View Single Post
Old 11-09-2019, 10:25 PM   #61 (permalink)
RustyLugNut
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 982
Thanks: 271
Thanked 385 Times in 259 Posts
I'm actually a believer in AGW.

Quote:
Originally Posted by litesong View Post
Nah! Natalya tells the truth about you AGW deniers, which all your thickness of heart will not accept. I doubt if you read all her posts & you don't take her words as truth. I tell the truth about yourself, but my words got more shoe scuff on them, sending you into a hissy-fit.

You read the exxon (-mobil) CEO AGW denier propaganda poop sheet, & expel it on the internet. Of course, real scientists, you can't understand or you would know you're packing BS to the masses.
That shows me how little you really read of people's posts.

However, I am not a religious, apocalyptic dooms day prophet believer.

I am quite pragmatic.

And I will show your posts to my scientist associates and tell them the sad news that they are not "real scientists". Only you can canonize and legitimize their work.

Oh, and since you are such a well versed person in science, why don't you expound to me the effects of man changing the earth's albedo? It is a much more settled science than climate change and it is admittedly a growing problem? I have seen that current models are starting to include these effects. And they are much larger forces of local temperature change than expected. And as human sprawl covers more and more of the land surface, the effect grows. Models show albedo only effects climate temperature rise by a bit less than a percent. But this effect dwarfs CO2 percentage effects ( in the tenths of a percent). Yes, albedo is more closely related to weather changes versus climate changes, but as our urban and farmland sprawl continue to grow, so does it's effect on climate.

How about the oceans? The health of the oceans is often an afterthought in climate change discussions. We are killing our oceans in many subtle ways. And the oceans are a much greater force in sequestering CO2 than terrestrial forces such as forests and grasslands. 25% of our CO2 output is estimated to be absorbed by the ocean processes every year. This is about 2 Giga-tons of CO2 out of the 10 Giga-tons or so human activities produce. The oceans permanently sequester much of this CO2 as carbonates (calcium carbonate). It has been doing this for eons. CO2 used to be in the 4000 parts per million, atmospheric. Giga-tons of it are now encased in rock formations and fossil formations.

These two factors alone, can make or break any attempt to mitigate man made warming, if only CO2 is focused upon. But these are not the only factors. Just the easiest.

Draconian measures to stop CO2 use may halt CO2 concentrations in the next few years. But if we have a broken ocean ecosystem due to anything that damages the basic phytoplankton food base, CO2 concentrations may not be reduced fast enough. If our urban sprawl and farming methods continue to move past the 12% land surface area we are now at, albedo heating may drive our climate change no matter what we do with reducing CO2.

The combination of an increasing landmass absorption cycle that holds and releases heat instead of reflecting or transforming that energy, along with an ocean that is broken in it's ability to do it's job sequestering CO2, can trigger all the "feedback loop effects" AGW believers trumpet - methane release, deep ocean CO2 and methane release, etc.

All you seem to really want to do is to destroy the fossil fuel industry. Saving the world seems secondary. Or are you really proposing the destruction of human civilization as we know it? Because if you stop the immediate use of fossil fuels, you will bring that about.

I grew up in a relatively primitive setting. We cooked with wood. Used kerosene lighting. We rode horses and water buffalo. We grew most of our food and traded excess for the rest. I can happily go back to the days of my childhood. How about you? How about the billions that have never had a day of want such as Greta T? How about the billions that long for the day they have first world problems such as " does my cell phone use produce more CO2 emissions than the value of my posts on Ecomodder"?

You don't get to make such decisions. Not without a fight. Slam the worlds economies with your stranglehold techniques and "There will be a fight".

  Reply With Quote