I like to think the partial pressure of CO2 going from 0.000375 atm to 0.000425 atm (out of a total pressure of 1 atmosphere at sea level) will dramatically change the temperatures on earth and destroy life on this planet, especially since water (a much stronger greenhouse gas) is on average at least an order of magnitude larger in composition of the atmosphere.
Makes sense...
The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere differs wildly by region.
No shit Sherlock...its actually several orders of magnitude higher in the areas of more direct sun absorption.
Physicist. Died in 2011–not sure Hillary has an alibi.
Yes and his resignation letter was all over the news. They told of the 200 fellow members who petitioned leadership to right the ship and get back to real science that was not a bunch of money grab pre-determined alarmist crap.
Oh wait, I guess the rat media never bothered to mention Doctor Lewis or the other 200 petitioners and their alarm over the money grab that was replacing real science. One would have thought that would have gotten a mention no? I mean did your rat leadership count the 200 petitioners in their fake "97% consensus"?
I can't wait to hear scotti's explanation on how this most accomplished scientist and his cohorts were all wrong.
I like to think the partial pressure of CO2 going from 0.000375 atm to 0.000425 atm (out of a total pressure of 1 atmosphere at sea level) will dramatically change the temperatures on earth and destroy life on this planet, especially since water (a much stronger greenhouse gas) is on average at least an order of magnitude larger in composition of the atmosphere.
Makes sense...
The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere differs wildly by region.
No shit Sherlock...its actually several orders of magnitude higher in the areas of more direct sun absorption.
I appreciate your concession that your use of averages was grossly misleading. And the implication of introducing greenhouse gases where they would otherwise be minimal but for human activity?
Physicist. Died in 2011–not sure Hillary has an alibi.
Yes and his resignation letter was all over the news. They told of the 200 fellow members who petitioned leadership to right the ship and get back to real science that was not a bunch of money grab pre-determined alarmist crap.
Oh wait, I guess the rat media never bothered to mention Doctor Lewis or the other 200 petitioners and their alarm over the money grab that was replacing real science. One would have thought that would have gotten a mention no? I mean did your rat leadership count the 200 petitioners in their fake "97% consensus"?
I can't wait to hear scotti's explanation on how this most accomplished scientist and his cohorts were all wrong.
Climate researchers are earning trillions! (Literally).
And 95% of the new jobs during the Obama years were part time!
Does the phrase "too good to be true" ring a bell?
I like to think the partial pressure of CO2 going from 0.000375 atm to 0.000425 atm (out of a total pressure of 1 atmosphere at sea level) will dramatically change the temperatures on earth and destroy life on this planet, especially since water (a much stronger greenhouse gas) is on average at least an order of magnitude larger in composition of the atmosphere.
Makes sense...
The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere differs wildly by region.
No shit Sherlock...its actually several orders of magnitude higher in the areas of more direct sun absorption.
I appreciate your concession that your use of averages was grossly misleading. And the implication of introducing greenhouse gases where they would otherwise be minimal but for human activity?
Thank you for putting on display that you know literally nothing on the subject. I don't think anyone with a science degree would have a clue as to what you are talking about with that second nonsensical sentence, but as for the first...couple questions:
Do you think the earth is exposed to more energy from the sun at the equator (where it is warm) or at the poles?
Do you think warm or cold air holds more moisture (i.e. water since I'm not sure you understand the term)?
Try to figure out the answer to those two questions and get back to me on how the average would relate to the actual behavior...
I like to think the partial pressure of CO2 going from 0.000375 atm to 0.000425 atm (out of a total pressure of 1 atmosphere at sea level) will dramatically change the temperatures on earth and destroy life on this planet, especially since water (a much stronger greenhouse gas) is on average at least an order of magnitude larger in composition of the atmosphere.
Makes sense...
The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere differs wildly by region.
No shit Sherlock...its actually several orders of magnitude higher in the areas of more direct sun absorption.
I appreciate your concession that your use of averages was grossly misleading. And the implication of introducing greenhouse gases where they would otherwise be minimal but for human activity?
Thank you for putting on display that you know literally nothing on the subject. I don't think anyone with a science degree would have a clue as to what you are talking about with that second nonsensical sentence, but as for the first...couple questions:
Do you think the earth is exposed to more energy from the sun at the equator (where it is warm) or at the poles?
Do you think warm or cold air holds more moisture (i.e. water since I'm not sure you understand the term)?
Try to figure out the answer to those two questions and get back to me on how the average would relate to the actual behavior...
Unless somebody has fallen and can't get up, amberlamps chaser can't help you.
Physicist. Died in 2011–not sure Hillary has an alibi.
Yes and his resignation letter was all over the news. They told of the 200 fellow members who petitioned leadership to right the ship and get back to real science that was not a bunch of money grab pre-determined alarmist crap.
Oh wait, I guess the rat media never bothered to mention Doctor Lewis or the other 200 petitioners and their alarm over the money grab that was replacing real science. One would have thought that would have gotten a mention no? I mean did your rat leadership count the 200 petitioners in their fake "97% consensus"?
I can't wait to hear scotti's explanation on how this most accomplished scientist and his cohorts were all wrong.
Climate researchers are earning trillions! (Literally).
And 95% of the new jobs during the Obama years were part time!
Does the phrase "too good to be true" ring a bell?
Still denying the truth about jobs huh? Your argument is with the Harvard and Princeton experts and the chief economist in BO's administration, not with me.
Comments
Oh wait, I guess the rat media never bothered to mention Doctor Lewis or the other 200 petitioners and their alarm over the money grab that was replacing real science. One would have thought that would have gotten a mention no? I mean did your rat leadership count the 200 petitioners in their fake "97% consensus"?
I can't wait to hear scotti's explanation on how this most accomplished scientist and his cohorts were all wrong.
And 95% of the new jobs during the Obama years were part time!
Does the phrase "too good to be true" ring a bell?
Do you think the earth is exposed to more energy from the sun at the equator (where it is warm) or at the poles?
Do you think warm or cold air holds more moisture (i.e. water since I'm not sure you understand the term)?
Try to figure out the answer to those two questions and get back to me on how the average would relate to the actual behavior...
Now go get em tiger!