STEM Global Warming and the CO2 Interpretation

[WAND]

@Matski
No. Because what they saying make sense to me, I believe them. Now I take a look for a moment.

As they said, after 1940 temperature trend go down, beside post-war industrial boom. So more CO2 and temprerature go down. How if CO2 causing global warming. Enough proof for me.
Personally I don't like CO2 propaganda because it damaging autoindustry.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/temp20.html

https://skepticalscience.com/global-cooling-mid-20th-century.htm

 

[kingjr9000]

Oh brother.

In your words....



So when climate scientists are saying global warming might be linking to CO2, its a cash-sam, a hoax and they are shills just trying to secure funding...

But when the Defence secretary says the bad guys can trigger earthquakes, volcanoes, hurricanes, shoot down passenger airliners, and eliminate ballistic missiles in trajectory..... you don't think perhaps that was in order to help secure the $300,000,000,000 a year budget?

I'm sure in the 20 years since lots of evidence has therefore been found of terrorists creating volcanic eruptions and earthquakes.... I'm glad these days they stick to flying aircraft into New York to secure funding, and the bad guys simply hack computers to rig presidencies.... that seems much easier

Funny Ok, i will admit that it does seem contradictory or hypocritical to mention that person, but, Regan back during his presidency even mentioned russia having the tech, and Lyndn was one of the firsts to mention doing it. Notice the dates of the experiments and Lyndons term. He claimed that it was for climate change or something along those lines, but then look at the CIA docs, and you'll see entirely different reasons.

Here goes a few links about weather manipulation from the recent CIA dump.

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/document/cia-rdp75-00001r000100070096-5

These two are on the fringe side of things, but they do mention weather manipulation.

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/document/cia-rdp96-00792r000500610009-7
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/document/cia-rdp96-00792r000600450022-9

I will admit that its hard to find things relating to haarp, and not cloud seeding, but the cia also don't answer to regular government rules and funding, too...

I'll be going to sleep soon since I've been up all night, but i'll try to continue this conversation when i wake back up, if i can find anything official.

 

[Giannis]

Interesting. So what are we going to discuss next? Menstruation cycles and shoes?

 

[Sunny]

Wow...you had to go and make one of these threads, didn't you? I normally don't get involved in these of things because some people believe everything NASA, "scientists" (shills), and the gubs say, but ignore other small things that pop up. Im in the camp of it being a hoax, a lie, a cash scam, or the like, generally because of things like this.

China is controlling the weather and will soon make it rain over an area twice the size of FRANCE


Test of climate tech follows years of bizarre rumours that China might be mucking around with the world's weather

BY MARGI MURPHY

24th January 2017, 1:46 pm

CHINA is going to make it rain.

Its government has created a technology that can cause a downpour over an area almost twice the size of France.

View attachment 396135
ALAMY
2
A storm brewing in Shanghai, China
China is spending £138million on the new initiative to solve the drought in its northwestern provinces, according to the South China Morning Post.

It’s sending airplanes to spray chemicals like dry ice and silver iodide across the sky to create more rainfall in a technique called cloud seeding.

The China Meteorological Administration expects rainfall and snow to be increased over 960,000 sq km as a result.


How can you change the weather?
China has a weather machine that it claims will make it rain over an area 1.7 times the size of France.

It’s spending millions on aircraft and chemicals that will be sprayed into the sky.

Those chemicals – typically silver iodide or dry ice – will change the metaphysical make up of the cloud.

This forces it to sleet, rain or even snow artificially, on demand.


The project will take about four years to complete.

It’s not a new technology.

Back in 2008, China launched over 1,100 rockets containing silver iodide before the Olympics opening ceremony so Beijing’s skies would be clear for its fireworks display.

It comes as changing weather plays havoc with our planet.

Nasa revealed that 2016 was the hottest year ever and 2017 could bring floods, droughts, SUPERSTORMS and wildfires if temperatures rise.


And things like this.
https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/the-frightening-politics-of-geoengineering

https://geopolitics.co/2015/06/06/us-air-force-admits-they-can-control-weather/

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...ia-accuses-russia-manipulating-worlds-weather

Interesting. So what are we going to discuss next? Menstruation cycles and shoes?

Didn't you know the Chinese control the menstruation cycles...

 

[chonkoa]

You guys are hilarious.

 

[Matski]

@Matskit
No. Because what they saying make sense to me, I believe them. Now I take a look for a moment.

View attachment 396206

As they said, after 1940 temperature trend go down, beside post-war industrial boom. So more CO2 and temprerature go down. How if CO2 causing global warming. Enough proof for me.
Personally I don't like CO2 propaganda because it damaging autoindustry.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/temp20.html

https://skepticalscience.com/global-cooling-mid-20th-century.htm

First off, I just wanna say, I'm on neither side of the fence on this one, so if I'm questioning you a lot, it's not because I disagree with you or think you're wrong, I just like to see the facts people use to form their opinions.

