Despite our differences I wish all of you a safe. sane and happy holiday on this anniversary of our wonderful country’s independence.

You too, Arch. Even with our problems, and we do have a lot, this Republic is the best nation that has existed. The personal freedoms, the freedom of expression, of movement, and of worship is unequalled.

John Adams wrote to his dear wife, Abigail: "I believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival... it ought to be celebrated by pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires and illuminations from one end of this continent to the other..."

So, to those who decry these things, saying that we are forgetting the True Meaning - A fig upon you! Ditto to those who wish to take our guns, fireworks (illuminations), and bonfires.

Thanks Joe. It’s a great one all right.

quote:

Originally posted by subdjoe:
You too, Arch. Even with our problems, and we do have a lot, this Republic is the best nation that has existed. The personal freedoms, the freedom of expression, of movement, and of worship is unequalled.

John Adams wrote to his dear wife, Abigail: "I believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival... it ought to be celebrated by pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires and illuminations from one end of this continent to the other..."

So, to those who decry these things, saying that we are forgetting the True Meaning - A fig upon you! Ditto to those who wish to take our guns, fireworks (illuminations), and bonfires.

Thank God for small smiles, I finally agree with you, happy 4th Joe & Arch!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by arch stanton:

Vapor pressures deal with vapors/liquids that are in equilibrium. Our atmosphere is rarely at equilibrium as far as H20 is concerned (particularly in the desert)

Yes, that's exactly what I have been explaining. Increasing one of the gases will affect the others AT A GIVEN PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE. Guaranteed. Let's pump up the nitrogen partial pressure, for example. Guaranteed, it will affect the atmospheric content of the other gases because atmospheric pressure will remain (on average) constant.

Are you claiming this is not so?

quote:

and never at CO2 equilibrium as long as we keep pumping fossil C to it.

Oh, puh-leeze, our measly "pumping" is like a wart on a gnat's ass compared to what Nature is doing. Why, this one volcanic event completely dwarfed the entire history of human industry...

Arctic volcano released enough heat energy in one explosion (out of many) to melt ice cap area size of Massachusetts
Link

Arctic ocean volcano blew its top in 1999 – even under pressure
Link

It is pointless to pretend humans can keep up with such massive natural events. Volcanoes such as this pump monstrous amounts of CO2 into the ocean - or atmosphere. As we know the SOLAR-forced global warming increases volcanic activity due to flexing of the Earth's crust in response to shifting mass from the ice sheets to the oceans.

quote:

If we stopped pumping into CO2 into the atmosphere, the carbon in the atmosphere would reach equilibrium with the carbon in the oceans.

Ridiculous. That one volcanic event just destroyed your premise.

If humans did not exist at all, this warming cycle, thousands of years long, would continue along its natural path. Or it would cool, since we are about due to start another Ice Age now. Our "contribution" is like a kid pissing into an Olympic swimming pool in a tropical downpour.

quote:

This fact will prevent our atmosphere from returning to pre-industrial CO2 levels for thousands of years.

You seem to be missing an important fact. CO2 increase is a natural response to SOLAR-forced global warming. As the oceans warm, they release more and more CO2 into the atmosphere...

Clues to End of the Last Ice Age - increased solar output warmed oceans, melting ice and releasing CO2
Link

And, BTW, since you asked, here is the source for the graph explaining the water vapor "contribution" to the Greenhouse Effect. The document shows WHY the money-grubbers leave water vapor out of the "contributions" of atmospheric gases to the greenhouse effect. The truth would be inconvenient to their schemes.

Water Vapor Rules the Greenhouse System
Link

You can find that information in lots of places. It's common knowledge - water vapor is THE greenhouse gas. None of the other gases can retain significant atmospheric heat, not even overnight, as the Sahara Effect demonstrates. Water vapor is like the glass of a greenhouse.

And, BTW, I usually don't resort to name calling but this is a point of fact. You're a freaking MORON for calling it a "cartoon graph". Haven't you EVER seen a bar graph before? Go to Google Images and type in BAR GRAPH and see what they normally look like. Edumacate yourself.

From...

Water Vapor Rules the Greenhouse System
Link



Both natural and man-made greenhouse contributions are illustrated in this chart, in gray and green, respectively. For clarity only the man-made (anthropogenic) contributions are labeled on the chart.

Water vapor, responsible for 95% of Earth's greenhouse effect, is 99.999% natural (some argue, 100%). Even if we wanted to we can do nothing to change this.

Anthropogenic (man-made) CO2 contributions cause only about 0.117% of Earth's greenhouse effect, (factoring in water vapor). This is insignificant!

Adding up all anthropogenic greenhouse sources, the total human contribution to the greenhouse effect is around 0.28% (factoring in water vapor).

Thanks Kathleen. Have a glass of wine for me and for our country; even though John Adams didn’t advocate alcohol as appropriate for the celebration.

