CO2 in the atmosphere: ca rises faster than expected

[Capt_Maloche]

[thejoker]

a faculty rating at the jospin
I'm never wrong but it's you who do not understand

I thought it was out of fashion?

an absolute belief in the unbalanced climate

the belief that CO² would dereglerate the climate while it represents only less than 0,5% of the gases of the atmosphere

the confusion between the physical principle of greenhouse effect and radiation


the total ascendancy of information research on theses that lays the sun as the only engine of the climate has very short term (not Theory Milankovic 19 ieme century ...)
(Svensmark is not really a beginner ....)

the mania to believe everything that is written on wikipedia
mann curve while everyone knows he has rigged these sequences and does not give the source of his modeling!

As for irreproducible PCs, as McIntyre and McKitrick will discover in the source code hidden in Mann's FTP site, the algorithm used is to refocus them around, not the average value of their entire series, but around the average value of the portion corresponding to the XNUMXth century, which "goes up" by two good orders of magnitude their weight in the final reconstruction, ie more weight than all the other series combined! Their particular shape will therefore be artificially imposed on the result.

the will to seek only that which reinforces a theory assimilating Man has a predator for the planet (gaya ??)

and the funny thing you think that only the zetes do not agree with you?

interesting their record on the climate
even though it is less complete than that the
http://www.pensee-unique.fr/theses.html

finally know that since at least 2001 and the magazine fusion I am gausse fans of warming

you seem to be a good BIGOT, a Benitier frog?
why hide your scientific openness?
Why believe in the mathematical modeling of the living as a good Aristotelian in the depths of his cave?

cele denotes a real fear of the sun of light and clarity !!

[thejoker]

a faculty rating at the jospin
I'm never wrong but it's you who do not understand

I thought it was out of fashion?

an absolute belief in the unbalanced climate

the belief that CO² would dereglerate the climate while it represents only less than 0,5% of the gases of the atmosphere

the confusion between the physical principle of greenhouse effect and radiation


the total ascendancy of information research on theses that lays the sun as the only engine of the climate has very short term (not Theory Milankovic 19 ieme century ...)
(Svensmark is not really a beginner ....)

the mania to believe everything that is written on wikipedia
mann curve while everyone knows he has rigged these sequences and does not give the source of his modeling!

As for irreproducible PCs, as McIntyre and McKitrick will discover in the source code hidden in Mann's FTP site, the algorithm used is to refocus them around, not the average value of their entire series, but around the average value of the portion corresponding to the XNUMXth century, which "goes up" by two good orders of magnitude their weight in the final reconstruction, ie more weight than all the other series combined! Their particular shape will therefore be artificially imposed on the result.

the will to seek only that which reinforces a theory assimilating Man has a predator for the planet (gaya ??)

and the funny thing you think that only the zetes do not agree with you?

interesting their record on the climate
even though it is less complete than that the
http://www.pensee-unique.fr/theses.html

finally know that since at least 2001 and the magazine fusion I am gausse fans of warming

you seem to be a good BIGOT, a Benitier frog?
why hide your scientific openness?
Why believe in the mathematical modeling of the living as a good Aristotelian in the depths of his cave?

cele denotes a real fear of the sun of light and clarity !!

[Woodcutter]

Bravo! You have earned the right to discuss alone with yourself!

[bpval]

Wise decision ... Bucheron

[Woodcutter]

[...] belief that co² deregler climate while it represents less than 0,5% gas atmosphere [...]

A belief" ? What is the connection ?

A belief does not need a scientific basis .. People who believe in some god do not need to be told shows that exists...

CO2 (and not co²) is a GHG : it's not a belief, it's a scientific fact!
It is this property of CO2 that allows, among other reasons, the Earth to show an average T ° fit for life in all forms that we know now ...
This property also requires that, very mechanically, an increase in its average content induces an increase in the greenhouse effect.

On the other hand, the relationship between the content of a product and its final action is not really relevant here. Other GHGs, whether they are partly of natural origin such as CH4 or N2O or else completely artificial like SF6 or Halocarbons also have an action on the greenhouse effect while their rates are measured in ppbv (part by billions in volume) is 0,0000001%!
This is not the only example where a small amount of substance is able to govern a system.

[...] confusion between the physical principle of greenhouse effect and radiation

It's funny that you say that when you have not even been able to understand what the greenhouse effect is!
Apparently you still think it's kind of "glass" in the atmosphere, right? Like a gigantic "cover" that would prevent hot air from escaping?
A little advice: educate yourself to look less con!

[...]thebtotal scence of information research on the theses that lays the sun as the only motor of the climate has very short term (not Theory Milankovic 19 ieme century ...)
(Svensmark is not really a beginner ....)

Ah ...
I think you did not understand me well.
It is obvious that the sun is at the base of major climate change since it is the alone source of energy of our Earth, and that this source is subject to variations ...
It just happens that variations in solar input do not explain everything, and do not solve the problem related to the increase of GHGs in our atmosphere.
Moreover, the theories of Milankovik that you denigrate are still in the sense that you defend, so you should know: sun or no sun?

[...] the mania to believe everything that is written on wikipedia

Which report ? Wikipedia is a encyclopedia participative online and the information found there must be found in any encyclopedia of good quality (Universalis, etc. ..). Simply, since it is on the Net, it is convenient to share info ...

[...] mann curve while everyone knows that he rigged these sequences and does not give the source of his modeling !!

As for irreproducible PCs, as McIntyre and McKitrick will discover in the source code hidden in Mann's FTP site, the algorithm used is to refocus them around, not the average value of their entire series, but around the average value of the portion corresponding to the XNUMXth century, which "goes up" by two good orders of magnitude their weight in the final reconstruction, ie more weight than all the other series combined! Their particular shape will therefore be artificially imposed on the result.

[...]

Fun, I do not think I've ever talked about the Mann curve ...
Besides, you who reproach me for my "copy and paste", do you understand only one of Martin's sentences that you just quoted, just above?

[...] the will to seek only that which reinforces a theory assimilating Man has a predator for the planet (gaya ??)

I do not know who this criticism is for, but if you had a minimum of scientific knowledge in the environmental field (which is my case, I inform you without any kind of pedance), you would know that indeed, the vast majority of human activities do a great deal of harm to all the compartments of the terrestrial biosphere. It's not difficult to see, just read ...

Then, the fact of seeing in the Earth a kind of "super-organism" named Gaia is more of the sweet fantasy post-baba-cool years, but hey, it does not hurt anyone if it leads to a lower environmental footprint of our activities ...

[...] finally know that since at least 2001 and the magazine fusion I am gausse fanas of the reheating

You see me very happy for you: get off well!
PS: why since 2001?

[...] you seem to be a good BIGOT, Benitier frog?

Ah? Amazing interpretation ...

[...] why believe in the mathematical modeling of life as a good Aristotelian in the depths of his cave?

What are you talking about quoting Aristotle? Do you know at least?
If it's the use of logic, it can actually be.

Otherwise, I do not see what comes to modeling life in there ...
The sun is not alive, the measurement of a temperature is not akin to a living phenomenon, the reaction of CO2 facing an IR radiation does not depend on the living ...
What does this sentence do here? Is it to look interesting?

[...] cele denotes a real fear of the sun of light and clarity !!

But yes but yes...


PS: Sorry for others the length of this post ...