As for the graph you posted, out of context I'm not entirely sure what it's showing to be honest, but... in that, and the first link you provided, they deal with a 100 year average baseline -- the more current you make the baseline, the higher the average, and the less the temperature anomaly will seem... I don't know if this is reasonable or not, because I don't know how long it takes to warm up a couple of quintillion tonnes of rock, or a thousand trillion litres of water, or 5000 trillion tonnes of the air we breath....

.... however ignoring that the further back you take the start date, the more the increased temperature anomaly will be... the 2nd link you provided offers a reasonable explanation for the cooling of the planet during the industrial boom.... as the article states, other gases - i.e. sulphate aerosols, will have altered readings --- readings that are perhaps not comparative as post war measurement techniques gave a lower reading (according to the link).

I'm certainly no expert, but the explanation of sulphate aerosols certainly tallies with very simple physics.... Greenhouse gases are about insulating the heat within them, gases that stop the solar warming of the Earth in the first place (apparently what sulphate aerosols do) mean that their is less warmth for Greenhouse gases to insulate... and consequently their effect will be lessened. These sulphates were reduced by legislation and warming started again... in essence... according to the link you posted, global warming via CO2 was combatted by the introduction of another pollutant into the atmosphere.

... so to be honest, in these cases I don't see how you think they support you belief?

but i'll try to continue this conversation when i wake back up, if i can find anything official

I think this may be getting away from the spirit of the thread to be honest... though it might make for a cracking spy thriller I guess the question is, is there enough evidence out there to link these acts to long term global climatic changes. I'm not saying there isn't but will we ever be able to get enough information out of the CIA, or the KGB, to spot a trend, or causality...? I personally doubt it... Vy ne znayete, ya ne znayu, komrad

 

[Matski]

Interesting. So what are we going to discuss next? Menstruation cycles and shoes?

The link is undeniable... When the girlfriend is menstruating, the only way I get to go and photograph racing cars, is by buying her shoes...

 

[WAND]

@Matski
Doesn't matter, I don't wan't to bother myself with discussion about this theme.
I am here ( on GCF ) primarily because of cars.
Sure we all sometimes goes outside of cars, but it should be less important.
Better we stay with fun threads and cars.
I am not expert for this theme also, just don't believe in this "CO2 story", and that's my choice.
Just like someone who think's that because of he breathe, he contribute destroying the Planet.
And animals and plant destroying Planet too.
Who believe in that, his choice.
There are really bad things that destroying the Planet, species, water etc, and there is no debate about that like for CO2 which they declare as "biggest" problem.
I am finished with this thread.

 

[kingjr9000]

Maybe its a brain fart and he meant to put "absorb" instead?

 

[jack]

i leave this here

 

[Sunny]

Maybe its a brain fart and he meant to put "absorb" instead?

Really? Hence why he repeated the same sentiment again here?

... and plant destroying Planet too.

Look, I don't mean to be mean spirited to him or you guys, and I know nothing I say will convince you guys otherwise, so I will stop. But when alone, just contemplate the possibility that maybe, just maybe, there is something to this thing called science and everything is not a conspiracy. Just give it a thought.

 

[kingjr9000]

Really? Hence why he repeated the same sentiment again here?



Or maybe you are right and it is a brain fart except it is always? Or maybe that is just the intellectual capacity of the people arguing against science?


Look, I don't mean to be mean spirited to him or you guys, and I know nothing I say will convince you guys otherwise, so I will stop. But when alone, just contemplate the possibility that maybe, just maybe, there is something to this thing called science and everything is not a conspiracy. Just give it a thought.

I didn't see the second time. You're not being mean to me, imv. We're all just having a nice debate between car enthusiasts. I see nothing wrong with it.

But i used to believe in C02 changing the climate, and was a full supporter of hydrogen over batteries, until i did a bit more research and followed the money and statements from from other scientist who mentioned that you agree or get no funding. Then you also had the founder of TWC and Greenpeace saying that the entire industry has become toxic. Thats when i became a lot more hesitant.

