With the use of Wiki as well as other resources - you will see the use of Global Warming Potential (GWP) to measure the amount of heat of most of the Greenhouse gases retains compare to CO2

Before I proceed - it's interesting to note the following impact of each gases to the Greenhouse effect

Water is between 36% and 72%
CO2 is between 9% and 26%
Methan is between 4% and 9%
OZONE is between 3% and 7%

Obviously there are overlaps

The interesting thing is - given the impact of water is up to 74% and the abundance of water in the atmosphere - they never bothered to measure the GWP of water

They decided that the gas with the greatest impact and greatest abundance should be omitted as a consideration.

I can understand the logic here. Water's constant. It's always there. So if the world is changing then we have top look at the gases that change in concentration.

Which is fine - but it only explains the increase in temperature this time around but does not explain the change in temperature post Ice Age of the 4 previous Ice Ages.

If you had 4 Ice Ages - at some point the Ice had to melt and freeze up again to begin the second, third and fourth Ice Ages.

So if it wasn't man-made warming back then - what caused it?

Dinosaur farts?

This IS plausible because the GWP of methane 72 times of CO2 over a 20 year period - the Nitrous Oxide 289 time of CO2 over the same period

What this means is a Dino-fart will trap 72 times more heat than CO2 over a 20 years period

So now - no Dino around to blame - they blame it on humans.

Maqqa wrote on Dec 28^th, 2012 at 11:35pm:

With the use of Wiki as well as other resources - you will see the use of Global Warming Potential (GWP) to measure the amount of heat of most of the Greenhouse gases retains compare to CO2 Before I proceed - it's interesting to note the following impact of each gases to the Greenhouse effect Water is between 36% and 72% CO2 is between 9% and 26% Methan is between 4% and 9% OZONE is between 3% and 7% Obviously there are overlaps The interesting thing is - given the impact of water is up to 74% and the abundance of water in the atmosphere - they never bothered to measure the GWP of water They decided that the gas with the greatest impact and greatest abundance should be omitted as a consideration. I can understand the logic here. Water's constant. It's always there. So if the world is changing then we have top look at the gases that change in concentration. Which is fine - but it only explains the increase in temperature this time around but does not explain the change in temperature post Ice Age of the 4 previous Ice Ages. If you had 4 Ice Ages - at some point the Ice had to melt and freeze up again to begin the second, third and fourth Ice Ages. So if it wasn't man-made warming back then - what caused it? Dinosaur farts? This IS plausible because the GWP of methane 72 times of CO2 over a 20 year period - the Nitrous Oxide 289 time of CO2 over the same period What this means is a Dino-fart will trap 72 times more heat than CO2 over a 20 years period So now - no Dino around to blame - they blame it on humans.

WATER IS A CLOSED SYSTEM BUT CO2 IS NOT: THIS IS THE WHOLE CRUX OF THE PROBLEMO DOOD!!

:D :D :D :D JUST SO LOL  :D :D :D :D

For someone who is so certain global warming is a hoax, you really haven't put a lot of thought into this.

MOTR wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 2:22pm:

For someone who is so certain global warming is a hoax, you really haven't put a lot of thought into this.

-->> POSSIBLY BECAUSE CHEWING UP THE ENTIRE INTERNET ADDRESS SPACE FOR THE PURPOSE OF SLOWING DOWN THE WORLDS DISCUSSION OF IDEAS/DEMOCRACY CAN'T BE DONE THOUGHTFULLY BY DEFINITION!??!

  ;) ;) ;)

MOTR wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 2:22pm:

For someone who is so certain global warming is a hoax, you really haven't put a lot of thought into this.

Don't misrepresent me like this.

