🗑️ 🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 08:29:52 UTC No. 16146558
>NASA says atmospheric CO2 would have to go to over 3500ppm before it would make a noticeable difference in the climate
Whats the absorption limit of CO2, how does that work? Does anyone here know?
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 12:24:59 UTC No. 16146719
>>16146558
That's not what that says. How can you be so illiterate that you end up with that statement?
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 12:51:16 UTC No. 16146760
>>16146558
Post source and wider context. Physicists had a good understanding of CO2's effects back in the 1950s.
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 00:11:12 UTC No. 16147688
>>16146558
Nobody on /sci/ is educated enough to understand absorption limits
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 00:21:06 UTC No. 16147697
>>16146558
Well at some point co2 will became solid
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 01:18:30 UTC No. 16147801
>>16147697
Mars has dry ice polar caps
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 01:20:21 UTC No. 16147803
oh no the weather is ever changing and we need to increase taxes, limit middle and lower class access to modern technology, increase abortions and sterilization, poison the minds of the masses with soul-degrading propaganda, and increase scientists' pay to fix it!
sheesh I really love science guys
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 01:51:07 UTC No. 16147843
>>16147688
What's the absorption limit for CO2?
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 02:39:31 UTC No. 16147904
>>16147803
Take your meds.
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 11:32:50 UTC No. 16148318
>>16146558
>NASA says atmospheric CO2 would have to go to over 3500ppm before it would make a noticeable difference in the climate
Now they're saying 500ppm will change it that much.
What changed in fundamental understandings of physics since 1972 to make NASA change their estimates so much?
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 23:47:49 UTC No. 16149206
>>16147843
2.5ºC @ 3500ppm
Anonymous at Sun, 28 Apr 2024 01:39:30 UTC No. 16149355
>>16149206
So, adding more CO2 would change nothing?
Anonymous at Sun, 28 Apr 2024 16:10:37 UTC No. 16150080
>>16148318
You shouldn't source your information from anonymous people on the internet.
Anonymous at Sun, 28 Apr 2024 16:13:11 UTC No. 16150085
legit question is NASA in cahoots with big oil? or on same political side or something?
Anonymous at Sun, 28 Apr 2024 19:37:52 UTC No. 16150362
>>16150085
No and OP's claims are nonsense.
Anonymous at Sun, 28 Apr 2024 19:43:57 UTC No. 16150377
>>16150362
I mean I look up to NASA but am from Europe so dunno all the political/corporate fuckery going on. just wanted to make sure
Anonymous at Sun, 28 Apr 2024 19:57:08 UTC No. 16150405
>>16150377
Fair enough. NASA's science is usually solid. They have almost no budget anymore though.
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 28 Apr 2024 21:29:31 UTC No. 16150519
>>16149355
Correct, once the threshold is crossed, any additional CO2 has no effect on temperature
Anonymous at Sun, 28 Apr 2024 23:03:58 UTC No. 16150714
>>16150519
Retard take
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 00:26:58 UTC No. 16150877
>>16150519
>Laughs in Venusian.
🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 00:48:03 UTC No. 16150932
>>16150877
>t. zero semesters of physics completed & zero semesters of astronomy completed
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 01:04:58 UTC No. 16150967
>>16150932
>he couldn't answer
Sad!
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 01:53:23 UTC No. 16151025
>>16150877
>Planet that receives eight times the solar irradiance per square meter is hotter
Whoah. Next you'll tell me Mercury is even hotter and tidally locked to the sun so literally only one half is melted and the dark side frozen and has a stable temperate twilight ring.
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 02:04:29 UTC No. 16151033
Plant food
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 02:39:08 UTC No. 16151066
>>16146558
if it increased then there would short term be a release of methane that would make the weather odd, but that sublimates pretty quickly
historically CO2 has been way higher and the propaganda is just about developing areas of the world where they don't have uh stuff and we have too much anyway
the real way CO2 works is that a small amount at higher altitudes mostly causes a feedback of higher water content that traps more heat
lots of people really don't understand science because people use the perception of it to appease a business and sociology agenda that sounds a lot more machievellian than it really is
just forceful if anything
basically the absorption limit is that more CO2 does not cause it to go higher up anymore and the clouds also don't change and we can seed those so the moisture falls back down to the earth
climate change is actually kind of positive because it will motivate people to develop poor areas and provide humanitarian basic services and also make some colder spots where unironically smarter people live arable not that there is a need for more food though
it's like they just want people to be mad so they'll complain about this instead of that and not bother anyone
like the modern form of listening to war of the worlds on the radio and then not realizing it's fictional nonfiction functional propaganda who cares but also the schools make no sense they only let peopel even go because it makes them feel better than kind of admitting they're functionally unfunctional slash autocratic in certain flashbangs of a prescient course correction of influences
but basically it's also money
tons of people running schemes and stuff
chaos
idk idc somebody threatened and paid me in the span of 1 hour so fuck it whatever
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 02:41:49 UTC No. 16151068
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coD
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 02:59:47 UTC No. 16151090
also this is pretty much not a topic about people being helpful because the agenda with spreading moronity around by collapsing the "economies" of the western people who need not and want not already are to focus the energies of omg so scary foreign globalist organizations at solving foreign global problems among groups of people /pol/ would plainly sum up as niggers, but really just mostly the issue is if you're gonna cure diseases and do nothing else for every group of people just because they can interbreed with you and muh babble said to then you problem didn't catch the part about the religion of the guy who like was crucified I mean c'mon like universe is gonna be around for a gajillion years and you can't just put your foot down about making a poverty line for not having babies globally?
