71
   

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

Forums: Environment, Global Warming, Politics, Environmentalism, Science
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
username
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 06:14 am
oops
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 06:27 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Hmm, I thought I detected an overall drop in the IQ of the site this morning...

Cycloptichorn


cyclo

A tad naughty, yes? There's not much that you or I can agree with when talking to fox as regards content or process in discussion, but low IQ mis-states the dilemma.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 06:30 am
ican711nm wrote:
miniTAX wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
T
K
Open a can of soda, does it stay carbonated?
The CO2 content in ocean is very, very, very, very far from saturation. ...
TK !

Yes, but that is irrelevant. You obviously did not understand the excerpts I posted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry%27s_law
Formula and Henry constant

You require an elementary course in physics and chemistry. No shame there unless you now refuse to recognize your limitations.

That is quite funny coming from you ican, since you have been claiming that CO2 will be washed from the atmosphere by rain. Unless you think the water in rain can achieve the level of CO2 found in soda there is no way for rain to do what you claimed.

Henry's law states there is a limit to the amount of CO2 that will saturate water. Keep in mind that water in the upper atmosphere is at lower pressure than that at sea level so will hold less CO2. DTKO is correct when he says a can of soda doesn't stay fizzy for long. It is called Henry's law which you now are claiming to understand. If you would care to post your math suing Henry's law that shows the amount of CO2 that would be absorbed by liquid water at 5,000 feet I am sure we would find it interesting in light of you claim that more CO2 would be absorbed at that height than at sea level.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 06:44 am
ican711nm wrote:
parados wrote:
Henry's law states that given time a gas will reach an equilibrium based on a constant in its concentration both in the atmosphere and water.

Based on the time the atmosphere and the ocean have existed there is no reason to think the oceans are very very very very far from their maximum CO2 content when using Henry's law.

...

I agree!

We would first have to measure at a point in time the CO2 content of earth's various ocean regions, and their temperatures, and the pressures under which they exist. Then for that point in time we could determine if any of those ocean regions at that given point in time were near or at their maximum CO2 content according to Henry's Law.

Until such measurements are made, I will assume these ocean regions are not saturated with CO2. However, when these ocean regions warm, they emit some of their CO2 in the form of gas into the atmosphere even though they are not saturated with CO2.
So what is YOUR explanation for why the oceans are at present outgassing CO2? If they are NOT saturated there is no reason for them to do that, is there?

Quote:

How does that happen?

Well obviously CO2 mixed in liquid H2O, is emited into the atmosphere mixed with the H2O vapor that evaporates from these ocean regions as they are warmed. H20 mixed with CO2 does not have to be saturated with CO2 for its vapor to retain in mixture, as it enters the atmosphere, some of that CO2 the H2O contained in mixture when liquid.
That's an interesting take on the chemistry of how gases mix with a liquid. So there will be bubbles in a gas/air mixture even without the gas being supersaturated compared to the atmosphere it is exposed to? I would love for you to tell us which law governs that. And you think others need to take a basic chemistry class.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 07:17 am
Southern Ocean nears CO2 saturation point

Ocean acidification from increased CO2
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 11:22 am
Thank you parados. It seemed simple enough for me.

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 01:06 pm
blatham wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Hmm, I thought I detected an overall drop in the IQ of the site this morning...

Cycloptichorn


cyclo

A tad naughty, yes? There's not much that you or I can agree with when talking to fox as regards content or process in discussion, but low IQ mis-states the dilemma.


After consideration, I am afraid I can't agree with this last statement either. Occam's razor provides no other explanation for the constant and maddening levels of mediocrity, presented as some sort of nuggets of wisdom.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 01:53 pm
blatham wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Hmm, I thought I detected an overall drop in the IQ of the site this morning...

Cycloptichorn


cyclo

A tad naughty, yes? There's not much that you or I can agree with when talking to fox as regards content or process in discussion, but low IQ mis-states the dilemma.


A "tad"? He's being a dick, blatham. Let's call it what it is. Foxy posted, and all Cyclops can do is leap to a personal attack about her intelligence. What a loser.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 01:56 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
blatham wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Hmm, I thought I detected an overall drop in the IQ of the site this morning...

Cycloptichorn


cyclo

A tad naughty, yes? There's not much that you or I can agree with when talking to fox as regards content or process in discussion, but low IQ mis-states the dilemma.


After consideration, I am afraid I can't agree with this last statement either. Occam's razor provides no other explanation for the constant and maddening levels of mediocrity, presented as some sort of nuggets of wisdom.

Cycloptichorn


Occam's razor would indicate you are an a$$hole.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 02:04 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
blatham wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Hmm, I thought I detected an overall drop in the IQ of the site this morning...

Cycloptichorn


cyclo

A tad naughty, yes? There's not much that you or I can agree with when talking to fox as regards content or process in discussion, but low IQ mis-states the dilemma.


After consideration, I am afraid I can't agree with this last statement either. Occam's razor provides no other explanation for the constant and maddening levels of mediocrity, presented as some sort of nuggets of wisdom.

Cycloptichorn


Occam's razor would indicate you are an a$$hole.


Laughing

It's a first step away from overly sexualized insults, at least, and I applaud your efforts at reform.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 02:05 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
blatham wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Hmm, I thought I detected an overall drop in the IQ of the site this morning...

Cycloptichorn


cyclo

A tad naughty, yes? There's not much that you or I can agree with when talking to fox as regards content or process in discussion, but low IQ mis-states the dilemma.


