Theologians Think They’re Smarter Than Stephen Hawking

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Free Thinker, Apr 24, 2012.

  1. Ricter

    Ricter

    But CO2 does cause warming. If I drop a cloche over my tomato starts today, the air around them warms, not because the sun is any brighter or because the sun is any closer, but because the heat, the same heat, radiating from the ground is trapped, slowed by the glass. Thus CO2, which demonstrably traps and slows the radiation of heat, does cause warming.

    Now, let's say I leave the cloche there "forever". Variations in solar output and Earth's orbit will change the interior temperature of the cloche. Without further variables added, this cycle will continue so long as the cycles of sun and orbit continue. But suppose I come along and add a slightly larger cloche over the first, in effect creating a double-walled mini-greenhouse. Now the insulative effect of the cloche is greater, and the temperature inside will rise still more, and it will be trapped longer.

    This is why, if you can afford it, you want a double-walled greenhouse instead of single-walled.
     
    #171     May 4, 2012
  2. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    Isn't affirmative action great?
     
    #172     May 4, 2012
  3. jem

    jem

    now who decides if the greenhouse is double walled. the co2?
     
    #173     May 4, 2012
  4. Well perhaps he's brilliant in his stupidity.
     
    #174     May 4, 2012
  5. Ricter

    Ricter

    We do. In my analogy it happens here:

    "...I come along and add a slightly larger cloche..."
     
    #175     May 4, 2012
  6. jem

    jem

    therefore the co2 does not cause the temperature increase. it was you. just like it is the warming activity which causes the CO2 (the glass) to become thicker.
     
    #176     May 4, 2012
  7. Ricter

    Ricter

    I started it when I added the CO2 (the cloche), but I didn't do it.

    Hey, it was the actually the bullet which parted the guy's flesh causing the shock and bleeding which killed him, I never touched him!
     
    #177     May 4, 2012
  8. Simply speaking, you don't know what the fuck you are talking about and there is absolutely no merit to the crap you just said. Easy on the drugs there dude. And get your tin foil hat on.
     
    #178     May 5, 2012
  9. I'm starting to think jem is just here to raise page views, or maybe he works for the Koch bros.

    There is no way someone could possibly be as dense, intentionally obtuse, blind and just all around illogical as jem has been here with regard to GW unless it is intentional. An 8 year old would have better comprehension of principles. You have to try very hard to be as stupid as jem has been here.

    I commend you Richter for your patience but jem is hopeless. At least he provides a good example of how lame the denier "argument" is and gives us a platform to maybe educate some more open minded folks here. Everyone here with more than half a brain reading this knows what we're talking about and can understand the simple logic that more CO2 raises temps and the extra CO2 is almost all from the burning of fossil fuels.
     
    #179     May 5, 2012
  10. jem

    jem

    you are so dense you do not realize that when Ricter blames the bullet for the damage he is joking. He gracefully conceded I have a valid position.
     
    #180     May 5, 2012