• Do liberals care more about hating Trump than about how well the US is actually doing.?

    Do liberals care more about hating Trump than about how well the US is actually doing.?

    It seems that liberals care more about hate and revenge for a 2016 election, than actually caring about how well the country is doing. If the country does well then shouldn't that be good for all people? Regardless if it's a democrat or republican. 3.4 percent economic growth, highest in 10 years.... show more
    It seems that liberals care more about hate and revenge for a 2016 election, than actually caring about how well the country is doing. If the country does well then shouldn't that be good for all people? Regardless if it's a democrat or republican. 3.4 percent economic growth, highest in 10 years. Nearly 4 million more jobs. Poverty rates the lowest in decades. Better relations in the world. Finally cracked down on the border problems. Highest Hispanic and Black employment rates in decades. Second amendment still safe. VOTE TRUMP 2020 if you care about America and the American dream.
    81 answers · Green Living · 2 days ago
  • Do you still see butterflies in your area?

    For the first time this year, I saw one white butterfly in my garden.
    For the first time this year, I saw one white butterfly in my garden.
    66 answers · Conservation · 5 days ago
  • With big oil supporting carbon taxes did they throw the deniers under the bus?

    Best answer: As the reality of global climate change becomes more and more apparent and it begins trimming corporate profits, we'll see all kinds of whining from the tinfoil hat brigade.
    Best answer: As the reality of global climate change becomes more and more apparent and it begins trimming corporate profits, we'll see all kinds of whining from the tinfoil hat brigade.
    10 answers · Global Warming · 2 days ago
  • How to get rid of horseflies around pool?

    Every summer horse flies terrorize us. Is there a way to get rid of them or?
    Every summer horse flies terrorize us. Is there a way to get rid of them or?
    5 answers · Other - Environment · 17 hours ago
  • Jimmy Hansen wishes he was wrong about Global Warming. Did he get his wish?

    Best answer: When a religion is based on lies and leftism is certainly a religion dependent on spreading lies, they are bound to be wrong far more than they are right. It isn't like there aren't good examples to learn from but some people, particularly alarmunists, have a great difficulty due presumably to their... show more
    Best answer: When a religion is based on lies and leftism is certainly a religion dependent on spreading lies, they are bound to be wrong far more than they are right. It isn't like there aren't good examples to learn from but some people, particularly alarmunists, have a great difficulty due presumably to their learning disorder which is primarily caused by their tendencies to believe in fairy tales.

    Added
    The problems with alarmists is they have no memory. They live in a bubble that keeps their memories cleaned of unpleasant contradictions such as the Pause that happened for most of the last 20 years. I know it is inconvenient and it doesn't help promote their Cause. Jimmy Hansen didn't predict it at all. In fact, the Pause pretty much proved that Jimmy's predictions are worth less than zilch zero nada. That is what the actual science tells us. Should we believe the NASA back then or the corrected versions?
    8 answers · Global Warming · 7 days ago
  • If the world’s highest and lowest annual temperatures were doubled, how much would sea level rise and fall each year?

    From what I’ve read, sea levels currently fluctuate by 80mm annually due to seasonal temperatures (see graph at link below) but I assume this figure wouldn’t simply be doubled. Please note I’m not enquiring with regards to climate change year by year in this instance - this is solely relating to inter-annual... show more
    From what I’ve read, sea levels currently fluctuate by 80mm annually due to seasonal temperatures (see graph at link below) but I assume this figure wouldn’t simply be doubled. Please note I’m not enquiring with regards to climate change year by year in this instance - this is solely relating to inter-annual effects of extreme seasons.
    6 answers · Global Warming · 7 days ago
  • What happened in the past when CO2 levels in the atmosphere were over 500ppm?

    Best answer: I've not read my skeptical colleagues answers just yet but I'll have a stab at guessing what argument they've put forward. It probably goes something like ... 'CO2 levels were WAY higher than they are now. Like, they were 1000s of ppm. And during those times plant life was amazingly abundant,... show more
    Best answer: I've not read my skeptical colleagues answers just yet but I'll have a stab at guessing what argument they've put forward.

    It probably goes something like ... 'CO2 levels were WAY higher than they are now. Like, they were 1000s of ppm. And during those times plant life was amazingly abundant, ecosystems thrived. It was close to paradise! This piddling little 400 or 500 ppm level of CO2 we're experiencing today is tiny in comparison, nothing to worry about, and hence the implication I'm making is that we don't have to do anything about so-called "global warming"'.

    Now let me read some of the answers. Ok, I'm not too far off the mark. Now let me paraphrase that argument in different terms ...

