IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New nice duck there,
New .. if you think a duck resembles a coffin-nail, perhaps.
New point==missed
the postulation that the c02 element itself is larger, as in size of a single element when emitted from a volcano than the physical size of a single c02 element when emitted from a car exhaust, as proclaimed by some, leaves the realm of science for religion. I was inquiring if the high priest under discussion also held that tenet.
New You, and they, apparently misunderstand the argument.
1) Volcanoes are not a major source of CO2. (They are a major source of SO2, but that's a completely different compound. http://www.temis.nl/aviation/so2.php)

2) CO2 is made of carbon and oxygen. They both have isotopes - atoms with the same number of protons (6 for Carbon, 8 for Oxygen) but different numbers of neutrons. These isotopes have different properties and their ratios in a sample of gas can give lots of information - like whether the carbon was recently part of the atmosphere or whether it was locked up in the Earth for millions of years. The ratio changes because one of the carbon isotopes is radioactive, so the ratio of C14 to C12 changes over time.

http://en.wikipedia....sotopes_of_carbon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen-16
http://www.physicsfo....php/t-29375.html

All of this is known and accepted science. There is no controversy about the physics.

Where it gets complicated is in the details. How are the samples taken? How are they protected from contamination? How are they analyzed? What are the error bars (how accurately are the numbers known, and what is the real precision of the value)?

Cheers,
Scott.
     Hansen predicts new global temperature record in next 4 yrs. - (Another Scott) - (34)
         aw, heck, never you mind - (rcareaga) - (1)
             hansen doesnt give a flying fsck about warming - (boxley)
         There seem to be several candidates for run-away scenario -- - (Ashton)
         <devil's advocate>Look at it this way - (pwhysall) - (12)
             It's the rate of change that's the problem. - (Another Scott) - (11)
                 Hansen can say what he likes. - (pwhysall) - (10)
                     Good points. -NT - (Another Scott)
                     Agreed, the 'geo-psycho'-demographic can't be ignored - (Ashton) - (8)
                         Thought experiment, and a question. - (pwhysall) - (7)
                             It might be useful to look to history. - (Another Scott) - (6)
                                 let me guess, history isnt your strong point. - (boxley) - (5)
                                     Linky. - (Another Scott) - (4)
                                         linky backatcha :-) - (boxley) - (3)
                                             You're misreading me. - (Another Scott) - (2)
                                                 It appears I did misread you - (boxley)
                                                 A modern city cannot function - (mhuber)
         Nother, why do you trust anything this guy puts out? - (boxley) - (17)
             Why? Because he knows what he's talking about. - (Another Scott) - (16)
                 Re: Why? Because he knows what he's talking about. - (boxley) - (15)
                     Got a problem with decimals? - (Ashton) - (14)
                         insignificant lot less than< 20% - (boxley) - (13)
                             If Hansen were looking to get rich, he wouldn't be at NASA. - (Another Scott) - (12)
                                 If hansen wasnt at nasa he would find it hard to get a job - (boxley) - (11)
                                     Hansen's CV - (Another Scott) - (6)
                                         does he believe than c02 belched from a volcano - (boxley) - (5)
                                             We've been through volcanoes multiple times, Box. - (Another Scott) - (4)
                                                 nice duck there, -NT - (boxley) - (3)
                                                     .. if you think a duck resembles a coffin-nail, perhaps. -NT - (Ashton) - (2)
                                                         point==missed - (boxley) - (1)
                                                             You, and they, apparently misunderstand the argument. - (Another Scott)
                                     re all the ad hominems: prend moi tel que je suis - (Ashton) - (3)
                                         so lets pretend shall we? - (boxley) - (2)
                                             Is it that you don't read for comprehension - (Ashton) - (1)
                                                 my bad, just saw the pnemonia, HIV causes aids? - (boxley)

YOU are gonna lecture ME on 'clear prose'?
86 ms