LOL you’ve got nothing do you STK? I give you sound arguments and you ignore them. You repeat the same lies and just add new ones.

The “one volcanic event” argument went out with Pet Rocks. Pinatubo was the largest recent volcanic event and it didn’t make a blip any CO2 censor. The Eruptions you sight didn’t either. Piatubo did affect the climate however due to SO2 and particulate emission; just as models predicted it would.

I have gone out of my way to be very clear and what do I get from you? Smoke and mirrors. What are you trying to imply with repeating your tired link? That I did not add the clear edit long before you ever responded to the post I corrected? That speaks volumes about your integrity.

I could argue against AGW better than you do.

However, Happy fourth bro. And I mean it. It is a great country. We’re just arguing about the blemishes. Who doesn’t have blemishes?

Arch, you linked to a "study" that has a couple of deep flaws:

1) It is a study of trapping of solar radiation wavelengths during the day. As the Sahara Effect indisputably demonstrates, CO2 actually has minimal heat RETENTION capability.

That's why the Sahara goes from over a hundred degrees in the daytime to below freezing after nightfall.

Water vapor has tremendous heat RETENTION capability, keeping the Amazon from dropping more than five degrees from day to night.

CO2 is accurately described in the study I provided as a minimal contributor to the greenhouse effect, which is the atmosphere's ability to RETAIN heat over an extended period of time.

The Amazon demonstrates a genuine greenhouse effect. The Shara shows that CO2 cannot contribute significantly.

Measurements of daytime albedo and solar wavelength trapping in that narrow and incomplete "study" you linked are apparently distracting you from the rest of the picture.

This has all happened before, btw. Atmospheric CO2 concentrations are well within the normal range for a deglaciation period.

Link



Yet, even this chart (and conclusions) narrowly focus on CO2 without taking into account water vapor. One of the more clever tricks in this whole scheme is to trick people into narrowly focusing on CO2 rise in relation to (and as a result of) global warming, while paying no attention to the WHOLE atmospheric picture.

We know for a fact Humans did not cause the warming cycle.

We know for a fact CO2 rise, following the warming cycle, is well within the normal parameters.

We know for a fact that all this talk about CO2 is a red herring anyway. Rising CO2 could not stop the cooling period of 1945-1980 or the many other cooling periods in recent human history (like after the Medieval Warm Period). It's the sun, stupid.

We know for a fact that solar-warmed ocean water pumps massive amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, as water cannot trap as much gas at higher temperatures. This is one reason for the sharp rise in CO2 about 600 - 1000 years following the beginning of a solar-forced warming period. It take a while for the deep-ocean CO2-bearing water to get warmed.

But more importantly, we know that increased solar radiation hitting the oceans pumps Water Vapor into the atmosphere, and water vapor's heat retention dwarfs that of CO2.

We know for a fact that CO2 is the fertilizer of our ecosystem, making plants more water-efficient and making the planet more GREEN.

We know for a fact that efforts to tax CO2 in America, to kill American industry so China can ramp up its industry in our stead, will do nothing to "fight" global warming.

It is all the biggest scam this world has ever seen. And the stupid people, Arch Stanton, are drinking the Kool-aid on this one.

Here's another salient fact: When we burn fossil fuels, releasing CO2 (that cannot trap heat even overnight), the combustion produces water vapor as well. For example...

Combustion of gasoline
C8H18 + 12.5 O2 ---> 9 H2O + 8 CO2

Combustion of Propane
C3H8 + 5 O2 ---> 3 CO2 + 4 H2O

And, as we know, each of those H20 gas molecules has many times the heat retention capability of a CO2 molecule.

Again, fools have been tricked into looking at CO2 (that cannot trap heat even overnight) instead of the water vapor (that keeps the Amazon nice and warm overnight).

quote:

Originally posted by Speak2Truth:
Arch, you linked to a "study" that has a couple of deep flaws:

1) It is a study of trapping of solar radiation wavelengths during the day.

Creative S2K. But absolutely wrong.

What ever makes you think that?

quote:

Originally posted by Speak2Truth:
This has all happened before, btw. Atmospheric CO2 concentrations are well within the normal range for a deglaciation period.

Link

Nice try. You will notice that red line (CO2) on the graph stops at the preindustrial level of ~288ppmv ). The current level of ~386ppmv is well above what is shown on the graph (actually - off the graph). The temperature may indeed have been higher at points in the past, and absolutely no one is saying that factors besides CO2 don’t effect the global mean temperature. The article you linked to gives a reasonable explanation for why CO2 can be either a “feedback” or a “forcing”.

quote:

Yet, even this chart (and conclusions) narrowly focus on CO2 without taking into account water vapor. One of the more clever tricks in this whole scheme is to trick people into narrowly focusing on CO2 rise in relation to (and as a result of) global warming, while paying no attention to the WHOLE atmospheric picture.

overgeneralization and a straw man.

quote:

We know for a fact Humans did not cause the warming cycle.

