Days
Commentator
About two years ago, I posted that the Arctic ice cap was not melting from air temps, and I proved it beyond any doubt, because the warmest the air gets within the Arctic circle is freezing (32 degrees F) - with an average year round temp in the single digits, it changes slightly. So I concluded the ice was melting from warmer waters, not warmer air. You guys said I was wrong, the scientists all said I was right. Then you changed your convoluted theory to have the heat in the air go back down into the water, so you could still ascribe the melting ice to greenhouse gases. I pointed out that ocean floor volcanic activity was responsible for heating the water, and that heat rises in the atmosphere, it never returns to the surface. Since I made that point, ETR has spent two years trying to get heat to not rise in the atmosphere (pathetic) while you have done your lawyer best to garble the whole argument.
All you have in the way of hard data is a tiny increase in recorded surface temps. You are trying desperately to attribute that two degree rise in average global temps to CO2, even though it has been proven that historical rises in global CO2 levels do not correlate with historical global warming trends. Still, you do have science that justifies CO2 adds some heat to the atmosphere through the increased absorption of radiation from the earth. But the critical question which I ask over and over is, how much of that 2 degree increase in recorded surface temps can you prove is due to CO2? (there are other elements, but CO2 has the only significant volume necessary to produce the numbers) You and ETR are constantly affirming that scientists have absolutely nailed down all the possible heat sources, and they are sure that, by far, CO2 is the main culprit for the added heat.
This is absolutely looney tunes. You can not break the law of thermodynamics to make your theory work. The law stays, your theory goes, heat still rises, it rises from the ocean floor to the ocean surface, it is absorbed in the process of the water molecules breaking their bonds of cohesion and changing from a liquid state into a gas state, and it keeps on rising until it dissipates in the upper atmosphere. That's the direction heat takes on planet earth, I don't care what the medium is for the heat. So that heat (2800-3000 degrees Fartenheit) from underwater volcanic activity is rising to the surface ice and melting it. So, the Greenhouse gases are not the culprit for the melting ice caps. The warmer waters are the culprit, and the culprit for the warmer waters is increased volcanic activity, and I linked that activity. here they are again:
Underwater volcanoes, not climate change, reason behind melting of West Antarctic Ice Sheet
Are Undersea Volcanoes a Cause of Melting Sea Ice?
Volcanoes Erupt Beneath Arctic Ice
Arctic Volcanoes Found Active at Unprecedented Depths
Now, pay attention and I will explain the source for your two degree increase in recorded surface temps. The warmer waters absorb less heat from the air for evaporation to take place (because they are warmer to start with) leaving the surface air temps a couple of degrees warmer than before, when the waters were colder. That's the source for your heat in the air temps. Is there any way warmer waters could require the same amount of heat for evaporation as the colder waters? Nope. Unless you want to break some more laws of physics. If the waters had more heat to start with, they required less heat from the atmosphere to evaporate, leaving the air at the surface warmer. That's exactly where your scientists are taking all their measurements. So more heat is now rising in the atmosphere; what was the source for that heat? volcanic activity. Along the way up, the air will be heated even more by CO2 absorbing radiation. But we have already accounted for the increase in recorded surface temps, so the greenhouse gas effect is insignificant. As is all the effort to reduce it via carbon taxes.
All you have in the way of hard data is a tiny increase in recorded surface temps. You are trying desperately to attribute that two degree rise in average global temps to CO2, even though it has been proven that historical rises in global CO2 levels do not correlate with historical global warming trends. Still, you do have science that justifies CO2 adds some heat to the atmosphere through the increased absorption of radiation from the earth. But the critical question which I ask over and over is, how much of that 2 degree increase in recorded surface temps can you prove is due to CO2? (there are other elements, but CO2 has the only significant volume necessary to produce the numbers) You and ETR are constantly affirming that scientists have absolutely nailed down all the possible heat sources, and they are sure that, by far, CO2 is the main culprit for the added heat.
This is absolutely looney tunes. You can not break the law of thermodynamics to make your theory work. The law stays, your theory goes, heat still rises, it rises from the ocean floor to the ocean surface, it is absorbed in the process of the water molecules breaking their bonds of cohesion and changing from a liquid state into a gas state, and it keeps on rising until it dissipates in the upper atmosphere. That's the direction heat takes on planet earth, I don't care what the medium is for the heat. So that heat (2800-3000 degrees Fartenheit) from underwater volcanic activity is rising to the surface ice and melting it. So, the Greenhouse gases are not the culprit for the melting ice caps. The warmer waters are the culprit, and the culprit for the warmer waters is increased volcanic activity, and I linked that activity. here they are again:
Underwater volcanoes, not climate change, reason behind melting of West Antarctic Ice Sheet
Are Undersea Volcanoes a Cause of Melting Sea Ice?
Volcanoes Erupt Beneath Arctic Ice
Arctic Volcanoes Found Active at Unprecedented Depths
Now, pay attention and I will explain the source for your two degree increase in recorded surface temps. The warmer waters absorb less heat from the air for evaporation to take place (because they are warmer to start with) leaving the surface air temps a couple of degrees warmer than before, when the waters were colder. That's the source for your heat in the air temps. Is there any way warmer waters could require the same amount of heat for evaporation as the colder waters? Nope. Unless you want to break some more laws of physics. If the waters had more heat to start with, they required less heat from the atmosphere to evaporate, leaving the air at the surface warmer. That's exactly where your scientists are taking all their measurements. So more heat is now rising in the atmosphere; what was the source for that heat? volcanic activity. Along the way up, the air will be heated even more by CO2 absorbing radiation. But we have already accounted for the increase in recorded surface temps, so the greenhouse gas effect is insignificant. As is all the effort to reduce it via carbon taxes.
