Wednesday, June 13, 2012 6:44:41 PM
@UDUMASS: By their very definition, greenhouse gases absorb and emit heat (infrared radiation) in the atmosphere. If you took a little effort, *you* could be the guy in a lab coat finding this out yourself.
Just get two clear soda bottles, half filled with water, add some Alka-Seltzer to one bottle for the CO2, then seal them with a temperature probe in each, and expose them both to a heat lamp. You will note that the addition of the greenhouse gas allows the temperature to get hotter.
This is a basic demonstration that scientifically demonstrates what I was saying.
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 12:10:39 PM
"Increased carbon emissions and other greenhouse gases increases the overall temperature of the Earth because they trap more heat in the atmosphere. You do not need any other "feedback" for that to be true."
Where's your evidence for this? And, by the way, a guy in a white coat saying "Yes, it`s true" does not constitute evidence... If I were to put on a white coat and say "Everyone on IAB is a bunch of assho..." oh, wait... never mind...
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 12:01:36 AM
@randomxnp: You keep using the word "feedback", but I don't think it means what you think it means. Or, at the very least, it`s not as important as you seem to think it is.
Increased carbon emissions and other greenhouse gases increases the overall temperature of the Earth because they trap more heat in the atmosphere. You do not need any other "feedback" for that to be true.
This rapidly (in geologic terms) increasing heat means changes in climate that many species cannot adapt to, more extreme weather changes, increased glacial melting, and rising sea levels. This may not be "catastrophic", but it is certainly problematic, and could be avoided by making some basic changes to how we go about doing some things. The earlier the better too.
Since we do not know the full extent of the problems that further global warming will cause, reasonable caution is recommended, yes?
Monday, June 11, 2012 11:50:08 PM
@Madest: Agreed. My favorite was how randomxnp claimed that your graph was irrelevant when he thought it disagreed with him, and then it was suddenly relevant again when he thought it agreed with him.
If that isn't selective reasoning, I don`t know what is.
You can`t convince people of anything when they insist on making the facts fit their beliefs, rather than letting the facts lead them to an objective conclusion.