You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–] Merchant_Menace 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

Burning fossil fuels releases carbon from the remnants of once living plants and animals. The animals got the carbon from the plants and the plants got it from the air. Therefore, burning fossil fuels releases carbon that was once in the air to begin with.

[–] gramman74 [S] 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

Carbon dioxide absorbs infrared radiation (IR) in three narrow bands of wavelengths, which are 2.7, 4.3 and 15 micrometers (µM). This means that most of the heat producing radiation escapes it. About 8% of the available black body radiation is picked up by these "fingerprint" frequencies of CO2. Climate scientists know that more CO2 does not result in more heat under usual conditions. So the mythologists among them try to salvage the global warming propaganda by pretending that something esoteric occurs higher in the atmosphere. The difference is that the absorption peaks for CO2 separate from the peaks for water vapor. Then supposedly, radiation which misses CO2 does not get picked up by water vapor and travels into outer space; and more CO2 causes less radiation to get missed on the shoulders of the peak

[–] Morbo 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

I'm with you on this. I've been arguing this point for years but most people have no clue about absorption and emission spectra. CO2 does have some emission bands like 10.2 µM that may play a part, but the emission is too weak given its small percentage of the atmospheric makeup. I've argued that for CO2 to be a significant contributor to heat gain in the system would put its concentration above lethal limits for animal life. None of this warming garbage stands up to the physics. It's just packaged pseudoscience fear mongering propaganda that the masses will buy into. CO2 is not a threat.

[–] Merchant_Menace 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Nothing I said contradicts this, fam. Just making another point bolstering argument against the whole global warming hypothesis.

[–] Morbo 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

You've proven nothing with those words. CO2 is not a contributor to atmospheric heating. OP's assertion on spectral absorption is spot on and provides a valid reason why CO2 is wrongfully accused of something it cannot do. You've basically just parroted some propaganda bullshit without any backing.

[–] Merchant_Menace 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I disproved the runaway greenhouse gas hypothesis independently from OPs claims about C02 absorption characteristics.

[–] HorseIsDead 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago  (edited ago)

The earth's surface was once a big sheet of glowing lava. I suppose we should find a way to focus the sun's energy on the earth to turn it into lava again since that would probably look cool and "it used to be like that" right?

[–] Merchant_Menace 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

So when you made that post did it feel like a valid point? Like, do you think the lava was because of the co2? In your little brain, is the timeline something like this: Step 1) lava earth Step 2) microbes Step 3) Venus earth Step 4) Moar microbes Step 5) ???? Step 6) paradise earth Step 7) cars Step 8) lava earth

Is that more or less how you think it works?