True but it does provide a positive feedback effect, i.e. the hotter it gets,
the more there is on average, and therefore the hotter it gets.
Its average concentration will only decrease if temperature decreases _first_
due to some stronger cooling effect. Such stronger cooling effects _do_
PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:to John Berry regarding GW
Paul Lowrance wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
John Berry wrote:
I think what you meant to say is that volcanoes have in the past
erupted to produce more CO2 than humanity ***for a given duration***.
Oddly enough you're
Actually, for the purposes of scientific argument, bollocks is much preferred.
P.
- Original Message
From: John Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 8:27:37 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:to John Berry regarding GW
Balls!
On 4/24/07, PHILIP WINESTONE
Paul Lowrance wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
John Berry wrote:
I think what you meant to say is that volcanoes have in the past
erupted to produce more CO2 than humanity ***for a given duration***.
Oddly enough you're missing a huge factor, Duration. IOW, humanity
continues to
thomas malloy wrote:
Paul Lowrance wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
John Berry wrote:
I think what you meant to say is that volcanoes have in the past
erupted to produce more CO2 than humanity ***for a given duration***.
Oddly enough you're missing a huge factor, Duration. IOW, humanity
thomas malloy wrote:
Paul Lowrance wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
John Berry wrote:
I think what you meant to say is that volcanoes have in the past
erupted to produce more CO2 than humanity ***for a given duration***.
Oddly enough you're missing a huge factor, Duration. IOW, humanity
Paul Lowrance wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
Paul Lowrance wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
John Berry wrote:
I think what you meant to say is that volcanoes have in the past
erupted to produce more CO2 than humanity ***for a given
duration***. Oddly enough you're missing a huge factor,
Thomas, so what?
Are you saying you have no doubt that man can pollute unchecked and be
assured no impact on the climate?
Even if you did why should pollution and oil be supported, even in your
right wing view of the world shouldn't Oil be given up for an alternative
energy?
Are you trying to
I knew that Volcaino sh*t was bunk, thanks for finding the evidence.
On 4/25/07, Paul Lowrance [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
Paul Lowrance wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
Paul Lowrance wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
John Berry wrote:
I think what you meant to say is that
thomas malloy wrote:
Paul Lowrance wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
Paul Lowrance wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
John Berry wrote:
I think what you meant to say is that volcanoes have in the past
erupted to produce more CO2 than humanity ***for a given
duration***. Oddly enough you're
Then there's the small matter of two Canadian scientists who utterly refuted
the thinking/mathematics behind the so-called hockey stick graph that showed
how much we puny humans have influenced climate since the Industrial
Revolution. These chaps have been all but totally ignored, but it's
Balls.
The argument that us 'puny humans' can't effect the environment isn't based
on science, it's just a philosophy if you could call it that. (It's a stupid
ignorant assumption you are happy to risk the world to)
One thing you have to note is that there are 6 Billion of us puny humans,
the
No offense intended, but this topic is one of few that I take ***extremely***
seriously. I will be out right blunt and tell you that nearly all your
statements are out right fuzzy logic --
Jeff Fink wrote:
Al Gore is poised to make millions if not billions off of “global warming”.
He puts
PHILIP WINESTONE wrote:
---
Then there's the small matter of two Canadian scientists who utterly refuted
the thinking/mathematics behind the so-called hockey stick graph that showed
how much we puny humans have influenced climate since the Industrial Revolution.
These chaps have been all but
Then there's the small matter of two Canadian
scientists who utterly refuted the thinking/
mathematics behind the so-called hockey stick
graph that showed how much we puny humans have
influenced climate since the Industrial Revolution.
These chaps have been all but totally ignored, but
John Berry wrote:
Balls.
The argument that us 'puny humans' can't effect the environment isn't
based on science, it's just a philosophy if
Did you watch the video John? Volcanoes pump out 10 times as much CO2 as
all human activity. The big volcano you mentioned blocked out the
sunlight
thomas malloy wrote:
John Berry wrote:
Balls.
The argument that us 'puny humans' can't effect the environment isn't
based on science, it's just a philosophy if
Did you watch the video John? Volcanoes pump out 10 times as much CO2 as
all human activity. The big volcano you mentioned
-Original Message-
From: Paul Lowrance [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 10:36 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:to John Berry regarding GW
No offense intended, but this topic is one of few that I take
***extremely***
seriously. I will be out right
Jeff Fink wrote:
Again I wonder. What happened to the ice age we were threatened with in
the
late 70’s.
Please show your references of leading climate scientists make such claims.
You don't remember it? It was all over the news and in magazines
during the late 70's. If I hadn't
Jeff Fink wrote:
Listen, neither you or I are climate scientists. Therefore it's only logical
to
listen to the mass majority of PhD climate scientists.
It is the liberal way to silence dissenting voices. The size of the
mass majority is skewed because the esteemed potential dissenters
Also you said I recall a news caster six weeks before saying that Europe
had
just experienced the warmest autumn in 500 years. You recall a news caster
making a statement??
The newscaster reported a statement. I don't know if he named a source. The
item was obviously intended to hype GW
This Mars warming up is a red herring. The source of that idea is one man
but it has been seized upon by the GW deniers as the basis of the latest in
a series of last minute revelations that they have trotted out - designed to
protect the status quo and muddy the waters. Most planetary climate
Message
From: John Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 7:56:59 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:to John Berry regarding GW
Balls.
The argument that us 'puny humans' can't effect the environment isn't based on
science, it's just a philosophy if you could call
the others in this world, including Bush.
P.
- Original Message
From: John Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 7:56:59 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:to John Berry regarding GW
Balls.
The argument that us 'puny humans' can't effect the environment isn't
based
.
P.
- Original Message
From: John Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 7:56:59 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:to John Berry regarding GW
Balls.
The argument that us 'puny humans' can't effect the environment isn't
based on science, it's just
Paul Lowrance wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
John Berry wrote:
I think what you meant to say is that volcanoes have in the past
erupted to produce more CO2 than humanity ***for a given duration***.
Oddly enough you're missing a huge factor, Duration. IOW, humanity
continues to pump out a
26 matches
Mail list logo
