Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
NASA Has Known Since 1971 That CO2 Is Not Dangerous, Yet Lied To The Public Continuously
Topic Started: Nov 13 2015, 01:59 PM (659 Views)
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]
NASA Has Known Since 1971 That CO2 Is Not Dangerous, Yet Lied To The Public Continuously

Posted on November 8, 2015 by tonyheller


New York State is investigating Exxon for telling the truth about CO2 in 1976, but the big story is that NASA and NCAR have known since 1971 that CO2 is not dangerous – yet have lied to the public about this for over 30 years.

In 1971, the top climatologists at NCAR and NASA reported that a runaway greenhouse effect is not possible, because the CO2 absorption spectra is nearly saturated already.

Posted Image


vademecum.brandenberger.eu/pdf/klima/rasool_schneider_1971.pdf

This is exactly what NCAR’s current radiative transfer models show. Adding more CO2 has very little effect on downwelling longwave radiation........

LINK


There is a lot more information and charts at the link.

The scam is coming apart at the seams.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Wow! Imagine that! We've learned nothing sine 1971!

That is the dumbest article I have ever read - I don't know where they got that crap, but Scientists knew far better than that even then.

One of the stupidest lines:

Temperatures can only go up so far because CO2 "saturates".

Considering the gas is simply absorbing then immediately reradiating the heat, that would be like saying a mirror can only get a little bit bright because the glass can only soak up some of the light. :75: :75:


But here's MY FAVOURITE LINE:
Quote:
 
Adding more CO2 has very little effect on downwelling longwave radiation........
That is 100% correct.

You could pour in almost infinite amounts of CO2, and it would have essentially zero effect on the downwelling longwave radiation, because there's almost none anyway. :hystery: :hystery: :hystery:

The Sun is primarily putting out shortwave radiation, which sails right on through the CO2, because CO2 is essentially invisible to shortwave. Have you noted the Sun feels warm on your skin?

Once that radiation is converted to heat by the Earth, then it is radiated back out as longwave, and THAT is trapped, bouncing back and forth.

Posted Image
Edited by Brewster, Nov 13 2015, 03:10 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]
That is a nice theory you have there. Too bad it is not working out for you.

Quote:
 
But it is worse than it seems. Scientists have actually known for 115 years that CO2 is not dangerous.


Knut Ångström, asked an assistant to measure the passage of infrared radiation through a tube filled with carbon dioxide. The assistant (“Herr J. Koch,” otherwise unrecorded in history) put in rather less of the gas in total than would be found in a column of air reaching to the top of the atmosphere. The assistant reported that the amount of radiation that got through the tube scarcely changed when he cut the quantity of gas back by a third. Apparently it took only a trace of the gas to “saturate” the absorption — that is, in the bands of the spectrum where CO2 blocked radiation, it did it so thoroughly that more gas could make little difference.


Edited by Berton, Nov 13 2015, 03:25 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
The scam is being exposed to all now.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Berton, you have already exposed yourself several times as a Gullible fool. Don't you think it's time to ease off?

So now you want to use an experiment that is over 100 years old, at the very beginning of the science, with no actual data recorded, as proof that modern scientists are fooling themselves, and us?

How much gas? Define "Scarcely changed"? How about "Blocked radiation" "Thoroughly"?

Talk about a bogus, useless article... :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jim Miller
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
I guess the left-wing blogs must not have liked it, eh?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Brew pretends to be astonished again with facts.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
I would be astonished if you used facts.

At least most of the Righties go looking for articles, although they need a lesson or two in critical thinking.

You on the other hand contribute absolutely nothing except the odd moment of unintended humour.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sea Dog
No Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
And these are the people who want to form
a government to run the country.

Thinking people should be very afraid!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
More pretending by Brew.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis