tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2581891759488770965.post8384796804373463742..comments2023-05-16T11:33:40.343-04:00Comments on Dialogues On Global Warming: The Probability of Global WarmingTales From The Travelshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12155749992445168195noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2581891759488770965.post-55796613702866843642015-02-23T14:25:27.740-05:002015-02-23T14:25:27.740-05:00Who accuse anyone of cherry picking statistics?Who accuse anyone of cherry picking statistics?Rexx Vernon Sheltonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2581891759488770965.post-60014393231473242802015-02-23T10:42:59.542-05:002015-02-23T10:42:59.542-05:00Being in my late 20's, I've spent a lot of...Being in my late 20's, I've spent a lot of time on the internet, and seen a lot of crazy things.<br /><br /><br />This may be the best of all of them.<br /><br /><br />You cannot accuse someone of cherry picking statistics because they refuse to cherry pick the single position that effectively misrepresents a trend, when all others are valid.Dan50thAEnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2581891759488770965.post-7171782918574845442015-01-20T18:02:24.710-05:002015-01-20T18:02:24.710-05:00The issue about the data sets was settled by Berke...The issue about the data sets was settled by Berkeley Earth. They made the same complaint and established an entirely different data set to challenge the main groups. They came up with almost exactly the same results.<br /><br />We can't even keep NSA secrets (REAL secrets) from becoming public. How can anyone thing NASA and NOAA can do a better job of it?<br /><br />The natural cycle is great. They've been telling everyone we are going into a new ice age. Now, they want to say the heat is all natural? The strange part is they are closer to the truth with the new ice age claim. The natural cycle we're currently in is a cooling one. Maybe not a new ice, but certainly not one leading to record warming.Christopher Keatinghttp://dialoguesonglobalwarming.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2581891759488770965.post-18670810681141795152015-01-19T19:12:38.101-05:002015-01-19T19:12:38.101-05:00You are mixing up two different things. The term &...You are mixing up two different things. The term "greenhouse effect" is a misnomer and comes from the old idea that sunlight went into a greenhouse, heated up the surface and the glass windows kept the IR light from going back out. That, as it turns out, is not really how greenhouses work (although there is some of that going on). Be that as it may, the greenhouse effect is real - even if it is a misnomer.Christopher Keatinghttp://dialoguesonglobalwarming.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2581891759488770965.post-84256862753587030472015-01-19T18:57:14.182-05:002015-01-19T18:57:14.182-05:00That is the difference between the greenhouse gas ...That is the difference between the greenhouse gas theory and an actual greenhouse. It may slow down infrared radiation, but CO2 can do nothing to slow heat transfer by convection. The theory was actually proven wrong over a hundred years ago by Robert W. Wood in 1909. You may want to look that up.Chris Redwinenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2581891759488770965.post-45316157332511881852015-01-19T18:19:30.065-05:002015-01-19T18:19:30.065-05:00The greenhouse theory says certain molecules will ...The greenhouse theory says certain molecules will absorb and reemit infrared radiation, thus slowing the movement of IR radiation from the surface to space. CO2 is a major greenhouse gas, as is water vapor, methane and many others. <br /><br />The runaway greenhouse effect is the idea that greenhouse gases will lead to an increase in temperature, which will lead to greenhouse gases being released into the atmosphere, which leads to higher temperatures and so on until it becomes catastrophic. There have been some claims we risk creating such a scenario here, but most climate scientists believe we will reach a stable temperature, albeit, one much higher than is good for us and the environment.<br /><br />Like I said, I didn't examine your numbers because I already know they are wrong. The greenhouse effect is real and been proven with extensive experimental evidence. You might was well produce numbers that say gravity isn't real.Christopher Keatinghttp://dialoguesonglobalwarming.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2581891759488770965.post-52860006342091905052015-01-19T18:12:13.530-05:002015-01-19T18:12:13.530-05:00The greenhouse theory claims that heat is somehow ...The greenhouse theory claims that heat is somehow being trapped, and building up over time. Didn't it also used to be called the "runaway greenhouse effect"? It is warmer at the surface of the earth than it would otherwise be because there is an atmosphere, and enough atmospheric pressure to raise the temperature. But there is no mechanism to trap that heat over time. The comparison to Venus and Titan makes that obvious.Chris Redwinenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2581891759488770965.post-41370190519641207512015-01-19T17:47:36.372-05:002015-01-19T17:47:36.372-05:00The laws are correct, but that doesn't me you ...The laws are correct, but that doesn't me you are applying them correctly. I didn't even bother with them because your premise of no greenhouse effect is a false one. You're right about one thing, the numbers don't lie. We can calculate what the planetary temperature would be without any greenhouse effect and we can compare that to the measured value. We find the planet is about 35 C warmer with an atmosphere than it would be without.<br /><br />http://ase.tufts.edu/cosmos/view_chapter.asp?id=21&page=1Christopher Keatinghttp://dialoguesonglobalwarming.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.com