 

[WAND]

@Sunny
Plant-facility-factory-industry in general.
How many tons of CO2 emitted annually your home :
The website of National Geographic published a short presentation picturesque consumers of electricity in the average home in the United States and their impact on CO2 emissions into the atmosphere.
Following the attached illustration, you can easily add up to how many tons of CO2 in the atmosphere is responsible your home. All figures represent the weight of CO2 that is emitted into the atmosphere during production for example. electric power consumed by wireless phone ...
Domestic appliances:

TV (digital) 247
TV (analog) 133
Home Cinema 55
Video recorder (I) 29
DVD player 11
Stereo (components) 76
Satellite set 80
laptop 45

Laundry room:

washing machine 69
tumble dryer (electric) 690
tumble dryer (gas) 196

Heating and cooling:

Cooling System 1830
air conditioning 393
Water heating (electric) 1.615
water heating (gas) 977
water heating (fuel oil) 1,950
furnace in the boiler room (gas) 3,136
furnace in the boiler room (fuel oil) 6.480
pump (electric) 2363
ventilator for oil and gas boiler 273

Kitchen:

aspirator 9
microwave 81
Oven (electric) 283
Oven (gas) 295
toaster 24
dishwasher (excluding water heating) 270
Coffee 38
fridge 536
freezer 630

Workroom:

monitor 53
PC 145
modem 33
printer (ink-jet, or with a scanner and copier) 162

Bedroom:

clock radio 10
telephone with answering machine 20
cordless phone 17
Electric lighting 1,040
ventilator 53

So there is list of "public enemy" too.
I guess you will destroy your home, to save the Planet.
Also, you need to stop breathing, to save Planet.
And stop driving cars. And stop using everything from list above.
So they should bring taxes to microwave, fridge, PC, TV, etc.
You need to pay annualy tax for CO2 emission.
And because you ( or we ) pay taxes for that, Planet will be safe.

 

[chonkoa]

I guess he meant that during night time, plants emit CO2 due to the lack of sunlight.
The amount of CO2 plants give out during the night time is quite minimal compared to the amount of CO2 it takes in during the day.

So generally speaking plants do take in CO2 in the day and give off O2 through photosynthesis. At night, they do the reverse and give off CO2(albeit small amount)

 

[Gianclaudio]

So there is list of "public enemy" too.
I guess you will destroy your home, to save the Planet.
Also, you need to stop breathing, to save Planet.
And stop driving cars. And stop using everything from list above.
So they should bring taxes to microwave, fridge, PC, TV, etc.
You need to pay annualy tax for CO2 emission.
And because you ( or we ) pay taxes for that, Planet will be safe.

What an imbecile logic. Your stupidity is borderline insulting to people with a modicum of rational thinking. Is ok not to believe or share a point of view, but spare ourselves from ignorance, superstition and insult lot's of people's life work because you saw a video which said something otherwise.

Also, excellent try on using semantics to alter your use of the word "plant" which was very clear in the context given.

 

[WAND]

@Gianclaudio
We see who insulting.
So continue enjoying CO2 making products, while criticize CO2 makers at the same time.
I don't impose anything to anyone.
Just posted video.
But seems that "CO2 supporters" doesn't tolerate other opinion.
And did you watched video ?
I guess no. But if you watched, what are yours objections ?
I am no expert for this theme, but I listen what scientist and professors says.
And they gave proof for what they saying.

 

[chonkoa]

Guys, I will suggest we maintain civility.
It is okay to disagree but please I ask everyone to be civil.
Thanks.
It is also worth mentioning that not everyone speaks and write english as their first language, so words or sentences may have a different delivery than actually intended.

 

[jack]

a friend of mine recently watched a video on youtube about german politics. the video told him that germany has no peace treaty and therefore still is an occupation zone of the united states. he now really believes this shit.
i don't know how we got there that some "research" on google and youtube makes so many people fall into these conspiracy traps.

i think its simply worth generating sustainable energy(even if you ignore global warming). everyone is able to generate their own energy(Democratization of energy). sustainable energy last forever, while crude oil has a limit. crude oil should be used for so much more important stuff(e.g. plastics), then blowing it out of some exhaust pipes. we are destroying nature and wonderful landscapes just because of oil. we are cooperating with dictatorships and great wars just to make oil deals.

so even if you really don't care about global warming and think that the chinese created it - there are a lot more reasons to go sustainable.

 

[Gianclaudio]

It is also worth mentioning that not everyone speaks and write english as their first language, so words or sentences may have a different delivery than actually intended.

Chonkoa, there is not a single remote posibility this was an incoherence error due to not being a native english speaker. The context which gives sense to the sentence is pretty obvious (and I should know sir, as I neither have english as my first language) :

You know, people, animals and plants emitting CO2. So will humans pay taxes for that "crime" ?
How about animals and plants, how they will charge them for CO2 emission?

Just like someone who think's that because of he breathe, he contribute destroying the Planet.
And animals and plant destroying Planet too.

And I didn't make any insult ad hominen, I clearly stated that was an stupid logic. If someone is going to talk bullshit and then use the rhetoric of having a semantic problem and pass up as being misunderstood, then he, in that case, is insulting our collective inteligence as a forum.

Thanks.