important because we need to reduce this right now, but we will be living with CO2 for basically forever
Potholer on youtube did the best explanation on the role CO2 has
If you think a source is valid then you should listen to the rebuttal and then weigh them both up https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uE-zY0roNfw
.
It's interesting how "Conservatives" have arrived at the position of 'not being interested in conserving anything' Personally I blame Trump, if he hadn't mocked the whole thing then his less than intelligent base wouldn't have jumped on board too. None of these people know what is going on, they are opposing something for no other reason than wanting to be in his cult of personality. This isn't really helped by the Left being quite so evangelical and censorial about it either, because my default reaction is always to oppose what they think.
But I remember the summer of 1976, when the tarmac melted into big waves. Likewise 2003 and 2006 were super hot, and today is 30degC (which for the UK is basically unheard of). I haven't seen a snowdrift for like three freaking decades now.
I don't really want to get into 'well what about this graph...', I just wanted to offer what I think are clarifications to your points. I'm old enough to notice that something is really fucked up with the weather these days, and the current overwhelming climate change consensus is good enough for me. I'm sure most people can't afford and don't want to change their lifestyle, but IMO it's more important to do something to help and maybe be wrong, than to follow a dummy like Trump and do absolutely nothing for the sake of his ego and poll numbers.
Once again. Co2 is a shitty absorber of heat.
Put it in a test chamber alone and hey you skewed science and can pretend it's a good heat trap. But in the real world atmosphere co2 is a non factor As a heat trap.
I tried to understand the science of co2 but it's really complicated. Calling it a catalyst is a fair pleb description. Co2 increases the likelihood of a cosmic ray being trapped by other gases.
Co2 is also a reducing gas. It is used by many processes and the greater the concentration the greater the usage rate.
Self balancing system comprising many variables ignored by scientisms.
You do understand that we cannot live without co2?
If muh climate change due to co2 hypothesis was founded in science then predictions these last fifty years would of had value. They didnt. Insane to keep making the same guesses then acting as if they will come true.
And climate change alarmism is actually a political program with zero intent and zero means and zero evidence to act to stagnate the global climate.
Meaning your faith in CCA is baseless and religious by nature.
Disagree? Provide peer review evidence that politicians can stagnate global climate by stopping humans producing co2.
So what is the game plan behind CCA? Cause poverty. Check. But not uniformly right? Cause fear. Cause extinction of human societies. Just not uniformly right? Transfer huge wealth to the nongentiles with a cut sent to pet scientisms. Enough to fund another round of alarmism.
My premise is simple. The idea that our climate is fragile is complete fear mongering bullshit. The idea that co2 leads climate changes is bullshit. The idea that a little change in co2 has a big impact on climate is bullshit. The idea of human activity being unnatural is speciest with zero value. Finally the very idea of change being bad is utterly moronic. And now we have massive evidence that the rate of change claimed isn't drastic at all. Meaning should sea levels actually start to rise 100 years after the "fact" we can adjust.
Also note that CCA is hiding real concerns. Islanders are saying that sea levels are drowning islands but the hidden truth is over population and deforestation is causing islands to sink through erosion. (but then islanders would have no one to blame and therefor extort)
So where do you stand on this?
Co2 is a shitty absorber of heat.
everything I can find says the opposite
Put it in a test chamber alone and hey you skewed science and can pretend it's a good heat trap. But in the real world atmosphere co2 is a non factor As a heat trap.
So what changes in the real world vs lab?
You do understand that we cannot live without co2?
not sure how that's relevant? nobody is capable of removing it
If muh climate change due to co2 hypothesis was founded in science then predictions these last fifty years would of had value
you could say the same about black holes, gravity waves and bigbang theories, but none of those are a likely threat
And climate change alarmism is actually a political program with zero intent and zero means and zero evidence to act to stagnate the global climate
Provide peer review evidence that politicians can stagnate global climate by stopping humans producing co2
well it won't, reducing methane will, CO2 is a long term goal
So what is the game plan behind CCA?
Say we have a problem with dumping pollutants in the sea but your favourite politician owns Acme Poison Corp, are we all supposed to ignore the problem because you've made it political now?
The idea of human activity being unnatural is speciest with zero value.
literally every upward tick in CO2, Methane, heat levels, sea levels, coral dying etc starts at the beginning of the industrial revolution, absolutely fuck all was happening before that time. Doesn't that seem even slightly suspicious to you?
Islanders are saying that sea levels are drowning islands
sea levels are rising though? https://www.realclimate.org/images/Kemp_sealevel_20111.png look at when it starts rising...
So where do you stand on this?
I can see within my own lifetime that the environment is way shittier than it was, the weather has become really erratic and hotter, and I can't remember the last time I made a snowball. I can look at any graph and point at the period when it all started, and it's always around 1800. Humans are doing "something" here.
I don't care if that's farting more, driving more, feeding niggers, or eating avocados instead of turnips. I've also noticed we have way more autistic kids now, and kids with asthma. We are doing something wrong.
I don't give a fuck if this is a Left wing plot, the jews did it, or trannies are melting the icecaps with disco music, we should come together and rewind everything we have been doing in the last 100 years. Better still if we can make some intelligent guesses as to exactly what we are doing wrong and fix that first.
If the majority of scientists point at fossil fuels then fine, we can solve that with electric cars so we should get on with making that more accessible to everyone. The switch from horses to cars only took a few decades. Back in the 70s we had no car, we cycled everywhere, food came in a paper bag not a plastic one and we wore cotton clothes. It was more tiresome than now but we didn't die
All this BS on the far right about this not being real, it's just flat earth tier tinfoil. Sure the models are not perfect, but even as a pleb looking into this I'm finding it really complicated, but I can read a rising graph as well as anyone.
Do you have a better explanation of why global heat is rising, and why EVERYONE with a PhD is wrong but some bloke on bitchute is the only one who is right? Because all I'm seeing is flat earth videos vs everyone else, and tbh flat earth delusions are quite complicated to refute even though it's fucking obvious they are wrong
My phone is too small to give you a proper response you deserve.
But consider that you are being told that co2 traps heat well. But also told that co2 is a tiny part of the atmosphere. That the prevalent greenhouses gases overlap the frequency co2 absorbs light.
So add the facts together and wonder how the conclusion you are told can possibly be true?
As for climate? Fifty years on this earth and no change for me let alone worse.
Air quality? Great. Water levels. Same. Storms. Same. Wind same.
Are you sure that you are not suffering psychosis?
(post is archived)