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 03:16:24 UTC No. 16151105
>>16151025
>8 times
1. ~2 times
2. Black body can estimate surface temperature. Guess what, Venus is around one order of magnitude less emissive than Earth.
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 05:07:18 UTC No. 16151191
>>16151066
Take your meds, retard.
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 05:08:18 UTC No. 16151194
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 05:09:20 UTC No. 16151195
>>16151105
>If you ignore the greenhouse gas effect then it doesn't exist!
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 05:43:01 UTC No. 16151228
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 05:45:53 UTC No. 16151231
>>16151195
and pic rel too
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 06:38:25 UTC No. 16151287
>>16151228
>>16151231
What do you think that proves?
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 09:52:02 UTC No. 16151453
>>16147803
they just want to put in solar panels more trains and a few nuclear reactors you, is that such a bad thing?
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 09:58:27 UTC No. 16151458
>>16151231
>Twice the irradiance
>Only just slightly more than twice the temperature
>288 * 2 = 580k vs 737k
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 13:47:10 UTC No. 16151761
>>16151287
Use your last neuron and you'll know. It's self-evident if you aren't a /x/tard.
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 14:00:20 UTC No. 16151786
>>16151458
>>16151761
So you're making shit up because you don't understand how to interpret data. Got it.
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 14:15:59 UTC No. 16151806
>>16151786
>that cheap bait
Deeply retarded.
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 14:42:06 UTC No. 16151827
>>16151458
Do ..... do you not understand the graph? Hell man, this is Climatology 201. I'm guessing you've never taken a Climatology class before, not even 101.
I remember when we plotted out all the planets expected temperature using nothing but their albedo, the inverse square law and distance from the sun using Steffan-Boltzmann. Venus's albedo is incredibly high. It reflects like, 80% of the incoming sunlight back into space and yet despite that it's the hottest planet in the solar system. This can only be explained by the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.
As far as OP is concerned, I need to know where you got that information, it's blatantly false and either a misprint or out of context in some way. We've known about CO2's affect on the climate since 1890.
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 15:00:49 UTC No. 16151843
>>16151453
Of course it is. California relies 30% on renewables and they have to import electricity from other states because they shut down their coal and natural gas plants. This is part of the reason why electricity is so expensive there.
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 15:29:43 UTC No. 16151866
>>16150877
Yes, ignore the insulating effect of the 50 miles-thick clouds that envelope the entire planet, or the fact that the surface air pressure is 90x denser than Earth's. It's all about the CO2 level.
I love it when death cultists expose their ignorance.
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 15:34:11 UTC No. 16151871
>>16151806
>Bait
Cope harder. You got caught LARPing.
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 15:35:23 UTC No. 16151873
>>16151827
>I remember when we plotted out all the planets expected temperature using nothing but their albedo, the inverse square law and distance from the sun
And you concluded that the ONLY factor that could explain deviation from your expected results was CO2 % in the atmosphere?
Not the density of the atmosphere or the effect of clouds / vapour / weather?
Picrel is the estimated forcings on terrestrial climate of CO2, water vapour, and clouds. Why should the 50 mile thick clouds which permanently cover Venus be any less of a forcing factor on the Venusian greenhouse effect than terrestrial clouds are on Earth?
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 15:36:24 UTC No. 16151874
>>16151873
>picrel
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 16:37:12 UTC No. 16151932
>>16151874
Absorption and emission happens in different bands. It's easy to find energy budget articles for each planet and some moons far more specific that that pic kek...
>Analysis of the radiative budget of the Venusian atmosphere based on infrared Net Exchange Rate formalism
Btw, clouds of Venus are high enough to be like a shell completely isolated for most bands from the surface, greenhouse effect of the lower atmosphere is the main factor limiting the energy transmitted to the clouds. Venus heat loss is limited to very long wave infrared (direct loss) and IR windows that heat the high altitude clouds. The lower atmosphere is 99.9% opaque to IR even if there's no water vapor vs ~80% of Earth...
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 20:17:37 UTC No. 16152137
>>16151932
>In our solar system, Venus is the only terrestrial body with a thick atmosphere. Venus has a strong greenhouse effect, and the measurements of radiation budget can help us better determine the efficiency of the greenhouse mechanism. The observations and studies of Venus’ radiation budget are very limited. We do not know how well the absorbed solar energy is balanced by the emitted thermal energy on Venus. The spatial and temporal variations of Venus’ radiation budget have not been measured either. Considering the very thick atmosphere on Venus (Venus’ surface atmospheric pressure is about 90 times that of Earth) and its highly reflective clouds, we expect that Venus has a unique radiation budget among the terrestrial planets in our solar system.
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 20:48:09 UTC No. 16152173
>>16152137
Now distinct it from gas pressure, which is - as you know base physics i hope- the main factor.
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 22:00:30 UTC No. 16152272
>>16151191
can i take your meds? make that would help me understand this quackery
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 00:03:32 UTC No. 16152437
>>16152173
Venus' atmosphere isn't gas, most of the the CO2 on Venus is supercritical
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 00:10:30 UTC No. 16152440
>>16152437
kinda like you
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 07:27:43 UTC No. 16152868
>>16152272
does the stuff sublimate the methane or just whatever and such?