A bold faced lie.

quote:

We know for a fact CO2 rise, following the warming cycle, is well within the normal parameters.

I will give you the benefit of a doubt here and simply say: "Absolutly wrong and a demonstration of your ignorance on the topic."

quote:

We know for a fact that all this talk about CO2 is a red herring anyway. Rising CO2 could not stop the cooling period of 1945-1980 or the many other cooling periods in recent human history (like after the Medieval Warm Period).

Total BS

quote:

It's the sun, stupid.

Please review the “it’s the sun” post on the site you linked. I assume that by you citing skepticalscience.com you consider it to be credible.

quote:

We know for a fact that solar-warmed ocean water pumps massive amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, as water cannot trap as much gas at higher temperatures. This is one reason for the sharp rise in CO2 about 600 - 1000 years following the beginning of a solar-forced warming period. It take a while for the deep-ocean CO2-bearing water to get warmed.

True, but an exaggerated twist of the chemistry/physics involved. Please review your knowledge of vapor pressures and then explain any significant implication you mean to imply by this statement other than purely historical.

quote:

But more importantly, we know that increased solar radiation hitting the oceans pumps Water Vapor into the atmosphere, and water vapor's heat retention dwarfs that of CO2.[quote]
True but we also know that this effect is not significant, or our climate would track the solar cycles (it doesn't). We also know that incoming solar radiation has not changed enough to make any significant difference at all in the last 50 years of measuing it.

[quote]We know for a fact that CO2 is the fertilizer of our ecosystem, making plants more water-efficient and making the planet more GREEN.

This is true to a very limited extent for C4 pathway plants, and even a lesser extent for C2 pathway plants. It is not by any means drought insurance.

quote:

We know for a fact that efforts to tax CO2 in America, to kill American industry so China can ramp up its industry in our stead, will do nothing to "fight" global warming.

BS
“…Update, May 6, 2009
Two days after we published this item, Reilly sent a letter to Rep. John Boehner, the Republican leader in the House, complaining that his study "has been misrepresented in recent press releases distributed by the National Republican Congressional Committee. The press release claims our report estimates an average cost per family of a carbon cap and trade program that would meet targets now being discussed in Congress to be over $3,000, but that is nearly 10 times the correct estimate, which is approximately $340."…”
Link
Link

quote:

It is all the biggest scam this world has ever seen. And the stupid people, Arch Stanton, are drinking the Kool-aid on this one.

That's what you resort to when your "facts” are all “follies"? LOL

quote:

Originally posted by Speak2Truth:
Here's another salient fact: When we burn fossil fuels, releasing CO2 (that cannot trap heat even overnight), the combustion produces water vapor as well. For example...

Combustion of gasoline
C8H18 + 12.5 O2 ---> 9 H2O + 8 CO2

Combustion of Propane
C3H8 + 5 O2 ---> 3 CO2 + 4 H2O

And, as we know, each of those H20 gas molecules has many times the heat retention capability of a CO2 molecule.

Again, fools have been tricked into looking at CO2 (that cannot trap heat even overnight) instead of the water vapor (that keeps the Amazon nice and warm overnight).

More smoke and mirrors.

What’s the dwell time for anthropogenic H2O emissions? Something like a few hours to a few days..

What is the dwell time for CO2 in the atmosphere? Usually measured in decades to centuries, but because of the way our oceans are currently sucking up our anthropogenic emissions and will release them whenever partial pressures change, they are considered to be measured in centuries to millennia.

In other words H2O vapor is cycled out quickly and does not accumulate. We would not have a problem if the same was true for CO2.

quote:

Originally posted by Axeman 11B:
My guess is that anyone who truly believes humans are responsible for GW probably sleeps with a night-light.

You people (GW activists) need to get a life. There are real problems to deal with in society, and you are using resources which could be put towards a concrete end by chasing your pie-in-the-sky / Chicken Little issue.

One decent volcano puts more junk in the air than the entire civilization of man.

You Sir are exactly correct. More than anything this theory has enabled some governments to try to change world economics. In the U.S. it started with Bill Clinton and Al Gore. This administration began the environmental regulatory shut down of American business and the encouragement of off shore industry process.

Today, there are 3 actual steel mills operating within the U.S., 1 is owned by Japan and one is owned by the Germans. Our industry for making mechanical products and textiles is almost non existent.

In our own backyard...
The portland cement being used for the 101 widening is produced in China and the aggragate comes from British Columbia. The rebar comes from China.

We have been sold a false bill of goods under the guise of environmental concern, the profiteers are the trade partners chosen in the 1997 free trade agreement.(China,India,Canada and Mexico)..... they have little or no environmental regulation.

We demand our industry back so we can have security and quality of life within our own Country. Those who have sold it off under false pretenses should be locked up.

There is nothing as humiliating to a family than to loose their ability to provide for themselves.