Global Warming

[garyb]

sorry, human CO2 is responsible for some 2-3% of greenhouse gasses, 5% if water vapor(95% of the effect) is removed from the equation. i already gave links to the science involved.

going in circles....

[astroman]

95% of greenhouse gasses are water vapor and humans are responsible for .001% of water vapor in the atmosphere

No one cares about the quantity of water vapor humans produce ( ) , the main concern is the CO2 produced by all human activities combined.

why is there a concern about a part of the system that can at maximum be 5% percent of the total amount of greenhouse gases ?
I assume that water vapour does indeed function as suggested, as it's a pretty simple substance.

but how can we predict climate over years if we cannot even predict the weather conditions of next month reliably' ?

cheers, Tom

[garyb]

exaclty.
we can't, unless it's because of technology like HAARP.....

[BingoTheClowno]

why is there a concern about a part of the system that can at maximum be 5% percent of the total amount of greenhouse gases ?
I assume that water vapour does indeed function as suggested, as it's a pretty simple substance.

but how can we predict climate over years if we cannot even predict the weather conditions of next month reliably' ?

cheers, Tom

I can't believe you fell for Gary's water vapour gimmick Tom. Think about it, you can't have too much wapor because water vapors condense and fall to the ground as rain, if you have less, then you have sunny conditions.

[BingoTheClowno]

sorry, human CO2 is responsible for some 2-3% of greenhouse gasses, 5% if water vapor(95% of the effect) is removed from the equation. i already gave links to the science involved.

going in circles....

Yup!

[garyb]

why is there a concern about a part of the system that can at maximum be 5% percent of the total amount of greenhouse gases ?
I assume that water vapour does indeed function as suggested, as it's a pretty simple substance.

but how can we predict climate over years if we cannot even predict the weather conditions of next month reliably' ?

cheers, Tom

I can't believe you fell for Gary's water vapour gimmick Tom. Think about it, you can't have too much wapor because water vapors condense and fall to the ground as rain, if you have less, then you have sunny conditions.

vapor is not steam. the amount of vapor depends on many conditions, so as a greenhouse gas, water vapor's effects can compound. the level of vapor is extremely variable and clear skies can have high concentrations. the more heat, the more vapor, the more vapor, the more heat, to a point. greenhouse gasses are not the only engine of warming. the biggest engine is undeniably the sun.
water vapor is not mygimmick. it's a scientific fact. just like it's a fact that CO2 was in tremendous portions in relation to other gasses many thousands of years ago and yet the temperature was similar to todays, just like it's a fact that the hottest decade in the last hundred years was in the '40s, after which temperatures began to fall and have begun to rise again in the last 10 years or so, just like a good volcano spews more CO2 than the USA....

give up the strawmen and the bugaboos and put the energy to something useful.

bingo, you've made light of my qualifications to speak about this stuff, but what are YOUR qualifications to act like you know every aspect of this, especially when so many real scientists disagree with you AND the UN?

[BingoTheClowno]

Are those water vapours coming out of your head?

[garyb]

addendum-
0.117% of the greenhouse effect is due to atmospheric CO2 from human activity. i was wrong when i said 2-3%. 2-3% is the TOTAL effect of CO2 as a greenhouse gas.

and a reminder:
" There is no dispute at all about the fact that even if punctiliously observed, (the Kyoto Protocol) would have an imperceptible effect on future temperatures -- one-twentieth of a degree by 2050. "



Dr. S. Fred Singer, atmospheric physicist
Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia,
and former director of the US Weather Satellite Service;
in a Sept. 10, 2001 Letter to Editor, Wall Street Journal (a REAL scientist.)

[BingoTheClowno]

Where do you find these right wing zealots?

In 1994 Singer was Chief Reviewer of the published report Science, economics, and environmental policy: a critical examination published by the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution (AdTI), a conservative think tank of which he was a Senior Fellow.[23] However, he was a co-author of earlier drafts and had been singled out as the man for the job in a memo from AdTI to the Tobacco Institute [24]. A notation on that memo from Walter Woodson, Vice President-Public Affairs of the Tobacco Institute to Sam Chilcote, Jr, President of the Tobacco Institute, said that the job would be well worth the $20,000. The report attacked the United States Environmental Protection Agency for their 1993 study about the cancer risks of passive smoking and called it "junk science"

Your man, ("a real scientist" ) thinks passive smoke is good for you...

[next to nothing]

"that's not what i implied, and the UN DID approve NATO actions, that's why NATO uses the UN as justification. period."

http://www.unu.edu/hq/ginfo/media/kosovo.html

i know you will find tis source unreliable, but im just gonna quote ONE THING they might have picked up over there:


"NATO's precedent-setting 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia proceeded without UN sanction. In view of the 1994 Rwandan genocide (during which UN intervention was stalled in the Security Council) and similar recent internal conflicts, the Kosovo intervention, while morally right, demonstrated a dangerous "selective indignation" towards humanitarian crisis, according to the study, presented at UN Headquarters March 21."


dude its common knowledge.

