What Climate Crisis? And what is it?

Truth Detector said:
https://www.thoughtco.com/chemical-composition-of-air-604288
Click to expand...
Thank you.

So these numbers are quoted by Anne Marie Helmenstine, Ph.D., who in turn got it out of a chemistry book written by David R. Lide. In other words, all of you are just quoting numbers with no authoritative source that I can see.

Gas concentrations in the atmosphere vary from place to place and from moment to moment. You can see this if you go out and buy a CO2 detector and wander around with it (and that's just the CO2 on the surface!) In other words, none of these gases are uniformly distributed over the Earth's surface or through the atmosphere.

Truth Detector said:
https://www.answers.com/Q/What_percentage_of_land_on_earth_is_dominated_by_humans
Click to expand...
So these numbers come from an unknown user at answers.com, and designated by answers.com as the 'correct' answer by fiat. Obviously, this is not an authoritative source.

You have accepted these as sources. I don't. As I said before, I have a higher requirement to even begin to believe numbers just thrown around.
Fortunately, it's inconsequencial. None of these gases or vapors have the ability to warm the Earth.

You had somewhat the right idea, but the wrong way of presenting it, and actually argued in favor of the Church of Global Warming while doing it. Your argument was based on the triviality of the low concentration of CO2 in Earth's atmosphere, but actually wound up ignoring the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

You got caught with a weak argument, and wound up actually helping those you were arguing against. The real key to this is to learn the science and the mathematics, and to realize why the idea of a magick gas is not possible, and that measuring the temperature of the Earth is not possible.

I'm trying to help you strengthen your argument. Please take my attempt in that light.
 
AProudLefty said:
Climate crisis is where there is an increase in numbers and intensities of the storms such as tornadoes, hurricanes and such.

That is a partial definition. Is it true or not? That's a matter of debate.
Click to expand...
Very good. You at least tried.

It unfortunately is not possible, since the word 'climate' is a subjective word and has no value associated with it, such as the number of storms, hurricanes, etc. There is no 'crisis' specified.

Storms are not a crisis. They are weather. So are hurricanes and tornadoes.

The number or intensity of tornadoes is unknown. The number of hurricanes or their intensity in history is unknown. That information used to be available, but NOAA removed it from the site (after they were caught modifying it). In other words, there is NO surviving data.

So your definition is based on random numbers of type randU.

You're going to have to try again.
 
Geeko Sportivo said:
You do know that Truth Deflector is a professed weather genius don't you?

Just because he still lives at home in Mommy and Daddy's basement and spends 12 hours here everyday verbally terrorizing and trolling the other forum members, is no reason to start doubting him now.
Click to expand...

Insult fallacies. Trolling. No argument presented.
 
McRocket said:
'Scientists know with virtual certainty that increasing greenhouse gas concentrations tend to warm the planet. '

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/energy-and-the-environment/greenhouse-gases-and-the-climate.php'

https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/co2-temperature.html

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...tly-impact-extreme-weather-research-suggests/

Yet you seem to be saying - matter of factly - that this is wrong.
Click to expand...
It is wrong.
McRocket said:
And where are your links to unbiased, factual evidence of this?
Click to expand...
None needed. I have already shown you the theories of science being ignored here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top