    'There was an earthquake in California that was really, really big. But Californians thrived despite it. Look at them there with their toned bodies, high incomes, and a State economy equivalent to entire nations! A piddling little earthquake is nothing to worry about, and the implication I'm making is that we shouldn't spend any money on protecting buildings against smaller earthquakes'.

    Now Solar Wind, my old mate my old pal, has kindly provided a graph showing you the last 600 million years with the aim of trying to convince you that there is no relationship between CO2 levels and temperature. Of course, no one, including Solar Wind argues that temperatures are ONLY dependent on CO2 - during that 600 million year timespan we've had changes in the output of the sun and changes in the earth's orbit. This is why you get those dips in temperature. What the graph also doesn't really show is the rate of change of CO2. These sorts of natural processes result in changes of 100 parts per million in CO2 concentrations over periods of many thousands or even tens of thousands of years. We've changed the CO2 concentration by 100 ppm in 120 years.

    So it's pretty irrelevant because

    a) we are living at a time when solar output and the orbital dynamics of the planet are going to be pretty stable over the next few hundred to a few thousand years
    b) under these stable conditions (like the 50 million year bit in the graph between 250 and 200 million years ago) CO2 levels are well correlated with temperature changes
    c) we've changed the CO2 concentration by 100 parts per million in 120 years, a rate which is nowhere reflected on this graph

    So, at the present time, if we increase CO2 levels to 500 ppm the planet will get warmer and this warming will occur on century timescales not millions of years. What happened in the past isn't important in terms of global warming today because there weren't 7 billion people distributed across the planet.
    12 answers · Global Warming · 6 days ago
  • Do you hate people that complain about the weather as much as I do ?

    Best answer: I don't hate I just have fun about such people.
    Best answer: I don't hate I just have fun about such people.
    9 answers · Global Warming · 6 days ago
  • How would the lapse rate change in a warning world?

    Best answer: The lapse rate is actually pretty complicated so let's go through it ... The basic explanation for the lapse rate involves modelling a parcel of air rising in our atmosphere. When you do this involving dry air, and you assume the atmosphere is in hydrostatic equilibrium (the flow velocity is constant over... show more
    Best answer: The lapse rate is actually pretty complicated so let's go through it ...

    The basic explanation for the lapse rate involves modelling a parcel of air rising in our atmosphere. When you do this involving dry air, and you assume the atmosphere is in hydrostatic equilibrium (the flow velocity is constant over time), you can derive an equation which tells you the lapse rate is dependent on only the specific heat capacity of air (about 1000 J / kg K) and the acceleration due to gravity (about 9.8 m/s^2). Dividing 9.8 m/s^2 by 1000 J/ kg K and you get 9.8 C per km, or a drop of about 1 degree for every 100 metres you climb.

    This is complicated by the addition of water vapour. If you consider a parcel of moist air, you now have to account for the latent heat of vaporization of the water and how the drop in temperature affects that water vapour. To put the equation in simple terms, let's imagine you have a parcel of moist air rising. At some point you'd have saturation, and as the parcel gets cooler still you'd have condensation of that water vapour, producing a cloud which extracts heat from the parcel of air. Since this is temperature dependent there's no fixed lapse rate but a reasonable value could be a drop of 5 C for each km of height gained. However, it's important to note that what you'd actually see is a transition - the air would follow the dry lapse rate before saturation, then start to follow this moist lapse rate afterwards.

    Now, you can keep adding complexity to try to get better models but the point is that these describe the lapse rate in the troposphere where temperature drops as you increase in altitude. As you move into the stratosphere the exact opposite happens, and temperatures increase as you increase in altitude due to the effect of ozone. As I said, the lapse rate isn't simple and it isn't just due to gravity.

    In any case, let's imagine you have a warm troposphere which decreases in temperature as you increase in height and a colder stratosphere that increases in temperature as you increase in height. The temperature of the troposphere is ultimately dependent on how much energy it radiates out into space. As we increase our CO2 emissions, the temperature of the troposphere at the equator would increase but that increase in temperature occurs higher up in the troposphere, resulting in more energy being radiated into space. This reduces the lapse rate since the troposphere is warmer higher up (the lapse rate is large if there is a large temperature gradient between ground and top of troposphere) and represents a negative feedback which reduces the impact of global warming. As you move towards the poles, that warming occurs lower in the troposphere and increases the lapse rate, which represents a positive feedback. What happens at the tropics tends to dominate, so what we see is a reduction in the lapse rate and a negative feedback on warming.

    These processes are included in the IPCC models.

