God Bless all affected by Florence

C. Beaty;n1140655 said:
Great chart! It shows that oxygen and ozone have the greatest response at the wavelength of the Earth’s surface temperature ~20 [SUP]0[/SUP]C. CO[SUB]2[/SUB] has strong response in the microwave region.
If you think 12-15 microns is a microwave region, that would explain why you keep getting the wrong answer on this issue, but I think you probably really do know how to interpret the numerical scales on those charts, could comprehend how a sensitive balance can be upset by changing even one component in a complex system if you were willing to consider it, and you just prefer to be cantankerous as a matter of personality. It has ceased to be fun for me to participate in your exercise in mental rigidity. Bye bye.
 
The highest frequency bands I have knowledge of are around 3 mm in wavelength but your first chart calls everything below ~12 microns “microwaves.”

Anything higher in frequency than 1 cm, Ka band, is quite useless because of atmospheric attenuation.
 
The atmospheric absorption produced by liquid droplets of clouds does not appear in your figure, WaspAir, Isn't it? To calculate the equilibrium temperature without involving the fundamental parameter related to the formation of these droplets (dust, catalysts, cosmic particles, solar winds, etc.) is like calculating the internal temperature of an humain according to the quantity of its fooding and the thickness of his clothes.

And not only clouds are not taken into account here, but I do not see the nitrogen in the image either. Is it not 78% of atmospheric gas?
 
Did I miss it? Did any of you 'sky is falling' goobers mention how you plan to stop volcanoes from poisoning the sky?
I'm also waiting for that same group to postulate a way to reduce human population (that would seem to be at the root of the 'problem')...
 
Some say that a an increase of CO[SUB]2 [/SUB] and a slight increase of temperature is a good thing; it assists plant growth and extends the growing season to provide food for a growing population.
 
I sure wish it was warmer at my location right now, 70*-75*, that would be just about right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
I sure wish it was warmer at my location right now, 70*-75*, that would be just about right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
I sure wish it was warmer at my location right now, 70*-75*, that would be just about right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
C. Beaty;n1140682 said:
Some say that a an increase of CO[SUB]2 [/SUB] and a slight increase of temperature is a good thing; it assists plant growth and extends the growing season to provide food for a growing population.

Quite a lot of variables here; overall some good effects, some bad but definitely not beneficial overall as the climate deniers posit.
https://news.stanford.edu/pr/02/jasperplots124.html
Where increasing temperatures and CO2 are showing the most immediate deleterious effects are in our oceans - resulting in measurable ocean acidification to the detriment of many organisms, particularly coral reefs. Furthermore ocean warming has resulted in increasing 'dead zones' as warmer water retains less oxygen in some cases not enough to sustain many species of fish. Many more active fish species such as cod are finding their habitats becoming far more restricted (shrinking northward). Couple all this with overfishing and other forms of ocean pollution and there are many signs that our oceans are in trouble. In Florida this year we have experienced one of the worst red tide events on record, extending far further and for a much longer period than is considered normal. The likely causes are increased ocean runoff from Florida agriculture and increasing temperatures. The effect on ocean life this year due to the red tide has been devastating, not to even mention the effect on people living along the coasts. CO2 is just part of the problem, an important one nevertheless. Old fogeys like CB and Smack don't have to worry, they'll be long gone, middle aged folks like myself maybe also not so much, it's our kids and grandkids that will have a more difficult time of it.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/sci...limate-change/
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/loc...216894990.html
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...-zones-spread/
 
C. Beaty;n1140682 said:
Some say that a an increase of CO[SUB]2 [/SUB] and a slight increase of temperature is a good thing; it assists plant growth and extends the growing season to provide food for a growing population.

Quite a lot of variables here; overall some good effects, some bad but definitely not beneficial overall as the climate deniers posit.
https://news.stanford.edu/pr/02/jasperplots124.html
Where increasing temperatures and CO2 are showing the most immediate deleterious effects are in our oceans - resulting in measurable ocean acidification to the detriment of many organisms, particularly coral reefs. Furthermore ocean warming has resulted in increasing 'dead zones' as warmer water retains less oxygen in some cases not enough to sustain many species of fish. Many more active fish species such as cod are finding their habitats becoming far more restricted (shrinking northward). Couple all this with overfishing and other forms of ocean pollution and there are many signs that our oceans are in trouble. In Florida this year we have experienced one of the worst red tide events on record, extending far further and for a much longer period than is considered normal. The likely causes are increased ocean runoff from Florida agriculture and increasing temperatures. The effect on ocean life this year due to the red tide has been devastating, not to even mention the effect on people living along the coasts. CO2 is just part of the problem, an important one nevertheless.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/environment/a25441709/last-fish-climate-change/
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/environment/article216894990.html
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/oceanic-dead-zones-spread/
 
In post #3 I wrote:
It seems that the flooding caused by the storm is severely aggravated by sea level rise. In the end this leads to a new evaluation of the value of a property lying in one of the areas that will be affected by future changes in sea level
I didn' t think this would come so soon, but this effect makes itself felt already. Members of Stanford University have studied the impact of sea level rise in Annapolis. While in the 60ies tidal floodings took place two or three times per year in 2017 there were 63! Shops bars and restaurants in the affected area lost between US $ 86.000 and 172.000 of revenue, due to guests not showing up as usual. This of course affects profitability of the shops and businesses and therefore also the prices at which they sell one day. The whole study is here:
http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaau2736

Another interesting article from the NYT:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...obal-warming-increases-nuisance-flooding.html
 
When Scandinavian tide gauges show a drop in sea level, IPCC explains the postglacial rebound. Why does IPCC forget about the associated sinking because of the extra weight of the water? Sans titre.png
 
I saw someone state that our atmosphere (on avg) is only .04% carbon dioxide.
Water vapor is a larger percentage and also absorbs infrared energy.
Why aren't the irrational types calling for reducing water vapor?
Still waiting on the plan to stop the volcanic contribution...
Brian
 
I read somewhere that the polar ice caps on Mars expand and contract in sync with those on Earth.

The little green men inhabiting Mars must be up to something sinister.
 
Top