| General > General Technical Chat |
| heartbroken that John Clauser seems to have joined climate change denial. |
| << < (46/67) > >> |
| tautech:
--- Quote from: cbutlera on August 07, 2023, 08:03:09 am ---If the scientists on the AGW sceptical side of the argument believe that to be the case, .......... --- End quote --- These were real events not some modelled BS but with a measurable impact on the atmosphere and the worlds weather/temperatures. What's not to believe ? :-// |
| cbutlera:
--- Quote from: tautech on August 07, 2023, 08:51:17 am --- --- Quote from: cbutlera on August 07, 2023, 08:03:09 am ---If the scientists on the AGW sceptical side of the argument believe that to be the case, .......... --- End quote --- These were real events not some modelled BS but with a measurable impact on the atmosphere and the worlds weather/temperatures. What's not to believe ? :-// --- End quote --- That these type of effects are significant and have not been included in the GCMs. I don't know if they have been included or not, but if the scientists on the AGW sceptical side think they are significant and have been ignored, then they should produce their own GCMs. Even if they think that GCMs are complete BS, a scientifically plausible GCM that fits the climate records sufficiently well and doesn't require a rising level of CO2 to do so would still be a very effective counterargument. Why don’t they create one? Even if only to demonstrate that "you can prove anything you want with a model". The counter to that statement is "well do it then". |
| Wallace Gasiewicz:
Quote from: EEVblog on Yesterday at 02:06:02 amQuote from: coppice on August 05, 2023, 06:44:01 pmQuote from: PlainName on August 05, 2023, 06:03:17 pm Quote As a kid of the 80's I grew up with the fear of the Ozone layer being destroyed and we even had a TV show called Captain Planet and the Planeteers and that made a big thing about cleaning up the world. Yet it didn't do a thing to change stuff if the current press is to be believed. --- End quote --- Didn't the ban on CFCs fix that up? Can't recall any recent press stuff about this either way, so if you have a relevant link I'd be interested to see it. --- End quote --- It would appear that changes to CFC usage have reversed the problem, and the ozone holes have been closing up. --- End quote --- Last I heard, yes, it was healing, but it's taken 40 years or something. The difference with CFC usage was that eliminating it didn't change, interrupt, or destroy anyone's life. It was an easy and obvious change which we just did pretty much overnight with almost no consequence. But they replaced a lot of these "Ozone Depleters" with mixtures of volatile hydrocarbons, typically propane, n-butane and isobutane.[1 Isn't hydrocarbon gas supposed to be really bad for global warming? The propellants do work fine in potato guns though. --- End quote --- |
| tom66:
--- Quote from: Wallace Gasiewicz on August 07, 2023, 11:27:15 am ---But they replaced a lot of these "Ozone Depleters" with mixtures of volatile hydrocarbons, typically propane, n-butane and isobutane.[1 Isn't hydrocarbon gas supposed to be really bad for global warming? The propellants do work fine in potato guns though. --- End quote --- --- End quote --- The harm of a given gas per kg is measured as global warming potential, where 1.0 is equivalent to 1kg of CO2. Propane GWP = ~0.072 Butane GWP = ~0.022 (both figures 20 year assessments) So, no, essentially. In fact, propane has been proposed as a refrigerant for small air conditioning systems given it causes so little harm if accidentally released - though its flammability is obviously of concern. |
| Wallace Gasiewicz:
So what is methane rating? |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |