Anyone notice this about Obama?

[Lavalamp]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jul 8 2008, 02:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Another interesting image:

</div>
I actually used the same graph data in my first post regarding this that you just responded to. lol

The thing is though, those quote unquote, abrupt changes. Take place over 10s of thousands of years. I was using the same graphical information when I first posted. The sharpest change in climate occurs at approximately 150 000 years ago. It goes from 3 to -9 in a span of 10 000 years (my graph was a little more detailed) or 12 degrees celsius over 10 000 years.

or 1.2 degrees over 1000 years. or .6 degrees over 500 years.

Ours has changed .5 degrees in 100 years. So ours has changed approx 5 times faster than a fast natural climate change.

 

[Denny Crane]

What is 380 ppm?

.003% or .00003 of the makeup of the atmosphere.

Compared to a much more influential greenhouse gas that nobody talks about, water vapor, which is 4% or .04 of the makeup of the atmosphere.

Simply put, mountain out of a molehill. Or to mix metaphors, you can't convince me the sky is falling

You say things that simply don't stand up to the data:

Do you or do you not see that temperatures radically increased starting about 40,000 years go (first graph) while CO2 was falling? Or that CO2 didn't start rising until 10,000 years ago, or 30,000 years after temperatures increased by over 10 degrees C?

 

[Lavalamp]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jul 8 2008, 02:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You say things that simply don't stand up to the data:

Do you or do you not see that temperatures radically increased starting about 40,000 years go (first graph) while CO2 was falling? Or that CO2 didn't start rising until 10,000 years ago, or 30,000 years after temperatures increased by over 10 degrees C?</div>

First off the issue you are pointing out is that temperature has other factors that can increase it, for example if glaciers melt and their is less glaciers to reflect light, and more ocean to absorb it.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Compared to a much more influential greenhouse gas that nobody talks about, water vapor, which is 4% or .04 of the makeup of the atmosphere.</div>

No one talks about water vapour because it`s not something that we are increasing or decreasing. The atmosphere will hold a certain amount of water vapour in it on average which is based on temperature. However C02 is something that we clearly are contributing to. And although Water vapour is more influential, C02 is an influential factor nonetheless.

However, although there is a lot more Water vapour than C02 molecules in the atmosphere:
4% water vs. 0.003.8% C02

Both produce noticeable amounts of greenhouse effect:
36%-70% for water vs. 9%-26% for C02

If I take mid numbers:
53 for water, 17.5 for C02,

Despite there being 1000 times as many water molecules than Carbon dioxide molecules in the atmosphere, Water only contributes approximately 3 times as much to the greenhouse effect as C02.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The most important greenhouse gases are:

* water vapor, which causes about 36?€“70% of the greenhouse effect on Earth. (Note clouds typically affect climate differently from other forms of atmospheric water.)
* carbon dioxide, which causes 9?€“26%
* methane, which causes 4?€“9%
* ozone, which causes 3?€“7%</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jul 8 2008, 02:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Simply put, mountain out of a molehill. Or to mix metaphors, you can't convince me the sky is falling smile.gif</div>

lol you can believe that the sky is falling or whatever you want, I don`t really care. I`m just pointing out what the data says. If you want to you could come to the conclusion from the data that Xenos the Scientologist overlord is increasing C02 emissions and cars are reducing them. lol

 

[Denny Crane]

It's typical of the pro-man-made-global-warming crowd to use the extremes of guestimated figures because their argument falls down when realistic numbers are used. Take that for what it is worth (which is worth a lot

)

This video says a lot in an entertaining way, particularly dumping on Gore and his silly movie. It's worth the 9 minutes to see the whole thing, but I was particularly interested in hearing your response to what it says about 5:30 into it and going forward.

<div><object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value=""></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350" /></embed></object></div>

 

[Lavalamp]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>It's typical of the pro-man-made-global-warming crowd to use the extremes of guestimated figures because their argument falls down when realistic numbers are used. Take that for what it is worth (which is worth a lot smile.gif )</div>
Well, that is a vague accusation, considering I've been using the same graphs you have and used wikipedia on determing the gases that compose the atmosphere. If it's relevant to my posts, then Point it out.

If you feel other people have exaggerated things well go argue with them lol.

I might watch the video tomorrow if I feel like it lol. Not in the mood right now to pay attention to a global-warming vid.

 

[Denny Crane]

I think you are falling for one of the easiest mathematical tricks that can be pulled on someone. I explained it in one of my blog posts here: http://sportstwo.com/forums/blog-b1.html&st=10 - see the two graphs and how by fiddling with the time scale you eliminate data and make stuff in the noise look suspicious (or in your favor).

And look at the two graphs I posted earlier. How do you explain 100 PPM less CO2 150M years ago when the temperature was the highest?

Simply put, there is no correlation between increased CO2 and temperature. This also explains why you are misusing this data:

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The most important greenhouse gases are:

* water vapor, which causes about 36�€“70% of the greenhouse effect on Earth. (Note clouds typically affect climate differently from other forms of atmospheric water.)
* carbon dioxide, which causes 9�€“26%
* methane, which causes 4�€“9%
* ozone, which causes 3�€“7%</div>

Or not factoring in your linear thinking that temperatures actually cooled for hundreds of years during the little ice age, so the aggregate amount of warming is even more than the 12 degrees (overstated) you claimed.