Global Warming: still the ‘Greatest Scam in History’
- Thread starter Walter
- Start date
per your OP Walter, you just linked to the guys blog homepage! What facts... laid out beautifully... are you speaking to? Any in particular caught your fancy?
I appreciate this is now the "half-dozenth, or so" time I've asked you, but if you don't want to talk about Uncle Roy's facts... why did you take it upon yourself to create this thread, as an extension of the original?
Too late for that, you've converted me. What does Roy Spencer know compared to you.
what a stoopid comment. I spoke of non-compliance penalty and sanction. If you think they hold no legal attachment, perhaps you should have alerted your boy Harper to that fact... he didn't need to avoid the penalty owed and make a world-wide media splash with the formal announcement to pull Canada out of Kyoto... he could have just ignored it! :mrgreen: The Harper team needs your expertise taxslave!
Do you think that the UN will invade China in 2030 if they don't comply?
Yeah, I thought not... So, really, there is no penalty assessable unless that nation is willing to pay up.
Yeah, I thought not... So, really, there is no penalty assessable unless that nation is willing to pay up.
I'm asking for your help Walter? You talk of "facts"... I'd like to read some of your particular expressed 'facts". I don't want you to just say "go fetch" by dropping a high-level link to a guys blog homepage... surely, you can highlight a few select "facts" for edification! Surely!
that U.S.-China agreement didn't directly involve the UN. Please adjust your talking point.
winner, winner... chicken dinner!
Not at all. I just don' t see the point in discussing issues with children. What part of shut up and let the men talk confused you?
oh ya baby! You're such a "manly-man"... you stud-muffin you! But hey, no problem... no discussion with you is requested, or needed... I'm most content to simply point out your "manly-contradictions" and your "manly-penchant-for-pet-theories-you-can't-support". Carry on!
Harper rightfully bailed on a bad agreement and there was no penalty was there? SO again what exactly is to stop china from reneging on their agreement.
Maybe you should learn a little about business law. There is no penalty unless there are hard assets to back up the agreed functions of all parties. The west is not going to all of a sudden stop buying cheap junk from China and selling them raw materials just because of some little gentleman's agreement.
of course that "CO2 sole source" is simply a strawman as CO2 is considered the principal source, not the sole source. Here's an article reference to a later paper from the same lead-author of the study member 'petros' links to (above): Scientists detect carbon dioxide accumulation at the edge of space
A team of scientists from the Naval Research Laboratory, Old Dominion University, and the University of Waterloo reports the first direct evidence that emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) caused by human activity are propagating upward to the highest regions of the atmosphere. The observed CO2 increase is expected to gradually result in a cooler, more contracted upper atmosphere and a consequent reduction in the atmospheric drag experienced by satellites.
CO2 occurs naturally throughout Earth's atmosphere and is the primary radiative cooling agent in the energy balance of the mesosphere (~50-90 km altitude) and thermosphere (>90 km). The same properties of CO2 that cause it to trap heat in the troposphere (<15 km) make it an efficient cooler at higher altitudes. The difference is that at high altitudes, the density of CO2 is too thin to recapture the infrared radiation (heat) that it emits. "In the upper atmosphere," explains Emmert, "thermal energy is transferred via collisions from other atmospheric constituents to CO2, which then emits the energy as heat that escapes to outer space."
The enhanced cooling produced by the increasing CO2 should result in a more contracted thermosphere, where many satellites, including the International Space Station, operate. The contraction of the thermosphere will reduce atmospheric drag on satellites and may have adverse consequences for the already unstable orbital debris environment, because it will slow the rate at which debris burn up in the atmosphere.
It has been expected that anthropogenic CO2 increases are propagating upward throughout the entire atmosphere. Before the study of ACE data, CO2 trends had been measured only up to 35 km altitude, although indirect evidence from satellite drag studies indicates that the thermosphere is indeed slowly contracting. The scientists estimate that the concentration of carbon near 100 km altitude is increasing at a rate of 23.5 ± 6.3 parts per million (ppm) per decade, which is about 10 ppm/decade faster than predicted by upper atmospheric model simulations. In comparison, tropospheric CO2 concentrations are increasing at a rate of about 20 ppm/decade (the current concentration of CO2 near the ground is ~390 ppm). The authors speculate that the larger than expected upper atmospheric trend may be caused by changes in upper atmospheric circulation and mixing.
good on member 'petros' for bringing forward this focused attention on the impact of anthropogenic sourced CO2 on the upper atmosphere! Good boy, petros... good boy! :mrgreen:CO2 occurs naturally throughout Earth's atmosphere and is the primary radiative cooling agent in the energy balance of the mesosphere (~50-90 km altitude) and thermosphere (>90 km). The same properties of CO2 that cause it to trap heat in the troposphere (<15 km) make it an efficient cooler at higher altitudes. The difference is that at high altitudes, the density of CO2 is too thin to recapture the infrared radiation (heat) that it emits. "In the upper atmosphere," explains Emmert, "thermal energy is transferred via collisions from other atmospheric constituents to CO2, which then emits the energy as heat that escapes to outer space."
The enhanced cooling produced by the increasing CO2 should result in a more contracted thermosphere, where many satellites, including the International Space Station, operate. The contraction of the thermosphere will reduce atmospheric drag on satellites and may have adverse consequences for the already unstable orbital debris environment, because it will slow the rate at which debris burn up in the atmosphere.
It has been expected that anthropogenic CO2 increases are propagating upward throughout the entire atmosphere. Before the study of ACE data, CO2 trends had been measured only up to 35 km altitude, although indirect evidence from satellite drag studies indicates that the thermosphere is indeed slowly contracting. The scientists estimate that the concentration of carbon near 100 km altitude is increasing at a rate of 23.5 ± 6.3 parts per million (ppm) per decade, which is about 10 ppm/decade faster than predicted by upper atmospheric model simulations. In comparison, tropospheric CO2 concentrations are increasing at a rate of about 20 ppm/decade (the current concentration of CO2 near the ground is ~390 ppm). The authors speculate that the larger than expected upper atmospheric trend may be caused by changes in upper atmospheric circulation and mixing.
So then, you admit that the agreement is useless.
Now we can move on
... Or to put it more accurately: 'Why bother?'
Nay nay... the U.S was not a Kyoto signatory. We own nothing and was able to sit back and laugh as it fell apart. Nothing is binding the U.S unless it is passed by the appropriate legislation. The President's delegation can sign and agree to whatever they want and the agreement means NADDA.
However Canada was in agreement and smartly bailed after finding out they'd OWN $14 BILLION in penalties.
Here’s How Much Every Country Would Have to Pay to Stop Climate Change | TakePart
You may begin dancing Wally.
There it is. Nothing but a giant wealth redistribution scheme that would bankrupt have countries, destroy or grandchildren's future and do nothing for the environment.
Now I could possibly be persuaded that that there would be some benefit in the the have countries using what they supposedly owe to clean up their environment but under no circumstances would I agree to a wealth transfer. And that would be contingent on China and India cleaning up their act as well.
“We call this a part of the climate debt owed to us, and it is needed if we are to confront climate change while still responding to the needs of people,” Lidy Nacpil, director at Jubilee South Asia Pacific Movement on Debt and Development, said in a statement. “It’s not just a question of being fair. It’s about being realistic. To be realistic means if we want a hope of stopping climate change, these transfers have to happen. "
And there it is indeed!
And there it is indeed!
I am ready to do this, anything, to stop the flood of desperately frantic paper carbon investment holders from their CO2 insanity.