    Additional: Just in response to your update ... yep. That's one way of looking at it. The other way is, if you imagine you have a warmer troposphere, that means as you increase the altitude of your parcel of air, it doesn't expand by as much as with the cooler troposphere because the warmer atmosphere exerts a higher pressure on it. This balances out so you get the same lapse rate. Remember, the dry adiabatic lapse rate just tells you if you have a certain gas and a certain gravitational pull, what the temperature decrease would be as a function of height. It doesn't care what the initial temperature is. So cold or hot atmosphere, you'd get the same lapse rate.

    BUT, as I said in my original answer, this isn't how the real atmosphere behaves. It's a reasonable approximation. The lapse rate is the end result of processes occurring in the atmosphere (of which the change in pressure as a function of altitude is one factor). Global warming must change the lapse rate if the troposphere warming is not evenly distributed throughout it. This factor isn't included in the simple model of lapse rate because that process is modeled as being adiabatic - there is no heat loss from the modeled 'parcel' of air to its surroundings.
    4 answers · Global Warming · 1 week ago
  • How to get an idea on plastics to the government or environmental companies?

    I'm a university student and am really passionate about reducing plastic as they have a huge effect on our oceans and enviroment. I work i a store as a part time job, and still so many people are buying plastic bags. If posters were produced that could sit on checkouts showing the effects of plastics on the... show more
    I'm a university student and am really passionate about reducing plastic as they have a huge effect on our oceans and enviroment. I work i a store as a part time job, and still so many people are buying plastic bags. If posters were produced that could sit on checkouts showing the effects of plastics on the ocean (A turtle eating plastic or sonwtuing), it woukd serve to remind people the effect and hopefully help change their decision on purchasing plastic bags. But how do i get this idea to someone who can actually help take it forward ?
    4 answers · Green Living · 4 days ago
  • Why is Arctic sea ice at record low extent?

    Arctic sea ice extent for May 2018 was 12.2 million square kilometers (4.7 million square miles). This was the second lowest May extent in the 39-year satellite record http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
    Arctic sea ice extent for May 2018 was 12.2 million square kilometers (4.7 million square miles). This was the second lowest May extent in the 39-year satellite record http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
    7 answers · Global Warming · 1 week ago
  • Provide five different types of information that can be gathered as evidence of climate change.?

    Best answer: Earth’s average surface air temperature has increased by about 0.8 °C (1.4 °F) since 1900, with much of this increase taking place since the mid-1970s. A wide range of other observations such as reduced Arctic sea ice extent and increased ocean heat content and indications from the natural world such as poleward... show more
    Best answer: Earth’s average surface air temperature has increased by about 0.8 °C (1.4 °F) since 1900, with much of this increase taking place since the mid-1970s.

    A wide range of other observations such as reduced Arctic sea ice extent and increased ocean heat content and indications from the natural world such as poleward shifts of temperature-sensitive species of fish, mammals, insects, etc together provide incontrovertible evidence of planetary-scale warming.
    6 answers · Global Warming · 7 days ago
  • What are your 3 most desirable characteristics for the car of the future ?

    Best answer: "use of photosensitive materials"
    Cars surface is too small. Even if we get near 100% photovoltaic cells.

    What would brine help?

    What do you know about the biodegradability and general non-toxicity of nano-composites?

    Rate: 2
    Best answer: "use of photosensitive materials"
    Cars surface is too small. Even if we get near 100% photovoltaic cells.

    What would brine help?

    What do you know about the biodegradability and general non-toxicity of nano-composites?

    Rate: 2
    3 answers · Alternative Fuel Vehicles · 5 days ago
  • Why do Gores alarmunist disciples lie about not having satellite data before 1979?

    Best answer: Why do Gores alarmunist disciples lie... You can stop right there. They lie to push their alarmunism... Elitist leftists pushing for increasing the power of the state to enrich themselves and control the behavior of everyone else. It is a very old game. I checked page 224 and it does show what a convenient year... show more
    Best answer: Why do Gores alarmunist disciples lie...
    You can stop right there. They lie to push their alarmunism...
    Elitist leftists pushing for increasing the power of the state to enrich themselves and control the behavior of everyone else. It is a very old game.

    I checked page 224 and it does show what a convenient year 1979 is. Alarmists love to make graphs that look bad. They play games with the scale and color. It is a PR game and it is amazing how many clowns they get to fall for it. It is sad, really. All you have to do is say it is science. They love to think of themselves as up to date on the latest science.

    Hillary illegally keeps her server unsecure with classified information so that she can keep the cash flowing into her slush fund and they took millions and millions from the Russian, trading away national interests with Uranium assets (maybe more), and now these same useful idiot alarmists think Trump is colluding with the Russians. It is just mind numbing stupidity.
    6 answers · Global Warming · 1 week ago