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 17:37:38 UTC No. 16153411
>>16152440
why so dense?
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 17:51:25 UTC No. 16153440
>>16147688
OP can't read English though, that's several steps behind.
t. ESL
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 06:43:38 UTC No. 16154304
>>16151231
Mars has massive amounts of CO2 in it's atmosphere and Mars' measured temperature T is virtually the same as it's calculated equilibrium temperature T' so there is no possible way that CO2 is a powerful greenhouse gas.
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 14:07:01 UTC No. 16154873
>>16154304
Retard take
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 14:34:23 UTC No. 16154900
>>16154304
> there is no possible way that CO2 is a powerful greenhouse gas.
Yes and no.
Other gases transparent to LWIR matters too, a denser atmosphere is better equalizing temperatures (compare max-min temp of the Moon with Earth and average temperature of ~250K vs ~290K), which means that places warmed by the Sun are colder than their black body temperature, those places 'heats' the rest of the planet through convection. That matters because heat loss by radiation increases by T^4 so removing the "hot spots" also contributes to higher -average- temperature too.
The feedback CO2 -> water and dissolved gases are the main problem to predict the total greenhouse effect of Earth and those are related to global temperature, that's why the CO2 is problematic (and easy to use as fearmonger buzzword): positive feedback.
The question of GH effect is about an Earth with 400 ppm of CO2 vs Earth with 800 or 1000 ppm (arbitrary figures iirc they could be higher), not only because the atmospheric CO2 by its own but because of the feedback too.
Water vapor is the main greenhouse gas of Earth and CO2 dissolved in oceans is ~50 times more than the atmospheric CO2. A lot of IFs that matters because current society works with very little margin (agriculture) and people tends to dislike the idea of climate inducing wars as in the past. Climate change wouldn't cause a complete extinction but can fuck up the convenient current state.
The example of Venus is a simple Reductio ad absurdum for the claim that "2500 Pa of CO2 is the limit for the GH effect of CO2". Venus surface is so isolated that you can model it as 2 separated bodies: a gas shell (clouds) + Venus and its dense atmosphere.
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 19:41:07 UTC No. 16155199
>>16151231
>Mars: over 30x more CO2 than Earth and a total greenhouse effect of 0.2ºC
so that means the greenhouse effect due to CO2 on Earth is 0.007ºC
AKA completely insignificant
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 21:38:05 UTC No. 16155364
>>16155199
>30
?
P(CO2) for Earth is ~40 Pa, ~600 Pa for Mars
>and a total greenhouse effect of 0.2ºC
>CO2 on Earth is 0.007ºC
May I see the source for those claims?
For comparison Moon (avg) surface temperature is ~250K vs 288K of Earth...
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 21:43:33 UTC No. 16155376
>>16155364
If you want to compare atmospheric pressure differences between two planets as a means of comparing the masses of their atmospheres you have to account for the gravity differences between the two planets, which you ignored
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 22:08:01 UTC No. 16155422
>>16155376
Yeah, my bad, it's ~30 times more mass of CO2 per area. Now, what about:
>and a total greenhouse effect of 0.2ºC
>CO2 on Earth is 0.007ºC
?
🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 2 May 2024 07:29:56 UTC No. 16156119
>>16155199
So Earth would need to have 30x the current amount of atmospheric CO2, about 12,000ppm CO2, to see the same magnitude of greenhouse effect due to CO2 as on Mars - and Mars' greenhouse effect due to CO2 is only worth 0.2ºC.
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 00:38:13 UTC No. 16157126
Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 01:21:46 UTC No. 16157160
>>16157126
>Source GeoCraft Data
>by “Monte Hieb”
Ah yes, the good ol pic of GeoCraft... pic rel.
That aside, ae you going to keep insisting that the total GH effect is 0.2ºC?
What average temperature would Earth have without GH effect and atmosphere?
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 01:48:09 UTC No. 16157171
>>16157160
>What average temperature would Earth have without GH effect and atmosphere?
Why can't you calculate that on your own? Are you completely uneducated? High school level geometry and algebra is beyond your intellectual capabilities?
Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 02:20:20 UTC No. 16157198
>>16157171
Not even an answer...
Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 09:00:08 UTC No. 16157496
>>16157160
You can tease out the fact that the greenhouse effect on Earth is over 99% due to water vapor by comparing interday temperature and humidity measurements from arid and humid locations. If CO2 was legitimately a significant greenhouse gas then people would have long since noticed that regions surrounding natural CO2 sources were substantially warmer than other locations. Volcanic mountains wouldn't have snow at the top like other mountains do if the massive amounts of CO2 they belch was preventing heat from escaping their region. As it turns out snow sticks around on top of volcanoes just as well as with any other mountain
Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 10:08:12 UTC No. 16157551
Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 10:10:20 UTC No. 16157552
>>16146558
Fuck climate change. I'm sick of all the bullshit Its a smokescreen hiding more immediate and tangible issues.
Concentrate of preserving biodiversity, protecting natural habitats, decreasing atmospheric, land and oceanic pollution and then maybe we can talk about fucking climate change AFTER the world population has stabilized. Otherwise shut the fuck up.
Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 12:56:39 UTC No. 16157656
>>16154304
>virtually the same
This is a lie. Mars' atmospheric climate is measurable and different and fits our understanding of climate change perfectly. Your argument is based on ignorance.
Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 12:57:51 UTC No. 16157658
>>16157552
>shut up about something that's happening and dangerous
No.
Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 19:59:48 UTC No. 16158145
>>16157496
>shishaldin.jpg
i've been there
r8
Anonymous at Sat, 4 May 2024 22:28:46 UTC No. 16159744
>>16157656
>mars is too different to compare to earth
>i only want to compare with venus
Mars' atmosphere is the most similar planetary atmosphere to Earth's in the known universe, Mars has weather systems similar to ones on Earth, Mars has wind, clouds and precipitation similar to whats found on Earth, even sandstorms similar the those here on Earth and unlike Venus, none of Mars' CO2 is supercritical.
Anonymous at Sun, 5 May 2024 01:33:48 UTC No. 16159969
>>16159744
>n=8
You will never be a scientist.
Anonymous at Sun, 5 May 2024 06:34:51 UTC No. 16160252
>>16158145
rated
Anonymous at Mon, 6 May 2024 05:00:36 UTC No. 16161739
>>16157656
your argument is based on ignorance, you have no idea what you're talking about, you can't even do basic math and physics, you've never passes a single semester of thermodynamics
Anonymous at Mon, 6 May 2024 19:36:03 UTC No. 16162763
>>16158145
did you go all the way to the top?
if so, what did it smell like
Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 03:14:32 UTC No. 16163434
>>16162763
All volcanoes smell the same
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 18:33:41 UTC No. 16164330
>>16157551
boomer cominc
Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 20:47:13 UTC No. 16164619
>>16161739
Show us the math that proves them wrong.
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 03:33:46 UTC No. 16165176
>>16164330
>this comic upsets me because it accurately characterizes me a brainless bootlicker
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 8 May 2024 20:21:15 UTC No. 16166293
>>16146558
>Whats the absorption limit of CO2, how does that work?
>Does anyone here know?
clearly nobody does, nobody on /sci/ has studied physics in enough depth to understand the issue. of all of the many people here who claim that they're experts in global warming, none of they understand radiative transfer even though its undergrad material.
Cult of Passion at Wed, 8 May 2024 20:22:56 UTC No. 16166295
I am God and you are all evil.
Cult of Passion at Wed, 8 May 2024 20:23:58 UTC No. 16166298
Bow before my mathematical prowess. I am king of science as long as I live. All of you are just stupid and evil.
Anonymous at Thu, 9 May 2024 05:34:11 UTC No. 16166878
>>16166293
People in climate science don't study physics, they're too low IQ to handle the mathematics involved
Anonymous at Thu, 9 May 2024 12:39:45 UTC No. 16167230
>>16166878
>Imagine being this retarded
🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 9 May 2024 20:05:46 UTC No. 16167882
>>16166878
They're discouraged from studying that kind of material because if they did learn it, they would quickly realize that global warming is completely and blatantly fake
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 05:15:15 UTC No. 16168558
>>16146558
So nobody on /sci/ even understands the basic of absorption limits?
This from the same people who constantly brag about how fully they understand all of quantum mechanics?
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 22:10:12 UTC No. 16169744
>>16167882
This, its impossible to believe in global warming if you've studied physics, the numbers just don't add up
Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 08:43:05 UTC No. 16170494
>>16169744
that explains why so many of the most successful and important physicists have denounced the global warming meme.
Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 15:18:57 UTC No. 16170843
>>16166878
>>16167882
>>16169744
>>16170494
t. dropouts in a circle jerk
Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 22:22:07 UTC No. 16171416
>>16170843
projection
just because you're a loser doesn't mean everyone else is
Anonymous at Sun, 12 May 2024 08:02:23 UTC No. 16171978
>>16169744
How come all life on Earth didn't come to an end 30 million years ago when atmospheric CO2 concentrations were 400% of what they are currently?
Thats all you need to ask to completely debunk the global warming narrative
Anonymous at Sun, 12 May 2024 22:45:42 UTC No. 16172963
>>16171978
Sudden shifts in climate have caused mass extinctions before. Look it up.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 May 2024 00:10:36 UTC No. 16173053
>>16172963
How come all life on Earth didn't come to an end 30 million years ago when atmospheric CO2 concentrations were 400% of what they are currently?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 May 2024 13:28:02 UTC No. 16173875
>>16173053
Why don't you look up what percentage of all life dies in each of these mass extinction events?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 May 2024 13:31:17 UTC No. 16173879
>>16146558
>NASA said
FTFY
Anonymous at Mon, 13 May 2024 17:40:29 UTC No. 16174189
>>16157160
there is no greenhouse effect due to co2 because co2 is not a greenhouse gas
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 05:24:15 UTC No. 16175025
>>16173053
life flourished during that era, primates benefited especially.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 06:04:14 UTC No. 16175084
>>16175025
>>16174189
>>16173053
Retard takes.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 21:48:47 UTC No. 16176196
>>16156119
Belief in global warming hinges on ignorance of science.
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 15 May 2024 07:08:13 UTC No. 16176768
>>16176196
inability to do math also helps the ignorant believe in the global warming meme
Anonymous at Wed, 15 May 2024 14:03:18 UTC No. 16177039
>>16176196
>>16176768
>Projection
Post degree
Anonymous at Wed, 15 May 2024 17:49:46 UTC No. 16177218
>>16146558
CO2 levels in our atmosphere average around 400ppm. The ideal CO2 levels to increase the yield of cannabis plants is roughly 1,200 to 2,000ppm. Studies show that CO2 levels of up to 10,000ppm can still significantly increase plant growth. However, managing a grow space with such high concentrations of CO2 is difficult as CO2 levels over 3,000ppm are dangerous to humans, and concentrations of roughly 5,000ppm are considered lethal.