I have NEVER said Climate Change was a hoax

Since the dawn of time - climate have been changing every moment of the day for the last 4.5B years

When alarmists tells me that climate change is caused by CO2 and that humans are the cause of it - then I ask them to provide me proof

How much do humans contribute to carbon emissions compared to everything else

So the issue here is climate change is not a hoax - but the stated cause of this change by alarmists is not conclusive

Now Ive heard it all..Wikipedia trumping scientific debate  ;D
Knock yourself out Maqqa ..maybe you should send in your well thought out theory to be peer reviewed  ;D

I can only assume that you are part of the scientific community or are your peers in a different field..internet trolling maybe  ;D

MOTR wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 2:22pm:

For someone who is so certain global warming is a hoax, you really haven't put a lot of thought into this.

for someone who believes in it. you sure arent showing much other than passion. logic and critical thinking are totally absent.

adelcrow wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 3:46pm:

Now Ive heard it all..Wikipedia trumping scientific debate  ;D Knock yourself out Maqqa ..maybe you should send in your well thought out theory to be peer reviewed  ;D I can only assume that you are part of the scientific community or are your peers in a different field..internet trolling maybe  ;D

thre is no debate. you and your hysterics literllay deny the right to debate or question the orthodosy. the difference between you and the Catholic church with Galllileo is that you dont wear a funny hat. everything else is identical.

gold_medal wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 4:32pm:

adelcrow wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 3:46pm: Now Ive heard it all..Wikipedia trumping scientific debate  ;D Knock yourself out Maqqa ..maybe you should send in your well thought out theory to be peer reviewed  ;D I can only assume that you are part of the scientific community or are your peers in a different field..internet trolling maybe  ;D thre is no debate. you and your hysterics literllay deny the right to debate or question the orthodosy. the difference between you and the Catholic church with Galllileo is that you dont wear a funny hat. everything else is identical.

Where is your evidence Howard was voted the best PM, LIAR?

gold_medal wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 4:32pm:

adelcrow wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 3:46pm: Now Ive heard it all..Wikipedia trumping scientific debate  ;D Knock yourself out Maqqa ..maybe you should send in your well thought out theory to be peer reviewed  ;D I can only assume that you are part of the scientific community or are your peers in a different field..internet trolling maybe  ;D thre is no debate. you and your hysterics literllay deny the right to debate or question the orthodosy. the difference between you and the Catholic church with Galllileo is that you dont wear a funny hat. everything else is identical.

You should have your vast knowledge on the subject printed and distributed throughout the scientific community..maybe even get the media down to have a look at it.

adelcrow wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 5:03pm:

gold_medal wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 4:32pm: adelcrow wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 3:46pm: Now Ive heard it all..Wikipedia trumping scientific debate  ;D Knock yourself out Maqqa ..maybe you should send in your well thought out theory to be peer reviewed  ;D I can only assume that you are part of the scientific community or are your peers in a different field..internet trolling maybe  ;D thre is no debate. you and your hysterics literllay deny the right to debate or question the orthodosy. the difference between you and the Catholic church with Galllileo is that you dont wear a funny hat. everything else is identical. You should have your vast knowledge on the subject printed and distributed throughout the scientific community..maybe even get the media down to have a look at it.

exceeding your ability would be trivial. At least I can construct an argument. you do nothing more than simply make stuff up and decalre it to be so. you are a shoe-in for the IPCC report then.

gold_medal wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 5:23pm:

adelcrow wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 5:03pm: gold_medal wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 4:32pm: adelcrow wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 3:46pm: Now Ive heard it all..Wikipedia trumping scientific debate  ;D Knock yourself out Maqqa ..maybe you should send in your well thought out theory to be peer reviewed  ;D I can only assume that you are part of the scientific community or are your peers in a different field..internet trolling maybe  ;D thre is no debate. you and your hysterics literllay deny the right to debate or question the orthodosy. the difference between you and the Catholic church with Galllileo is that you dont wear a funny hat. everything else is identical. You should have your vast knowledge on the subject printed and distributed throughout the scientific community..maybe even get the media down to have a look at it. exceeding your ability would be trivial. At least I can construct an argument. you do nothing more than simply make stuff up and decalre it to be so. you are a shoe-in for the IPCC report then.

Goldy must be the clown at all the crack smoking partys!

Lord, those days got boring pretty quickly hey goldy!!  :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

I know, i'll repeat what i said on the crack last time............................  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Maqqa wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 3:29pm:

So the issue here is climate change is not a hoax - but the stated cause of this change by alarmists is not conclusive.

Exactly.