[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Much of what you say is good and interesting. Each of us individually must integrate all the facts and opinions that we have heard and create an individual consensus for ourselves. I choose to believe that in the western world that the majority of scientists are true to themselves and are writing factual material. And the PEER REVIEW system should help keep them honest. Now, in Russia and China scientists may feel hamstrung about telling the truth.

I wish that were true. But when all "the peers" are on the same page for the same reasons...........

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Fair point. I think of CO2 as a pollutant in that it is OUT OF BALANCE with the earth in relatively recent years. Its EXCESS gets into the seawater and causes a weak acid which KILLS (as in POLLUTES) the water and kills the coral reef. Maybe CO2 in its pre-1880 concentration was NOT a POLLUTANT, but today in its EXCESS state, it IS a POLLUTANT.

Just like our bodies need certain vitamins and minerals to function properly, too much or too little can make you ill or even kill you. The chemical balance of our atmosphere and oceans need to be in balance for our world to be healthy. Sounds simple, but it isn't.

[sounding]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

Just like our bodies need certain vitamins and minerals to function properly, too much or too little can make you ill or even kill you. The chemical balance of our atmosphere and oceans need to be in balance for our world to be healthy. Sounds simple, but it isn't.

Too simple, because it ignores reality. Life and nature are never in balance. Mother Nature is constantly adjusting its heat transfer processes in response to heating inputs from the sun, volcanism, cosmic radiation, etc. All these inputs are constantly changing and thus so does our climate in response. Even our lives are in constant change -- called aging.

[Taltarzac725]

Climate change conspiracy theory - Wikipedia

A lot of this looks like climate change conspiracy theories thrown out by certain media outlets to sell crap in more ways than one.

There is good science out there but Meteorology - Wikipedia is still not that sophisticated a discipline. They did not have that good an idea, for instance, where Hurricane Ian was going. It did a lot of damage though. Hurricane Ian - Wikipedia

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by sounding

Too simple, because it ignores reality. Life and nature are never in balance. Mother Nature is constantly adjusting its heat transfer processes in response to heating inputs from the sun, volcanism, cosmic radiation, etc. All these inputs are constantly changing and thus so does our climate in response. Even our lives are in constant change -- called aging.

Sorry you failed to see that it was intended to be a simple, brief analogy. Thinking of the Earth as a " super organism" and using a single organism for comparative functions is common. As we age and go through normal activity, our body's needs constantly change. Same with our planet's oceans and atmosphere, as you pointed out. Also, at the end of my post, I said it sounds simple, but it isn't.
When our system is out of balance or broken, it is time to take our medicine.

[sounding]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

Sorry you failed to see that it was intended to be a simple, brief analogy. Thinking of the Earth as a " super organism" and using a single organism for comparative functions is common. As we age and go through normal activity, our body's needs constantly change. Same with our planet's oceans and atmosphere, as you pointed out. Also, at the end of my post, I said it sounds simple, but it isn't.
When our system is out of balance or broken, it is time to take our medicine.

So tell me, what is out of balance?

[sounding]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Climate change conspiracy theory - Wikipedia

A lot of this looks like climate change conspiracy theories thrown out by certain media outlets to sell crap in more ways than one.

There is good science out there but Meteorology - Wikipedia is still not that sophisticated a discipline. They did not have that good an idea, for instance, where Hurricane Ian was going. It did a lot of damage though. Hurricane Ian - Wikipedia

Agree. And when it comes to damage, that is not a good indicator of storm strength, but an excellent indicator of population growth in a specific area. Regarding where Ian was going -- this will be briefly discussed 1 PM on Nov 7 at Everglades Rec Ctr.

[sounding]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

I wish that were true. But when all "the peers" are on the same page for the same reasons...........

Ditto -- that's called PAL Review -- created by those in authority to control group think. This is not new and been going on since humans were invented.

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Actually it IS there and I gave everyone its location in one of my earliest posts. Please just refer back to that post. I guarantee that it is in there. And I believe that that other scientist that we were talking about stated it also.

Actually, it is fairly common knowledge that man caused Global Warming. The U.N. recently stated that same thing.
All the rapid warming occurred after the Industrial Revolution and has increased recently about proportional to the rate of increase of the world's population.