Dude weed bros, our time is now!
🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 16 May 2024 05:31:45 UTC No. 16177927
>>16177218
>CO2 levels over 3,000ppm are dangerous to humans,
They aren't, NASA sets the maximum safe level for CO2 their space station at 5500ppm and astronauts have to do difficult work under those conditions and they're not just putting in 8 hour days either. NASA has never recorded short term or long term negative health affects as a result of the high CO2 atmosphere aboard their space station
Anonymous at Thu, 16 May 2024 21:02:50 UTC No. 16178911
>>16177927
why are people that are ignorant of the science of CO2 always on this board trying to pass themselves off as experts?
imagine trying to act like an authority figure on the topic of CO2 and you don't even know the basics such as NASA's limits for the space station or the results of the biosphere2 experiments
Anonymous at Fri, 17 May 2024 06:50:30 UTC No. 16179464
>>16178911
>why are people that are ignorant of the science of CO2 always on this board trying to pass themselves off as experts?
because they're global warming political activists
Anonymous at Fri, 17 May 2024 15:01:36 UTC No. 16179984
>>16147803
Over target
Jews did not like this post
Anonymous at Fri, 17 May 2024 15:06:53 UTC No. 16179990
>>16151066
Actual high intelligence post
Anonymous at Fri, 17 May 2024 15:12:19 UTC No. 16179995
>>16151827
>I need to know where you got that information, it's blatantly false and either a misprint or out of context in some way
Orwellian
Anonymous at Sat, 18 May 2024 04:31:32 UTC No. 16180982
>>16151827
>This can only be explained by the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Most of the CO2 on Venus is supercritical, not in gas form.
Anonymous at Sat, 18 May 2024 20:46:31 UTC No. 16181968
>>16151827
Jupiter reaches temperatures in excess of 20.000ºC, that has to do with the physics of dense gasses, it has nothing to do with solar inputs. Climate science students are too dumb to learn physics so they don't understand thermodynamics
Anonymous at Sat, 18 May 2024 20:52:39 UTC No. 16181974
>>16181968
>Imagine being so retarded that you thought dense gas provided infinite energy
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 19 May 2024 18:03:18 UTC No. 16183042
>>16179464
This, /sci/ is full of /leftypol/ fags spamming the board with their political propaganda
Anonymous at Sun, 19 May 2024 20:10:06 UTC No. 16183261
>>16183042
You have to go back >>>/pol/
🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 20 May 2024 05:28:24 UTC No. 16183953
>>16181968
Thats why they're always confused about why Venus is so hot, because even basic idea gas law is beyond their comprehension
Anonymous at Mon, 20 May 2024 12:21:28 UTC No. 16184372
>>16150877
>Burning all fossil fuels will increase CO2 to 96.5% of gasses in the atmosphere.
Was 4000-8000ppm pre Carboniferous, so it can’t get higher than that if we burned everything.
Anonymous at Mon, 20 May 2024 12:50:24 UTC No. 16184418
>>16184372
>>16183953
>>16183042
>>16181968
>>16180982
>>16179995
>>16179990
>>16179984
>>16179464
>>16178911
>>16177927
>>16177218
Retard takes
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 00:44:51 UTC No. 16185376
>>16148318
>What changed in fundamental understandings of physics since 1972 to make NASA change their estimates so much?
Nothing in physics, but NASA is a political propaganda organization, not a scientific body.
NASA was founded for the purpose of showing up the USSR in the space race, it has never been anything other than a propaganda tool
Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 09:32:28 UTC No. 16185919
>>16185376
>it has never been anything other than a propaganda tool
Its also good for generating kickbacks for politicians and nasa executives
Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 10:50:21 UTC No. 16186015
>>16184418
That level of autism is impressive, even at 4chan
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 12:17:26 UTC No. 16186088
>>16185919
>>16185376
Retard takes
Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 00:44:30 UTC No. 16187084
>>16147688
I do, but only for atomic hydrogen.
Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 20:30:41 UTC No. 16188469
>>16147688
its literally undergrad tier physics
Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 07:50:33 UTC No. 16189138
>>16188469
Nobody on /sci/ understands even basic undergrad tier physics
Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 21:36:51 UTC No. 16190160
Heres a short video that explains atomic and molecular absorption limits for people who don't feel like going through physics grad school to learn about it
https://youtu.be/eBq2T6g8kQ0
Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 06:00:23 UTC No. 16190708
>>16190160
thanks, good video
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 10:15:37 UTC No. 16190899
>>16190160
>>16190708
You retards should kill yourselves. NOW
Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 04:55:59 UTC No. 16192083
>>16190899
physics only upsets you because you're not willing to take the time needed to learn to understand it
Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 23:43:17 UTC No. 16193340
>>16183042
thats what they're brainwashed to do at goyschool
Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 09:54:14 UTC No. 16193845
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 12:50:34 UTC No. 16194099
>>16193845
>>16193340
Retard takes
Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 07:57:49 UTC No. 16195427
>>16181974
>I've never encountered the phrase "random walk" before
Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 10:00:08 UTC No. 16195548
>>16195427
We can tell, pseud
Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 21:27:50 UTC No. 16196538
>>16189138
thats why they think black holes are real
Anonymous at Tue, 28 May 2024 07:37:56 UTC No. 16197326
>>16189138
I do, I also understand graduate school level physics. Thats why I know black holes aren't real.
