The Negative Correlation Between Global Temperature Rise andCO2 Concentrations
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Australia Dust Storm ... WELL DESERVED DIVINE RETRIBUTION FOR WELL KNOWN COLLECTIVE CRIMES
Next: sonoluminescence: sonofusion explained
From: Marvin the Martian on 1 Oct 2009 18:17 On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:07:53 +0000, Sam Wormley wrote: > John M. wrote: > > >> Replying to a poster who uses any handle other than his real name >> almost guarantees it is either an 8th grader or an automated response >> bot. You have one of each on your case now, and they don't go away in >> the face of logical, reasoned argument backed by hard fact and >> empirical discoveries. In fact they don't go away...ever. >> >> > Most of these crackpots are old men in their later years who, > somewhere along the way, failed to learn physics. They tend to have > little maturity, little self esteem and belittle what they cannot > understand. Is that the best "science" you can produce? LOL!
From: Sam Wormley on 1 Oct 2009 19:11 Marvin the Martian wrote: > > 1) It doesn't matter. The chemistry still works. > > 2) everywhere on the surface of the ocean there is CO2 entering and > exiting the surface. When the exits equal the enters, then it's at > equilibrium. > > 3) Nothing you quoted from the propaganda changes the fact one bit that > most of the man made CO2 enters the oceans, or that when the amount of > CO2 exceeds a certain level, carbonate deposits precipitate out and fall > to the bottom. Humans are dumping CO2 (31+ billion Metric tonnes per year) into the atmosphere and we measure atmospheric CO2 concentrations increasing 1.7 ppm/year. We measure CO2 increasing in the oceans. All the estimates show that the carbon content of the oceans is *increasing* by ~ 2±1 PgC every year (current burning of fossil fuel is ~7 PgC per year). Global Mean Surface Temperature Anomaly http://www.logicalscience.com/skeptics/images/tempchart.gif
From: Sam Wormley on 1 Oct 2009 19:12 Marvin the Martian wrote: > On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:40:11 +0000, Sam Wormley wrote: > >> Marvin the Martian wrote: >>> On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:03:53 +0000, Sam Wormley wrote: >>> >>>> Marvin the Martian wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> The ratio of CO2 in the atmosphere to CO2 in the oceans is determined >>>>> only by temperature. I told him that and he didn't believe it. I >>>>> quoted wikipedia and he attacked the source. So I quoted two >>>>> chemistry books, and then the changed the subject. Amazingly, quoting >>>>> books annoys him and he dismisses websites that FAVOR the global >>>>> warming fraud, if it doesn't suit his argument at the time. So, there >>>>> is no way to cite data to him. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> The partial pressure of CO2 is not a factor??? >>> no. Do I need to taunt you with freshman chemistry again? >> Is the ocean carbon sink sinking? >> http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/11/is-the-ocean- > carbon-sink-sinking/ > > Yes. I am well aware your idiot propaganda website demands that you > ignore simple chemistry. I am aware of their bullshit isotope ration > studies that pretend that fossil fuels are the only source of sequestered > carbon, which is a damned lie. > Marvin, you keep frothing at the mouth! Humans are dumping CO2 (31+ billion Metric tonnes per year) into the atmosphere and we measure atmospheric CO2 concentrations increasing 1.7 ppm/year. We measure CO2 increasing in the oceans. All the estimates show that the carbon content of the oceans is *increasing* by ~ 2±1 PgC every year (current burning of fossil fuel is ~7 PgC per year). Global Mean Surface Temperature Anomaly http://www.logicalscience.com/skeptics/images/tempchart.gif
From: Marvin the Martian on 1 Oct 2009 19:16 On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 23:12:44 +0000, Sam Wormley wrote: > Marvin the Martian wrote: >> On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:40:11 +0000, Sam Wormley wrote: >> >>> Marvin the Martian wrote: >>>> On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:03:53 +0000, Sam Wormley wrote: >>>> >>>>> Marvin the Martian wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> The ratio of CO2 in the atmosphere to CO2 in the oceans is >>>>>> determined only by temperature. I told him that and he didn't >>>>>> believe it. I quoted wikipedia and he attacked the source. So I >>>>>> quoted two chemistry books, and then the changed the subject. >>>>>> Amazingly, quoting books annoys him and he dismisses websites that >>>>>> FAVOR the global warming fraud, if it doesn't suit his argument at >>>>>> the time. So, there is no way to cite data to him. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> The partial pressure of CO2 is not a factor??? >>>> no. Do I need to taunt you with freshman chemistry again? >>> Is the ocean carbon sink sinking? >>> http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/11/is-the-ocean- >> carbon-sink-sinking/ >> >> Yes. I am well aware your idiot propaganda website demands that you >> ignore simple chemistry. I am aware of their bullshit isotope ration >> studies that pretend that fossil fuels are the only source of >> sequestered carbon, which is a damned lie. >> >> > Marvin, you keep frothing at the mouth Not really. But you do like to lie about people and cut and paste irrelevant drivel, don't you? > Humans are dumping CO2 (31+ billion Metric tonnes per year) into the > atmosphere and we measure atmospheric CO2 concentrations increasing > 1.7 ppm/year. We measure CO2 increasing in the oceans. All the > estimates show that the carbon content of the oceans is *increasing* > by ~ 2±1 PgC every year (current burning of fossil fuel is ~7 PgC per > year). > > Global Mean Surface Temperature Anomaly > http://www.logicalscience.com/skeptics/images/tempchart.gif
From: Unumnunum on 1 Oct 2009 22:51
Bill Ward wrote: > It would greatly improve your credibility if you would learn enough > chemistry to explain what you think is happening rather than mindlessly > posting the same link over and over. Ward attempts to belittle someone who doesn't agree with him. Meanwhile he posts no links to anything supporting his remarks. |