Nope, not quite true. Yes, there was warming, AND there was an Industrial Revolution, but if you look at the millenniums of cyclic climate changes, you will see that Earth was warmer and it cooled off and there was little or no humans to cause it. You are making assumptions. A man on the train died, so since there were people on the train, he MUST have been murdered. He couldn't have just died. Sure, he could have died, but someone has to prove it was not a natural occurrence in order to call it "man caused" death.
Sorry if some us do not put much stock in the U.N. As far as I am concerned they could disband and I doubt anyone would miss them.

[Taltarzac725]

TV

Originally Posted by Byte1

Nope, not quite true. Yes, there was warming, AND there was an Industrial Revolution, but if you look at the millenniums of cyclic climate changes, you will see that Earth was warmer and it cooled off and there was little or no humans to cause it. You are making assumptions. A man on the train died, so since there were people on the train, he MUST have been murdered. He couldn't have just died. Sure, he could have died, but someone has to prove it was not a natural occurrence in order to call it "man caused" death.
Sorry if some us do not put much stock in the U.N. As far as I am concerned they could disband and I doubt anyone would miss them.

A man was murdered and there was no place for anyone to get off the train. This is a better analogy and we all have to live with the murderer free. In this case, the train is earth and the murderer is Global Warming.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by tuccillo

Breathing 100% oxygen is also not without issues. CO2 absorption by the oceans is not turning the oceans to an acid. The pH is dropping so the alkalinity is being reduced, which can be referred to as moving the oceans towards acidity. However, the oceans will not become an acid (a pH less than 7). Trying to draw an analogy of CO2 being a "blanket" is just as bad as calling CO2 a "greenhouse" gas. The physics of a "blanket" and the physics of a "greenhouse" are different than the physics of how CO2 impacts the atmosphere (approximately 1C from anthropogenic sources). We are, however, probably forever stuck with the term "greenhouse" gas.

I am sorry, but all my additional reading on the subject of CO2 has CONFIRMED my statements. 2 sources are Corning and RAC in England, among others.
.......Carbon Dioxide IS a greenhouse gas from automobile EXHAUST that is a MAJOR CONTRIBUTING FACTOR to Climate Change. Other greenhouse gases from car EXHAUST are NOx and Benzene........which is a CARCINOGENIC.
......"CO2 has the potential to TRAP energy from the sun and heat the surface of the earth" .........(that sounds like a blanket to me)

I have read MULTIPLE articles that state that CO2 has become excessive and the oceans are storing that excess CO2 as acid that is BLEACHING and killing coral reefs around the world.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by sounding

So tell me, what is out of balance?

I'm sorry. You are on post 156 and the information you seek has been mentioned several times already. Since I am not your secretary, I suggest you re-read all posts to find what has already been made available to you, or simply read on.

[sounding]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

I am sorry, but all my additional reading on the subject of CO2 has CONFIRMED my statements. 2 sources are Corning and RAC in England, among others.
.......Carbon Dioxide IS a greenhouse gas from automobile EXHAUST that is a MAJOR CONTRIBUTING FACTOR to Climate Change. Other greenhouse gases from car EXHAUST are NOx and Benzene........which is a CARCINOGENIC.
......"CO2 has the potential to TRAP energy from the sun and heat the surface of the earth" .........(that sounds like a blanket to me)

I have read MULTIPLE articles that state that CO2 has become excessive and the oceans are storing that excess CO2 as acid that is BLEACHING and killing coral reefs around the world.

Many years ago many sources said witches caused the glaciers to grow during the Little Ice Age. Do you believe everything you read?

[sounding]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

I'm sorry. You are on post 156 and the information you seek has been mentioned several times already. Since I am not your secretary, I suggest you re-read all posts to find what has already been made available to you, or simply read on.

In other words you have no data to support your claim.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by Byte1

Nope, not quite true. Yes, there was warming, AND there was an Industrial Revolution, but if you look at the millenniums of cyclic climate changes, you will see that Earth was warmer and it cooled off and there was little or no humans to cause it. You are making assumptions. A man on the train died, so since there were people on the train, he MUST have been murdered. He couldn't have just died. Sure, he could have died, but someone has to prove it was not a natural occurrence in order to call it "man caused" death.
Sorry if some us do not put much stock in the U.N. As far as I am concerned they could disband and I doubt anyone would miss them.

Ah! Murder on the Orient Express. The man was murdered. The evidence is clear to anyone who cares to look. Multiple stab wounds, one of which, the last one, was fatal.
Like in that marvelous tale, there is evidence of man's influence on climate change for those who wish to look and understand what they are seeing.
And as for the U. N., I think most of the world would miss them. Kind of like disbanding the U. S. A.. It would be missed very badly, except by the Russians and China.