They're just a dumb popsci meme.
DoctorGreen !DRgReeNusk at Tue, 28 May 2024 16:37:48 UTC No. 16197861
>>16146558
>>NASA says
so?
Anonymous at Wed, 29 May 2024 05:05:41 UTC No. 16198684
>>16173879
what about basic science has changed since they said it? did molecules recently start absorbing and reemitting radiation differently?
Anonymous at Wed, 29 May 2024 05:10:51 UTC No. 16198689
CO2 levels should get nowhere near 1000 ppm due to its effect on humans
high CO2 levels are poison to us and makes humans mentally slow, makes it difficult to concentrate
the dinos must have been built different to live in level of 2-3k ppm
Anonymous at Wed, 29 May 2024 05:48:51 UTC No. 16198722
>>16198689
You have no idea what you're talking about. NASA limit for atmospheric CO2 in the atmospheres of it's spacecraft at 5500ppm and they have their astronauts doing difficult and complicated work in those conditions. Your house or your apartment or your dorm or your mom's basement is regularly well over 1000ppm and you don't notice the difference at all. You don't even own a CO2 meter, but you would own one if you were legitimately concerned about CO2.
If you were really as sensitive to CO2 as you claim then you'd have long since noticed that you were smarter at different times of the day, but you're not even aware of the interday CO2 cycle at all.
Anonymous at Wed, 29 May 2024 20:14:34 UTC No. 16199556
>>16147688
Ignorance of physics is a prerequisite for belief in global warming
Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 05:40:54 UTC No. 16200287
>>16199556
That explains why Al Gore and Greta both believe in it, since neither of the were able to pass even high school level math classes
Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 06:13:10 UTC No. 16200338
>>16146558
The ocean is essentially an unlimited sink. There will never be enough CO2 to saturate it like a fizzy drink. The ocean sinks, such as coral, are also boundless. The forest sinks are also boundless. CO2 is a complete nonstarter. The perfect humiliation ritual with the intended purpose of justifying mass migration. But they don't need that any more. That is why they are letting so much push back. The west is already gone. Unlimited migrants in every decent country in the world. They got their win condition.
Now they need to start a war between mudshits and the west.
Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 06:47:43 UTC No. 16200393
>>16154304
mars barely has an atmosphere, so its not even remotely comparable.
Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 21:53:38 UTC No. 16201501
>>16200393
Mars has over 3000% more atmospherics CO2 per unit surface area than Earth does and Mars has no measurable greenhouse effect, so that conclusively rules out CO2 as a potentially significant greenhouse gas
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 05:12:37 UTC No. 16202047
>>16201501
nigga mars has like 1/100 of the atmospheric pressure of earth, there is hardly any atmosphere at all, its like comparing a thick wool blanket to a thin sheet of tissue paper that is made of a marginally more insulative material
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 06:11:40 UTC No. 16202120
>>16201501
Time to combat manmade pressure change then.
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 06:18:10 UTC No. 16202126
>>16200338
the final social cataclysm
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 19:40:01 UTC No. 16202896
>>16202047
you have never passed so much as a freshman level thermodynamics class, you have no idea what you're talking about
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 08:03:33 UTC No. 16203792
>>16202047
So you're saying CO2 works like a magical greenhouse blanket on Earth, but on Mars the laws of physics are different or something?
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 13:01:40 UTC No. 16204093
>>16203792
The laws are the same, the values of the variables are wildly different.
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 22:31:04 UTC No. 16205258
>>16202047
You've not considering that Mars has lower gravity than Earth and that factor alone accounts for the lion's share of the atmospheric pressure difference.
Mars' atmosphere is extremely Earth like outside of the chemical composition, Mars has clouds, precipitation, wind storms and those wind storms cause dust storms, which wouldn't be possible with an extremely thin atmosphere. Mars' atmosphere is far, far more comparable to Earths than Venus' is.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 21:10:08 UTC No. 16206742
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 04:34:56 UTC No. 16207252
>>16204093
Right, Mars has much, much more CO2 than Earth does and Mars has zero greenhouse effect, so theres no possible way that the infinitesimal amount of CO2 in Earth's atmosphere could possible produce any significant greenhouse effect.
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 16:00:36 UTC No. 16207939
>>16207252
Lol wrong.
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 18:15:00 UTC No. 16208126
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 19:46:43 UTC No. 16208274
>>16202107
>>16206742
> What are tides?
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 20:04:34 UTC No. 16208300
>>16208126
Lol wrong.
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 05:02:45 UTC No. 16209209
>>16208274
why can't you find any real pics which show global warming causing the sea level to rise? according to the science manhattan should be under water by now, why isn't it?
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 21:01:49 UTC No. 16210436
>>16209209
Those pics don't exist because sea level isn't rising anywhere. If any pics like that did exist then they'd have been spammed massively all over the internet by all of the "online activists"
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 01:44:10 UTC No. 16210873
>>16210436
>>16209209
Lol wrong.