After consideration, I am afraid I can't agree with this last statement either. Occam's razor provides no other explanation for the constant and maddening levels of mediocrity, presented as some sort of nuggets of wisdom.

Cycloptichorn


Occam's razor would indicate you are an a$$hole.


Laughing

It's a first step away from overly sexualized insults, at least, and I applaud your efforts at reform.

Cycloptichorn


Be nice if you'd reform. Nothing funny about it.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 02:11 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
blatham wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Hmm, I thought I detected an overall drop in the IQ of the site this morning...

Cycloptichorn


cyclo

A tad naughty, yes? There's not much that you or I can agree with when talking to fox as regards content or process in discussion, but low IQ mis-states the dilemma.


After consideration, I am afraid I can't agree with this last statement either. Occam's razor provides no other explanation for the constant and maddening levels of mediocrity, presented as some sort of nuggets of wisdom.

Cycloptichorn


Occam's razor would indicate you are an a$$hole.


Laughing

It's a first step away from overly sexualized insults, at least, and I applaud your efforts at reform.

Cycloptichorn


Be nice if you'd reform.


I'm rather surprised by this comment; you've never displayed much interest in 'nice' in the past.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 02:13 pm
COMMITMENT TO CLIMATE: Sweden First, US almost Last, Says Study
Quote:
A new report rates the climate-protection performance of 56 countries that account for 90 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions. While Germany came in at second best, the US ranked second worst.

[...]

http://i18.tinypic.com/8g8sewx.jpg
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 02:18 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
I'm rather surprised by this comment; you've never displayed much interest in 'nice' in the past.

Cycloptichorn


What's true is I won't sit idly by and allow others to insult without sending a response or two their way. Your meltdown on the Bush Supporters thread was in response to a comment I made which was a direct response to a comment you made. You caused me to go where I went, and then you bitched about the consequences. I can be nice, but if you drag the rhetoric down to the base, I can play that game as well.

In this instance, Foxy made a comment and you waded in and insulted her. You need to take a serious look in the mirror.

And Walter ... nobody is surprised to see you take a shot at Foxfyre. You're just taking up where you left off.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 02:26 pm
Ticomaya wrote:

And Walter ... nobody is surprised to see you take a shot at Foxfyre. You're just taking up where you left off.


I neither asked if someone was surprised nor questioned it otherwise.

You see, Tico, there's a thread about missing persons.

If a regular poster disappears without notice - even someone not noticed by all - hasn't posted since weeks, some try to find out what happened.

And if someone returns after having been away for more than half a year - certainly not everyone starts a thread "I'm back again" like many, but at least ...


Well, be it as it is.

But thanks for your care about me, Tico.
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 02:28 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
COMMITMENT TO CLIMATE: Sweden First, US almost Last, Says Study
Quote:
A new report rates the climate-protection performance of 56 countries that account for 90 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions. While Germany came in at second best, the US ranked second worst.

[...]

http://i18.tinypic.com/8g8sewx.jpg

Just as an aside. Thanks walter for keeping to subject. Very Happy

Very interesting stuff. I'd be lying if I said that I'm not surprized.

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 02:29 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:

And Walter ... nobody is surprised to see you take a shot at Foxfyre. You're just taking up where you left off.


I neither asked if someone was surprised nor questioned it otherwise.

You see, Tico, there's a thread about missing persons.

If a regular poster disappears without notice - even someone not noticed by all - hasn't posted since weeks, some try to find out what happened.

And if someone returns after having been away for more than half a year - certainly not everyone starts a thread "I'm back again" like many, but at least ...


Well, be it as it is.

But thanks for your care about me, Tico.


Please don't mistake my disdain of your treatment of Foxy as caring about you Walter.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 02:35 pm
Diest TKO wrote:
Just as an aside. Thanks walter for keeping to subject. Very Happy


For the record -- because I know how selective some memories are around here -- the poster responsible for getting this thread off-topic is Cyclops.

Someone posts after a long sabbatical -- possibly to take a break from the constant BS and attacks from certain posters on this site -- and the first response she gets is a personal attack of the brain-dead variety. Pretty damn pathetic, if you ask me.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 03:11 pm
Maybe I hoped Walter would just say hello instead of taking a cheap shot, but that could put me in the brain dead category couldn't it. Confused

Oh, well, okay. Enough of this. Thank you Tico and Ican. At least somebody told me hello. Smile

And now, please, back to our regularly scheduled programming re global warming. . . .
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2007 03:15 pm
Welcome back, Foxy.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

The oil leaks and fracking thread - Discussion by edgarblythe
Poverty Can Trump A Winning Hand of Genes - Discussion by Miller
Arctic ice cap grows 60% in one year, global warming mantra dies - Discussion by gungasnake
Our planet is being destroyed, does anybody care? - Discussion by Caroline
Will that be Paper or Plastic? - Discussion by Khethil
Spill baby spill, slippery politics - Discussion by rosborne979
Number 85 - To see a tree asmiling. - Discussion by danon5
CAP AND TRADE-FOR IT/AGIN IT? - Discussion by farmerman
THE 70's LIFESTYLE : GOOD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT - Discussion by hamburger
Memories of 21, 42, 63 ... the 84th meandering - Discussion by ehBeth
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news
  3. » Page 385
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.13 seconds on 10/02/2024 at 02:17:29
▲ ▼