Formulate it? You contradicted yourself. Formulate it yourself if you have that expertise. I don’t, it’s not my forte. But you talk dribble mate. If you can’t prove AGW, there is no point in further discourse. Farewell.
-
-
This discussion tends to be "either or" yet there is no reason to believe that only one process is effective. Both (and even more) are at work but Ned's work is a compelling case for an adiabatic explanation for the major trends and CO2 or GHG are weaker factors.
-
The only reason for a correlation between
#CO2 and temperature observed on some time scales is that atmospheric CO2 is controlled by temperature, hence the CO2 lag! There is NO effect of CO2 on planetary temperature, because no physical mechanism exists to enable such an effect! -
Thanks Ned. CO2 is simply a political “culprit”, chosen to be that “sciency” thing to dupe the public. It’s sheer lack of volume and lack of capacity to increase temperature, needs to be known by the broader public!
-
Keep up the good work you do Ned. You have many supporters mate!
- پایان گفتگو
گفتگوی جدید -
-
-
And the constant gas law?
-
Ideal gas law or the gas laws... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_gas_law …
پایان گفتگو
گفتگوی جدید -
بهنظر میرسد بارگزاری صفحه طول کشیده است.
ممکن است ظرفیت توییتر پر باشد یا موقتاً دچار مشکلی شده باشد. دوباره امتحان کنید یا برای اطلاعات بیشتر از وضعیت توییتر بازدید کنید.