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 05:17:57 UTC No. 16211101
>>16210873
>t. no pics
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 22:07:40 UTC No. 16212542
>>16210436
>If any pics like that did exist then they'd have been spammed massively all over the internet by all of the "online activists"
This, the fact that there is no evidence of global warming even after nearly half a century of the theory being shilled nonstop is proof that the theory is false
EK at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 22:49:01 UTC No. 16212609
The real red pill is realising that CO2 actually has a cooling effect
Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 19:29:22 UTC No. 16217709
>>16217378
nobody can ever answer this question
🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 19:34:48 UTC No. 16217722
>>16151066
Fucking retarded
🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 19:35:57 UTC No. 16217726
>>16151287
You're such a retarded nigger. Stop posting.
🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 19:40:02 UTC No. 16217743
>>16151866
Holy retard
🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 19:45:01 UTC No. 16217764
>>16152868
Huh? Did you not read the image? The particles themselves reflect sunlight, same shit happens with volcanic ash iirc.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 03:13:09 UTC No. 16218748
>>16217709
Its like that because global warming isn't real
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:09:19 UTC No. 16220842
>>16202047
Imagine someone who posts in ebonics and trannycase presuming that they're experts in science.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 06:51:20 UTC No. 16221448
>>16220842
dumb people are too dumb to realize that they're dumb, that explains the phenomenon you noticed
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 21:26:38 UTC No. 16222874
>>16222827
>mfw when I go through the list of signatories
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 09:13:04 UTC No. 16224057
>>16146558
Nobody on /sci/ understands the vagaries of radiative transfer
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 14:43:46 UTC No. 16224492
>>16224057
That explains the 8+ climate change denial threads.
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 23:00:49 UTC No. 16225687
🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 08:12:50 UTC No. 16226404
>>16225687
my bad, I forgot to include modern warming for reference
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 08:16:19 UTC No. 16226406
>>16225687
my bad, I forgot to include modern warming for reference
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:05:15 UTC No. 16227140
>>16226406
>the hockey stick meme
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:25:19 UTC No. 16227259
>>16227140
>Imagine being so retarded that you didn't understand the difference between the global climate and the climate of Europe
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:42:27 UTC No. 16227275
>>16227140
>be good juden
>try to save planet from global warming
>bad goys find emails in climategate
>they call you a fraud
>sue
>fail to move case along for 8 years
>antisemitic court drops your case
>other bad goys compare your fraud to molesting children
>sue
>good goy court agrees with you
>antisemites took it a nose too far
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:47:37 UTC No. 16227280
>>16225687
>>16226406
>>16227140
This is just one reconstruction, no? What is the temperature reconstruction which is accepted by scientific consensus?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:57:04 UTC No. 16227611
>>16227280
No. Google it.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 06:41:10 UTC No. 16228047
>>16227280
>scientific consensus
you mean "academic consensus"
science isn't a democracy
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 19:18:12 UTC No. 16228899
Heres a 50 year old NASA document for all of you self appointed science geniuses who don't even understand basic radiative transfer and absorption limits
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 05:50:13 UTC No. 16229856
>>16228899
modern soience fanboys are too dumb to understand NASA documents from back in the days when NASA could actually run a successful spaceflight program
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 19:34:47 UTC No. 16230855
Has /sci/ figured out absorption limits in radiative transfer yet or are you still working on it? Its a good applied physics problem, dovetails thermodynamics and quantum mechanics nicely, all of the self identified physics experts here should enjoy it
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 06:12:40 UTC No. 16231906
>>16228899
Thats a good document, better than most contemporary physics books.
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 08:38:21 UTC No. 16232090
>>16210873
Climatetards sure aren't sending their best with rhetoric like this.
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 03:08:34 UTC No. 16233783
>>16230855
none of the greta tier idiots have the mental ability to comprehend absorption limits or radiative transfer, they're greta tier idiots, they're too dumb to understand hard science topics
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 19:26:35 UTC No. 16234978
>>16233783
Schizos and screeching emotional children don't have the patience needed to concentrate long enough to learn physics, thats why they're easy prey for media manipulators.
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 06:25:25 UTC No. 16235815
>>16228899
there is nobody currently working at NASA who could comprehend whats in that text, let alone produce a document of that caliber.
Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 00:42:29 UTC No. 16237089
>>16235815
Sure, but they can memorize the 109 genders, so they're not completely useless
Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 19:41:43 UTC No. 16238188
>>16235815
>currently working at NASA
white males have banned from nasa unless they're homosexuals or jewish
Anonymous at Mon, 17 Jun 2024 03:19:03 UTC No. 16238896
>>16228899
too technical4me
is there anyone here who understands the absorption limits mentioned in OP pic well enough to explain it to a midwit?
Anonymous at Mon, 17 Jun 2024 23:07:20 UTC No. 16240134
>>16238896
I don't, but I won't. Open a book if you want to learn physics
Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 00:50:28 UTC No. 16240262
>>16240134
Done. Now what Mr science
Anonymous at Tue, 18 Jun 2024 01:15:40 UTC No. 16240301
>>16150085
at the top literally everything in "the west" is a part of the same political group(which probably more closely resembles a mafia)
that doesn't mean those institutions aren't doing real science but they are absolutely corrupt
Anonymous at Wed, 19 Jun 2024 05:08:54 UTC No. 16242210
>>16240301
>which probably more closely resembles a mafia
"the mafia" is a myth created by hollywood.
the biggest organized crime operators have always been the same group that controls hollywood.
Anonymous at Wed, 19 Jun 2024 23:10:09 UTC No. 16243293
>>16242210
Meyer Lansky was the organized crime guy who took over the FBI, he wasn't Italian.
