This is of course bullshit. Exactly the same amount of energy is escaping to space at CO2 and H2O absorption wavelengths.
Or at least, if less energy was escaping at the absorption wavelengths, it would be a sign that either the albedo of the earth had increased or insolation had reduced, which would tend to cause cooling, not warming.
Brought back to basics, the AGW thesis is that the same amount of energy is escaping at these wavelengths, but it has been through more molecules (scattered more times) on the way out and the average final emission occurs at a higher altitude.
Satellite measurements of outgoing longwave radiation In 1970, NASA launched the IRIS satellite that measured infrared spectra between 400 cm-1 to 1600 cm-1. In 1996, the Japanese Space Agency launched the IMG satellite which recorded similar observations. Both sets of data were compared to discern any changes in outgoing radiation over the 26 year period (Harries 2001). The resultant change in outgoing radiation was as follows:
Figure 1: Change in spectrum from 1970 to 1996 due to trace gases. 'Brightness temperature' indicates equivalent blackbody temperature (Harries 2001).
What they found was a drop in outgoing radiation at the wavelength bands that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) absorb energy. The change in outgoing radiation is consistent with theoretical expectations. Thus the paper found "direct experimental evidence for a significant increase in the Earth's greenhouse effect".
This result has been confirmed by subsequent papers using more recent satellite data. The 1970 and 1997 spectra were compared with additional satellite data from the NASA AIRS satellite launched in 2003 (Griggs 2004). This analysis was extended to 2006 using data from the AURA satellite launched in 2004 (Chen 2007). Both papers found the observed differences in CO2 bands matching the expected changes from rising carbon dioxide levels. Thus we have empirical evidence that increased CO2 is causing an enhanced greenhouse effect.
Surface measurements of downward longwave radiation A compilation of surface measurements of downward longwave radiation from 1973 to 2008 find an increasing trend of more longwave radiation returning to earth, attributed to increases in air temperature, humidity and atmospheric carbon dioxide (Wang 2009). More regional studies such as an examination of downward longwave radiation over the central Alps find that downward longwave radiation is increasing due to an enhanced greenhouse effect (Philipona 2004).
Taking this a step further, an analysis of high resolution spectral data allows scientists to quantitatively attribute the increase in downward radiation to each of several greenhouse gases (Evans 2006). The results lead the authors to conclude that "this experimental data should effectively end the argument by skeptics that no experimental evidence exists for the connection between greenhouse gas increases in the atmosphere and global warming."
They showed no such thing despite deniers trying to turn it into some huge conspiracy. Your use of the word "climategate" itself shows you are trying to disparage the scientists involved through connotations of a conspiracy. Your intellectual dishonesty is simply disappointing.
You still have failed, despite being asked numerous times, to provide credible peer reviewed scientific papers that overturn the overwhelming consensus amongst the scientific community.
So I will ask again... please provide your peer reviewed papers in a respected journal that overturn the overwhelming scientific consensus.
Do not skirt the issue. Do not try to claim we are abusing you by asking this. Do not try to disparage climate scientists.
The evidence of the climategate emails is quite clear
Scientists are concerned that promoting C02 warming in such strong terms without drawing attention to the level of uncertainty may cause them considerable future problems if the proposed warming does not eventuate.
The climategate emails are part of the scientific process and can be legitimately seen as being like a review of the state of knowledge we have about AGW.
The evidence of the climategate emails is quite clear
Clear only to deniers who seek to push a particular agenda. And once again you are trying to divert attention because you have been unable to provide any peer reviewed papers that overturn the broad scientific consensus.
Clear only to deniers who seek to push a particular agenda. And once again you are trying to divert attention because you have been unable to provide any peer reviewed papers that overturn the broad scientific consensus.
You keep going on about this
You are having an argument with a fantasy person rather than me.
The science supports what i am saying.
You are just so far unable to understand what i am saying
Well then, Please state clearly what it is you are saying.
