Hey what’s up guys

What do you guys think of global warming

I believe it’s a real phenomenon

@Hector I mean failing crops droughts aren’t good

@Hector I mean maybe in Russia might have positive effects even though I’m kind of doubtful but Russia is fucked if other places in the earth are heavily effected by it. Since globalism and the such.

I mean okay but like it will fuck up the whole economy and create famines it doesn’t matter if the equator is cancer or not since Russia’s economy will fail

We can reduce our carbon emissions.

That are green house gasses

Are you sure

Okay let’s look at the co2 levels for the past 50 years to see if we are at a historical low

Fake nasa data of course

Bad measurement

It’s from ice cores

How do you know this @troglodytes

Did you look at the data

Okay I mean you can just create some conspiracy without actually looking at the data and how they got it

@troglodytes how do you know this

I know they are mixing data because.... and it’s bad because..... we mix data all the time. Definitely historical data. Else we couldn’t never compare modern data to old information. Back in the day they used this method to measure data now we use this different method oh I guess we can never compare this information ever. This doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t matter if you got information different methods as long as you know it’s accurate. This is why you can compare ice core to modern day data. It’s okay to mix data if it’s the only way. But you haven’t even proven they are mixing data anyways.@troglodytes

@troglodytes where

@troglodytes why is mixing data bad.

What does that even mean

If you know both data is accurate it doesn’t matter if you mix data it’s done all the time @troglodytes

I have done it in my studies at college and that’s fine. You need to sometimes @troglodytes

Mixing data bad <:kekboi:417880491182653450>

Hey what’s up guys

I believe global warming is a real phenomenon

Debate me

@oojimaflip can you give me one instance of this? There are different reasons for different time periods.

What was the carbon dioxide ppm at that time

I mean Venus has an atmosphere of 96% carbon dioxide it says I’m not sure having a atmosphere of 1500 ppm would make it turn into Venus

What

So there is a difference between these things. In ones instance the temperature gain were slower. The ecosystem is able to adapt over the 100,000 or what ever time period. 10000 years maybe. Human beings are raising co2 levels a lot more a quickly and this is why it will lead to catastrophic effects

Well it’s actually 2 things. It’s high co2 levels and it’s thicker atmosphere. We can observe the green house effect of co2 in experiments. High schoolers do this.

So we know co2 has this effect

What do you mean? What it seems is the carbon dioxide increased more plants started to over grow took the carbon dioxide out of the air.

And the temperature went down

Why would higher temperature cause higher co2 levels

This doesn’t make any sense

What is the phenomenon

It also means a lot more plants that take carbon dioxide out of the air and it seems plants have more an effect on co2 levels then animals do at least on land. For the time period you have shit tons of plants grew took carbon dioxide out of the air and the world almost ended up in an ice age

Do you deny that carbon dioxide has a green house effect? Do you deny the high schoolers experiments done that show this effect on heat retention? @oojimaflip

So for example

If you take a jar fill it with carbon dioxide and put it under a heat lamp it is hotter then the jar with lower amounts of carbon dioxide

No of course not but it shows in the small scale the effect that carbon dioxide traping light energy and because of this higher temperature

You have a misunderstanding

Green house effect is not the same as a green house

These are too different phenomenon

And things

They are called the same just because scientist name things badly

What do you mean based off TSI values

Yes I guess.

Why

We can see in small scale experiments the effect co2 has on temperature

In closed environments

Okay first off. Just because there is a small percent change. Doesn’t mean it will have a large effect. Nature can only absorb so much of it and adding more doesn’t get absorbed. That’s why it might seem like a small percent but it’s actually big.

Data modification? We modify all data

I mean you got to show evidence for this

Show me proof nasa cherry picks data

Oh the supposed data mixing he cries about?

Do you know that you need to use data mixing to compare co2 levels now co2 levels before? Of course you should try to avoid data mixing but it’s impossible in this circumstance.

I’m not sure if I would take tony hellers word on any of this

Yeah we can’t do ice core data of co2 levels now. So if you want to compared co2 levels now to millions of years ago how do you do this without data mixing

data mixing isn’t inherently wrong it should be avoided but if you know that one data is accurate and the other data is accurate you can mix them. Nothing is wrong with this

Why we can observe the green house effect on a small scale that co2 causes

Idk dude co2 levels we calculate aren’t from airports or urban heat islands

Sure but it proves the green house effect carbon has.

Okay so why doesn’t this phenomenon scale?

Sure many of these factors are constant

And don’t change

At least

From the human perspective

Co2 levels thought out history created drastic change in the temperature

We can see this after the time period you talked about

Okay so in a couple years In the 1940s it was warm and in the 70s it was slightly colder so that means the green house effect isn’t real.

You are the one cherry picking data

We can see historical records of how much change the co2 levels change from plants and volcanoes see the drastic change in temperature and see how it changed.

Okay I don’t care about a couple scientist somewhere massaging data

I mean I don’t care if they with the broader scope of if something is true or not.

Why didn’t it lead to a runaway effect? Because plants grew because of higher co2 levels and took co2 out of the air

What do you mean input energy into a system? co2 levels change equilibriums so temps raise it doesn’t keep trapping energy for ever

So energy can’t leave

Catch up with what

Do you think if you have 1500ppm of co2 the temperature of earth will keep rising to infinite?

So co2 levels and temperature have a equilibrium.

Temperature won’t just keep increasing

To infinity

No it shouldn’t Venus is 96% carbon dioxide and has a thicker atmosphere. While 1500ppm is waaaaaay less then what Venus has.

We would expect a huge temperature difference and we do

I think Venus has 86 million ppm

It what it says

Yes I a closed system

I’m a closed system

Let’s say a jar

The temperature doesn’t increase to infinity

If you shine a light on it

As energy levels increase more energy leaves.

Changing co2 changes this

Allowing for more energy to stay to a point till more energy starts to leave

So the temperature is higher