Anonymous at Thu, 20 Jun 2024 17:27:16 UTC No. 16244311
>>16146558
That was the old NASA that could actually build rockets and send people to the moon.
Nu-NASA says the global warming is going to kill us all in "two weeks" and have been spinning that same lie since for over a third of a century without any noticeable change in the climate.
Anonymous at Fri, 21 Jun 2024 08:25:20 UTC No. 16245266
>>16244311
Old NASA was run by Christians and Nu-NASA is run by atheists
Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 05:53:20 UTC No. 16246950
>>16238188
jews aren't white
Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 21:35:01 UTC No. 16248208
>>16246950
They sure do seem to wish they were, but semites are from Asia and Africa, not Europe. There isn't even a semitic nation that borders on Europe.
Anonymous at Sun, 23 Jun 2024 18:50:08 UTC No. 16249647
>>16146558
How is the absorption limit of CO2 calculated?
Does anyone on /sci/ know?
Anonymous at Mon, 24 Jun 2024 06:47:33 UTC No. 16250444
>>16249647
apparently not
Anonymous at Mon, 24 Jun 2024 21:02:50 UTC No. 16251549
>>16249647
Theres so many climate science experts on /sci/, its impossible that there isn't at least several people who understand how the absorption limit of CO2 is calculated
Anonymous at Tue, 25 Jun 2024 08:09:06 UTC No. 16252364
>>16251549
>climate science experts
they can't do math, "climate science" is not an intellectually rigorous field of study, you can get a degree in it without learning calculus, so they aren't capable of comprehending physics such as whats in OP
Anonymous at Tue, 25 Jun 2024 08:55:39 UTC No. 16252389
>>16252364
>"climate science" is not an intellectually rigorous field of study
Only in McDonald's land of course. In Europe it's a specialization of geology which requires bachelor's level math, physics and chemistry.
Anonymous at Wed, 26 Jun 2024 00:00:27 UTC No. 16253925
>>16252389
sure it is, thats why nobody in the field understands the ideal gas law or ever publishes anything other that completely unscientific drivel
Anonymous at Wed, 26 Jun 2024 20:54:50 UTC No. 16255353
>>16252389
Do you know how is the absorption limit of CO2 is calculated, Mr. Eurogenius?
Anonymous at Thu, 27 Jun 2024 17:33:23 UTC No. 16256866
>>16255353
>he can't answer
europeans confirmed for low IQ
Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 05:16:12 UTC No. 16257710
>>16245266
Old NASA was run by literal nazis
Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 05:28:43 UTC No. 16257719
>>16228047
neil is such a dumb fuck retard its amazing anyone takes this woman molesting clown seriously.
if the universe isnt truly knowable then we cant know anything thus unable to do science and rely on our senses. this key part of this argument completely and utterly decimates the theory of evolution and materialism. sadly most atheistic dorks refuse to understand it. this is why philosophers will always be brighter than STEM nerds.
Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:17:41 UTC No. 16259003
>>16242210
The "Italians are in charge of organized crime" movies were the 2nd most common type of movie hollywood made in the 2nd half of the 20th century, holocaust movies were the most common.
Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 16:40:57 UTC No. 16259993
>>16259003
both are false narratives
Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 16:52:10 UTC No. 16260008
>>16229856
>>16235815
>I'm retarded so everyone alive must be equally dumb
what causes this sort of delusion?
Anonymous at Sun, 30 Jun 2024 04:48:33 UTC No. 16260677
>>16260008
explain the absorption limit of CO2 to us
Anonymous at Sun, 30 Jun 2024 22:11:01 UTC No. 16262029
>>16260677
I can't because I've never studied physics and couldn't pass caculus
Anonymous at Mon, 1 Jul 2024 21:11:36 UTC No. 16263302
lmao that nobody on /sci/ is intelligent enough to wrap their tiny little brains around the absorption limit concept. this is undergrad level physics
Anonymous at Tue, 2 Jul 2024 07:05:05 UTC No. 16263966
>>16263302
People who believe in global warming can't do math, so they're incapable of understand physics
Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 13:37:08 UTC No. 16265926
bump!
Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 17:15:54 UTC No. 16266228
>>16265007
How come Florida hasn't been flooded yet?
Why is NASA currently expanding their sea level Florida launch site if they genuinely believe that global warming is real?
Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 17:23:06 UTC No. 16266244
bump
Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 17:54:40 UTC No. 16266300
>biodiversity already shitting the bed from land use
>people breathe less oxygen in big cities because of combustion engines
>BUT WHAT ABOUT THE DISTANT THREAT OF VENUS CLIMATE ON EARTH????
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 05:54:15 UTC No. 16267276
>>16266228
>Why is NASA currently expanding their sea level Florida launch site if they genuinely believe that global warming is real?
/sfg/ can you answer this one?
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Jul 2024 06:14:19 UTC No. 16267297
bump
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Jul 2024 01:51:16 UTC No. 16268333
>>16267276
Everyone at NASA realizes that global warming is fake and that sea level isn't rising
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Jul 2024 02:25:52 UTC No. 16268360
bump
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Jul 2024 20:15:20 UTC No. 16269415
>>16147688
If you need a Bill Nye tier explanation, think of it as the reason that conventional greenhouses don't become infinitely hot and instead only become something like 30ºC warmer than the ambient temperature if its sunny out
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Jul 2024 19:58:31 UTC No. 16270659
>>16268333
>Everyone at NASA realizes that global warming is fake
they should, they're the ones producing a lot of the propaganda