Please stop distorting what I say, Geoffrey - it's dull.

I said (correcting for typos):

>> [CO2] contributes about 30% to the glacial-interglacial warmings and coolings, or about 50% if you include other GHG’s like CH4 and N2O <<

You follow with:

“Where did you get the figure of 50% attributable to the three GHGs, H2O vapour, CH4 and N2O?”

Are you being intentionally obtuse, or is it a natural trait, Geoffrey?

I know it might be a big (t)ask for you Geoffrey, but do try and understand the AR4 link in context with what I said about glacials-interglacials, CO2, CH4 and N2O.

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/tssts-2-1-1.html

Who knows, if you look close you might even see the words “Glacial-Interglacial” at the top of the 1st piccie too?

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/figure-ts-1.html

Tell you what Geoffrey, try and extend yourself just a little further to terms like; “radiative forcing”, “energy budget”, so forth and so on - it will help with “attribution”.

Here’s something novel, why don’t you read the chapter on attribution or do some homework on a dude by the name of Severinghaus - JP that is.

You are very tedious Mr Kelley, good bye.

qanda,

Thought provoking article on blogging, commenting and moderation:

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/a-blog-around-the-clock/2013/01/28/commenting-threads-good-bad-or-not-at-all/

Dear poirot,

Interesting article thank you.

The notion that denialism is now regarded as trolling on respectable scientific blogs is heartening and not before time.

OLO is of course an opinion site and as such attracts, even welcomes, many diverse views and positions so I suppose they will always have a place to voice their recalcitrant take on the issue.

Just look at Geoffrey. Even when the claim “My evidence was properly referenced peer reviewed science.” was shown to be demonstrably false we did not see any retreat or apology. He shows such little respect for the scientific method it is no wonder reputable scientific journals such as Scientific America are quick to show these those engaging in such delusion/dishonesty the door.

What is interesting is the religious nature of their denialism or pseudo-scepticism and how closely their behaviour mirrors that of the 'spirit filled', young-earth creationist. The willingness to believe in the suspension of the laws of physics, the strenuous berating of those who don't believe those laws can be transgressed, the complete and utter disregard for contrary data and the uncanny ability to turn irrefutable evidence to support their position.

They are the ultimate 'Dark Suckers'.

Cont..

Cont..

Quote..

For years it has been believed that electric bulbs emitted light. However, recent information from Bell Labs has proven otherwise. Electric bulbs don't emit light, they suck dark. Thus they now call these bulbs dark suckers. The dark sucker theory, according to a Bell Labs spokesperson, proves the existence of dark, that dark has mass heavier than that of light, and that dark is faster than light.

The basis of the dark sucker theory is that electric bulbs suck dark.

Take for example, the dark suckers in the room where you are. There is less dark right next to them than there is elsewhere. The larger the dark sucker, the greater its capacity to suck dark. Dark suckers in a parking lot have a much greater capacity than the ones in this room. As with all things, dark suckers don't last forever. Once they are full of dark, they can no longer suck. This is proven by the black spot on a full dark sucker. A candle is a primitive dark sucker. A new candle has a white wick. You will notice that after the first use, the wick turns black, representing all the dark which has been sucked into it. If you hold a pencil next to the wick of an operating candle, the tip will turn black because it got in the path of the dark flowing into the candle.

Unfortunately, these primitive dark suckers have a very limited range. There are also portable dark suckers. The bulbs in these can't handle all of the dark by themselves, and must be aided by a dark storage unit. When the dark storage unit is full, it must be either emptied or replaced before the portable dark sucker can operate again.

Cont..

Cont..

Dark has mass.

When dark goes into a dark sucker, friction from this mass generates heat. Thus it is not wise to touch an operating dark sucker. Candles present a special problem, as the dark must travel in the solid wick instead of through glass. This generates a great amount of heat. Thus it can be very dangerous to touch an operating candle.

Dark is also heavier than light. If you swim deeper and deeper, you notice it gets slowly darker and darker. When you reach a depth of approximately fifty feet, you are in total darkness. This is because the heavier dark sinks to the bottom of the lake and the lighter light floats to the top. The immense power of dark can be utilized to mans advantage. We can collect the dark that has settled to the bottom of lakes and push it through turbines, which generate electricity and help push it to the ocean where it may be safely stored. Prior to turbines, it was much more difficult to get dark from the rivers and lakes to the ocean. The Indians recognized this problem, and tried to solve it. When on a river in a canoe travelling in the same direction as the flow of the dark, they paddled slowly, so as not to stop the flow of dark, but when they traveled against the flow of dark, they paddled quickly so as to help push the dark along its way.

Finally, we must prove that dark is faster than light. If you were to stand in an illuminated room in front of a closed, dark closet, then slowly open the closet door, you would see the light slowly enter the closet, but since the dark is so fast, you would not be able to see the dark leave the closet.

In conclusion, Bell Labs stated that dark suckers make all our lives much easier. So the next time you look at an electric bulb remember that it is indeed a dark sucker.

End Quote
http://www.siliconhell.com/humour/darksucker.htm

Thanks csteele : )

While not wishing to be "alarmist", I can't resist this meme:

http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3srn3c/