[garyb]

dude, what part of good cop bad cop don't you get?

and if those actions were truly disapproved of by the UN, then why weren't NATO heads also charged with war crimes for bombing civilians?

as to Rwanda, the public knowledge is that UN peacekeepers watched as atrocities took place.

the UN is not always good. that was the point. the other arguement is strictly a strawman for you to knock down and divert the discussion.

[BingoTheClowno]

vapor is not steam. just like it's a fact that CO2 was in tremendous portions in relation to other gasses many thousands of years ago and yet the temperature was similar to todays, just like it's a fact that the hottest decade in the last hundred years was in the '40s, after which temperatures began to fall and have begun to rise again in the last 10 years or so, just like a good volcano spews more CO2 than the USA....

That's totaly unrelated drivel, typical of you, an incompetent denier of global warming. Levels of CO2 were higher in periods when Earth's atmosphere was forming (UN didn't write that). The evidence that you deny exists, shows clearly that the levels of CO2 are highest in the last 600 years.
Now, we had a nice diversion with UN liars ( ), "breathing" plants and dangerous "water vapours", we learned about your precious and highly esteemed, right wing slanted, scientific sources, what else could you possibly come up with against global warming?

[garyb]

let the dead bury the dead.

respiration is breathing any day of the week. there are no right or left wingers at the top, only among the lower level lackeys. the truth is the truth wherever it comes from. there's no scientific reason for CO2 greenhouse effects to be any different in any age. highest CO2 level in 600 years? so what? who's SUV was responsible for the "high" level 600 years ago? 400 years ago europe was in the throws of a mini ice age, the weather ALWAYS changes, the MAIN engine is SOLAR activity. FACT.

there is NOTHING to be done about global warming, get over it. stop repeating things with no understanding.

memetics would explain your irrational behavior acting like you know about anything.....

no matter how hard you try, many will continue to think for themselves. i don't care about party politics, which is what you continue to reduce things to(conservatives, right wing, et al). at the bohemian grove democrats and republicans run around drunkenly naked together with capitalists and communists, then they return to their homes and carry out the Great Work, but the hypnotized like yourself know nothing of this..

[next to nothing]

"the UN is not always good. that was the point."

No, again, the point is that You claimed UN started the kosovo war, which it evidently didnt.

one mans "good cop bad cop" is another mans "youre damned if you do and damned if you dont".

[garyb]

you haven't explained how Milo was dragged off to the hague for war crimes against civillians and not one NATO general or government official was even reprimanded for bombing cities full of people and using all that DU in CITIES that were FULL of CIVILLIANS, if the UN did not approve and if the UN is looking out for humanity.

good cop, bad cop is a well known game that law enforcement plays here in the united states.i happen to know it gets played where you live too.

one cop pretends to be your friend. "look buddy, i just want to help you. that guy over there, he's an animal. an a-ni-mal. i don't know how long i can hold him off. you better just tell me what i need to know, i know that i can keep you out of the worst of the trouble, heck, this is as bad as it gets right here, pal."

the other cop acts like he hates you. "stop coddling him, it's my turn! take this and this and this, aaaaaAAAARRRRRGGHH!!!!!!"

the first cop again, "hey! leave him alone! you poor guy! just whisper......."

and so on.

and now, entetainment!

people find justifications and reasons for this kind of disgusting bahavior, but not me. a whole lot of drama over things that aren't real.

[Zer]

Luckily the fire didn`t make it to the hacienda of the famous german TV moderator Thomas Gottschalk.

[garyb]

respect.

[next to nothing]

"good cop, bad cop is a well known game"

yes i know the concept.

"you haven't explained how Milo was dragged off to the hague for war crimes against civillians and not one NATO general or government official was even reprimanded for bombing cities full of people and using all that DU in CITIES that were FULL of CIVILLIANS, if the UN did not approve and if the UN is looking out for humanity. "

Like it or not, there is a difference between ethnic clensing and military blunders. Yankee blue on blue is all too common, as ive experiencedd myself when rehearsing with US troops. from a quick review of why slobodan was "dragged over to haag" you can have a quick overview at http://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0,,514609,00.html.

[BingoTheClowno]

there are no right or left wingers at the top, only among the lower level lackeys. the truth is the truth wherever it comes from. there's no scientific reason for CO2 greenhouse effects to be any different in any age. highest CO2 level in 600 years? so what? who's SUV was responsible for the "high" level 600 years ago? 400 years ago europe was in the throws of a mini ice age, the weather ALWAYS changes, the MAIN engine is SOLAR activity. FACT.

The fact is that you refuse to admit evidence that comes from official sources like EPA that have spent millions of dollars on research. Your're a fraud and a bamboozler. You don't care about the facts but only about being right even when you can't prove your point. You're busted!

[next to nothing]

"the MAIN engine is SOLAR activity. FACT."

well it really should be getting colder now then, shouldnt it?