There are no greenhouse gases

Judged:

2

2

1

idiotish wrote:

Mr. Turner, I think I'll believe the EPA, the DOE, NASA, FERC, and all of the national laboratories, who all disagree with your opinion.

Judged:

1

my my wrote:

Looks like no one with a scientific background at the Lowell Sun checked this one out before allowing this nonsense to be published.
" Life is energy" ?????
" physical scientists" ???
" temperature on cloudy days is lower than on bright sunny days" ????
Water vapor is 97% of the atmosphere but does not retain heat- no problem. The other 3% consists of: carbon dioxide, methane,nitrous oxide and a variety of fluorinated gases from a variety of industial processes- big problem. They all have one thing in common - fossil fuels.
All " greenhouse gases" trap heat in the atmosphere. scientif fact that can be easily proven in a laboratory. Not water vapor.
Every reputable scientist in the WORLD has acknowledged greenhouses gases and their affect on the atosphere . Even the last pro-oil administration if you can call then that, were forced to acknowleg the scientific evidence lest they be laughed out of the room, but did not agree that it would have an imminent efect
This is crazy.
Im going to write an article about the world being flat because when I go to Australia I am not upside down, and see if the Lowell Sun will print that.

Judged:

2

2

1

The Truth Matters wrote:

<quoted text>
I do believe you need to go back to school. Water vapor makes up about 97% of all GREENHOUSE GASES - NOT 97% of the atmosphere. It is only about 4% of the atmospheric gases.
Water vapor is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2 and causes the majority of any greenhouse gas warming in the atmosphere - NOT CO2.

What the science says...

Water vapour is indeed the most dominant greenhouse gas. The radiative forcing for water is around 75 W/m2 while carbon dioxide contributes 32 W/m2 (Kiehl 1997). Water vapour is also the dominant positive feedback in our climate system and a major reason why temperature is so sensitive to changes in CO2.

Unlike external forcings such as CO2 which can be added to the atmosphere, the level of water vapour in the atmosphere is a function of temperature. Water vapour is brought into the atmosphere via evaporation - the rate depends on the ocean and air temperature and is governed by the Clausius-Clapeyron relation.

If extra water is added to the atmosphere, it condenses and falls as rain or snow within a week or two. Similarly, if somehow moisture was sucked out of the atmosphere, evaporation would restore water vapour levels to 'normal levels' in short time.
Water Vapour as a positive feedback

As water vapour is directly related to temperature, it's also a positive feedback - in fact, the largest positive feedback in the climate system (Soden 2005). As temperature rises, evaporation increases and more water vapour accumulates in the atmosphere. As a greenhouse gas, the water absorbs more heat, further warming the air and causing more evaporation.

How does water vapour fit in with CO2 emissions? When CO2 is added to the atmosphere, as a greenhouse gas it has a warming effect. This causes more water to evaporate and warm the air more to a higher (more or less) stabilized level. So CO2 warming has an amplified effect, beyond a purely CO2 effect.

How much does water vapour amplify CO2 warming? Without any feedbacks, a doubling of CO2 would warm the globe around 1°C. Taken on its own, water vapour feedback roughly doubles the amount of CO2 warming. When other feedbacks are included (eg - loss of albedo due to melting ice), the total warming from a doubling of CO2 is around 3°C (Held 2000).

Judged:

1

1

1

Fair Game wrote:

<quoted text>
<quoted text>
http://www.skepticalscience.com/water-vapor-g...

Judged:

2

1

1

Fair Game wrote:

<quoted text>
<quoted text>
http://www.skepticalscience.com/water-vapor-g...

Judged:

1

1

The Truth Matters wrote:

<quoted text>
Your website has old information. It seems that the role of water vapor is totally different than you claim - including water vapor feedback in clouds. It seems that it is the opposite of modelers assumptions - especially in the tropics where temperatures are warmest.

The Truth Matters wrote:

Meanwhile, water vapor in the upper atmosphere is increasing and it does NOT precipitate out. This seems to be where most of the current ozone loss is coming from [and increasing atmospheric warmth]- increased water vapor in the stratosphere [noctilucent clouds are increasing]. Most of this comes from volcanic injections, major storm clouds, and the action of atmospheric gravity waves.
Get a grip and learn the latest science instead of repeating the tired, debunked old AGW junk science.

Judged:

2

1

1

theworldasweknowit wrote:

<quoted text>
the green turkey troll cant think for himself
tell us turkey is it cooler when the cloud goes in front of the sun?

Objection: Clouds are a large negative feedback that will stop any drastic warming. The climate models don't even take cloud effects into account.

Answer: All of the atmospheric global climate models used for the kind of climate projections synthesized by the IPCC take the effects of clouds into account. You can read a discussion about cloud processes and feedbacks in the IPCC TAR.

It is true, however, that clouds are one of the largest sources of uncertainty in the GCMs. They are complicated to model because they have both positive feedbacks, preventing surface heat from escaping back into space, and negative feedbacks, reflecting incoming sunlight before it can reach the surface. The precise balance of these opposing effects depends on time of day, time of year, altitude, size of the water droplets and/or ice particles, latitude, current air temperature, and size and shape.

On top of that, different types of clouds will interact, amplifying or mitigating one another's effects as they coexist in different layers of the atmosphere. There are also latent heat considerations -- water vapor condenses during cloud formation and precipitation events, and water droplets evaporate when clouds dissipate.

The ultimate contribution of clouds to global temperature trends is highly uncertain, but according to the best estimates is likely to be positive over the coming century. There is no indication anywhere that any kind of cloud processes will stop greenhouse-gas-driven warming, and this includes observations of the past as well as modeling experiments.

Judged:

3

1

Fair Game wrote:

<quoted text>
<quoted text>
http://www.grist.org/article/models-dont-take...

Judged:

1

1

Gord wrote:

<quoted text>
Gee, don't you know that when a cloud passes between the Earth and the Sun the Earth gets COOLER?
Any Child can tell you this!
The SUN is the ONLY energy source.
Clouds COOL the EARTH!....it's IMPOSSIBLE for them to HEAT the Earth because they are COLDER than the Earth.
Read the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
"Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object."
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/th...

Fair Game wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't get your climate science from children.
"Clouds COOL the EARTH!" huh?
Even a child could tell you that is not necessarily true:
A cloudy night is warmer than a cloudless night.

Judged:

1

1

Gord wrote:

<quoted text>
So are you saying that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is WRONG?

Judged:

2

MattJ wrote:

<quoted text>
No. Just that you do not understand it and do not know how to apply it.

Gord wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, let's hear your "wisdumb" of how a COLDER cloud can HEAT a WARMER EARTH and not VIOLATE the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
Please include Physics Links...I'm not interested in you CULT OPINION.

Judged:

1

Fair Game wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't get your climate science from children.
"Clouds COOL the EARTH!" huh?
Even a child could tell you that is not necessarily true:
A cloudy night is warmer than a cloudless night.