The Forum > General Discussion > CO2 a bit player
CO2 a bit player
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
-
- All
Posted by Hasbeen, Monday, 20 April 2020 7:38:38 PM
| |
Yes indeed Hasbeen, nothing new there.
A while back I collected a number of references to cloud sensitivity of global warming. The Universities in Finland and Kobe have defined the argument. It is the reason that AGW theory thinks that the earth's temperature is so sensitive to a small amount of co2. It explains why Ian Climer's "Can one in 80000 co2 molecules have that affect ?". Well no it can't. But clouds can. Climate Depot http://tinyurl.com/y5huzsz5 http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-07-11/scientists-finland-japan-man-made-climate-change-doesnt-exist-practice by Tyler Durden http://calderup.wordpress.com/category/3b-the-svensmark-hypothesis/ http://calderup.wordpress.com/category/3-climate-change/ Confirms that Roman & Medieval Warming was world wide. https:// Posted by Bazz, Tuesday, 21 April 2020 8:41:57 AM
| |
Has, Please post links to the papers
Posted by Josephus, Tuesday, 21 April 2020 8:42:05 AM
| |
is boris Johnson a geenie or globalist?
Hasbeen, have you shattered Boris Johnson's hope for the world to reduce greenhouse gas emissions? No need to be sorry, because you are merely part of minority world opinion, albeit the concern is not yet mounting to enough real action. For every bit of info you find, there are many, many more signs and publications that support global warming Posted by Chris Lewis, Tuesday, 21 April 2020 8:42:10 AM
| |
Last line chopped off;
Confirms that Roman & Medieval Warming was world wide. http://tinyurl.com/uqz485j Posted by Bazz, Tuesday, 21 April 2020 9:01:38 AM
| |
Chris there is no argument about whether the earth has warmed,
the argument is why ? Start with Hendrix Svenmark's papers on cloud formation, sunspots etc. Posted by Bazz, Tuesday, 21 April 2020 9:07:44 AM
|
Cloud forcing dominates in the Arctic
Within a matter of hours, the radiative forcing effects from clouds can vary by ±40 W/m² in the Arctic. From one year to the next, cloud radiative effects can vary by 70 W/m² and overall cloud radiative effects can reach 360 W/m² (Ebell et al., 2020).
Follow it & weep.
In contrast, the total accumulated change in net impact from CO2 forcing is only 1.82 W/m² since 1750 (Feldman et al., 2015).
Simply put, cloud forcing radiatively dominates in the Arctic. CO2 is a bit player, at most. Perhaps those who have been pushing the scam for years will use the coronavirus fiasco to to quietly drop the rubbish, rather than be proved to be fools.