SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: RetiredNow who wrote (1065236)4/14/2018 6:50:01 AM
From: Thomas A Watson  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1578290
 
yes they believe in it. lol,.... you believe a degree in some bla bla science indicates someone has a clue. after all you do not have a clue and could not tell some professors back what they told you well enough for your to get your own, Global warming process is based upon global cooling delay. If one understands probability and how photon interact with matter and the thousands of H20 vs CO2 one cannot but see how idiotic thinking some one part in 10,000 will make any more difference than something less nowhere close to measurable. In and electric circuit the voltage delay will be caused by added capacitance before a resistance. GHG effect is like adding a capacitance to the thermal impedance of the atmosphere.

Can you fathom what dew point defines in H20 part per 10,000.
At dew point of 45f the atmosphere is 1% H2O. At Dewpoint 65F the atmosphere is 2% H20. At 75f it's 3% H20. Can you comprehend the GHG property of H20 vs CO2 per molecule. Now CO2 has gone up by .001 percent. It seems no one in Iceland comprehends how to use ratios.

It all over your head to understand. And FYI at agwn.homeip.net you can find the spreedsheerts I created using both goff-gratch and bolton dewponts equations with Ideal Gas Law algebra.




To: RetiredNow who wrote (1065236)4/16/2018 2:40:04 PM
From: PKRBKR  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1578290
 
which show conclusively the acceleration in atmospheric CO2 content over the last 100 years

This is inarguable and certainly human activity is a huge contributor. The concentration levels are still so low this nominal increase could never cause the level of warming and devastation. It is so low it would be ignored in any conservation of energy calculation.