How about you provide some documentation that describes in a paragraph or so the current overwhelming scientific view on AGW so that i know what you are describing that is different to what i am describing and we take it from there?
I seem to be repeating myself so far.
As far as i can see we are disagreeing on what actually is the scientific consensus where i am saying the consensus is that humans are believed to be measureably warming the planet.
ThatGuy for example agreed that C02 caused warming is a theory at this point in time.
I am an atheist because the science supports that position.
There is no science to support the existence or non-existence of gods.
Quote:
I accept AGW because the science supports that position.
There is no science that shows the degree to which humans influence the global climate, nor is there any consensus on the degree to which humans influence the global climate.
Quote:
You are a know nothing on the interweb.
Why the unprovoked abuse? It seems my post has hit a nerve...
Oops. I did not take into account the fact that a photon re-emitted from a CO2 (or water) molecule can strike the earth and be re-emitted at a frequency at which the atmosphere is transparent or the absorption band is already saturated. So yes. If you increase the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, you would expect to see emission to space at the CO2 frequency decrease and the emissions at other frequencies where there are no IR absorbers/emitters or the band is already saturated increase.
Note that this is just consistent with the postulation that CO2 absorbs and emits at these frequencies which we already knew and that the band had not saturated by 1996 (which we did not know). Not seeing this effect would have disproved the theory behind AGW, but seeing it merely fails to disprove it, and it is still silent on the *proportion* of the change of temperature which is due to AGW.
That website is quite deceptive in the way it presents the data, because all the graphs have the effect of water vapour filtered out so as to make the effect of CO2 seem more significant than it really is. This is silly, because increase in water vapour concentration at the polar regions (which you would predict) could have much more "greenhouse effect" than CO2. But modelling of this increase and the behaviour of clouds is still very much a work in progress.
The truth will set you free. But first, it will piss you off. --Gloria Steinem AREPS™
C02 is an essentially almost biologically harmless gas.
Currently we are burning fossil fuels to ensure plants in greenhouses have sufficient C02 where C02 is essential for life on earth as we now know it.
And quite obviously C02 is being portrayed as some kind of bogeyman where vast clouds of water coming from cooling towers are being pictured along with the alarming C02 doom stories
What's all this got to do with the price of fish?
The argument essentially is whether increasing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere cause more global warming.
The answer is yes.
You're pursuing a line of argument which indicates subjective emotionalism. Nothing to do with objectivity.
As for increasing CO2 being harmless for our sort of life, no it isn't. Even 1000 ppmbv is impairing the health of mammalian life. Mammals became lords of the planet as CO2 levels plummeted from 50 million years ago onwards. Mammals don't have have the super-efficient respiration that theropods have.
The next trick of our glorious banks will be to charge us a fee for using net bank!!! You are no longer customer, you are property!!!
AGW is still a scary story to tell children before bedtime. You know the kind of problem only an enlightened state can solve, just a little tax here a subsidy there. Obama helped some mates out over at Solyndra.
Governments love a crisis so much, sometimes they have to create their own.
I thought we were supposed to be underwater by now anyway.
As to AGW I say bring it, I hate the f@king cold.
Enjoy The Ride!
The case for individual freedom rests chiefly on the recognition of the inevitable and universal ignorance of all of us concerning a great many of the factors on which the achievement of our ends and welfare depend. It is because every individual knows so little and, in particular, because we rarely know which of us knows best that we trust the independent and competitive efforts of many to induce the emergence of what we shall want when we see it. Humiliating to human pride as it may be, we must recognize that the advance and even the preservation of civilization are dependent upon a maximum of opportunity for accidents to happen.” ― Friedrich A. von Hayek
"I, on the other hand, am a fully rounded human being with a degree from the university of life, a diploma from the school of hard knocks, and three gold stars from the kindergarten of getting the shit kicked out of me." Blackadder.
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy
