S
Global warming aka climate change is real (*) and, sadly, human activity since the industrial revolution is the primary instigator.
(*) Global warming was first predicted in 1896 by Swedish physical chemist Svante Arrhenius.
He noted that human activity was putting into the atmosphere more carbon dioxide and that it was going to increase temperatures. He thought this might be a good thing for Sweden because they'd have milder winters.
Global warming is really very simple physics and easy to understand if you're at least a physics student and learn about the kinetic theory of gases. Really, the relevant physics is the same physics that predicts all sorts of phenomena including why the atmospheres of all the planets in our solar system are what they are.
But, back to Svante...
In 1896, he didn't give a shit about US politics or have a "liberal agenda". He just followed the logical conclusions of what science was telling him.
I understand that, as a conservative, it is inconvenient when Nature has a liberal bias.
============
It most definitely exists and the scientific basis for it goes all the way back to a paper by Nobel Prize-winning chemist, Svante Arrhenius in 1896.
TITLE: Svante Arrhenius, the Man Who Foresaw Climate Change
https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/science/leading-figures/svante-arrhenius-the-man-who-foresaw-climate-change/
This is Arrhenius's original 1896 scientific journal article:
www.rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdf
On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground
Svante Arrhenius
Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science
Series 5, Volume 41, April 1896, pages 237-276.
I have had a BS in physics since 1985. The physics that explains global warming (and it is global warming) is so basic that it is the same exact physics that explains the atmospheres of both Mars and Venus. This physics is not that intuitive to a lay person, but, to a minimally competent physicist, it's all very easy to understand.
===========
Of course.
It was predicted in 1896 by Nobel winner Svante Arrhenius.
This simple article by NASA introduces Arrhenius as the first one to predict global warming:
=======
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Arrhenius
Svante Arrhenius (1859-1927)
by Steve Graham • January 18, 2000
A hundred years ago, Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius asked the important question “Is the mean temperature of the ground in any way influenced by the presence of the heat-absorbing gases in the atmosphere?” He went on to become the first person to investigate the effect that doubling atmospheric carbon dioxide would have on global climate. The question was debated throughout the early part of the 20th century and is still a main concern of Earth scientists today.
=======
So why did Svante Arrhenius predicted it in 1896
Because it is basic physics.
Any competent student of physics who had reached the point of understanding basic kinetic theory of gases and statistical mechanics (so, basically, a second-semester freshman), should think "Duh."
This is why in a nutshell...
1. In physics, molecules consist of atoms with electrical bonds between the atoms that keep these atoms together.
2. If a molecule has only 2 atoms, then there is only one bond between those two atoms.
3. However, if a molecule has more than 2 atoms, then there are at least 2 bonds.
4. Now, this is the first thing that is important: These bonds are like rubber bands and can store energy.
5. So, the larger a molecule is, then the more bonds it will have and the more energy it can store.
6, Stored energy can be released and that causes motion. For instance, think of a slingshot. When you pull back on the rubber band in the slingshot you are putting energy into that rubber band which stores it. When you let go, the pebble in the middle is suddenly flung at high speed because the rubberband stored released its energy transferring it to the pebble. The pebble now is moving and we say it has kinetic energy (the energy of motion).
7. So, think of all these molecules with extra bonds as having all this extra energy that can cause other molecules to move faster when they collide.
8. So, as these molecules are bouncing around, they are exchanging energy with each other, but because the larger molecules can store more energy, they can release more energy so, when they bounce into smaller molecules, those smaller molecules are more likely to move faster.
9. Now, the average speed of molecules in a gas is related to the average kinetic energy of the molecules. In fact, if you double the average speed, then the average kinetic energy will go up by 4 (=2^2).
10. Now, this is the second important thing: Temperature is directly related to the average kinetic energy of the gas. So, if you can double the average kinetic energy of the gas, then the temperature doubles as well.
11. So, when you put all this together, it says that if you increase the number of larger molecules in the gas, then you will increase the temperature.
12. Remember that the molecular bonds have to store energy. Well, the sun is the major source of energy, so all these extra larger molecules in the air are just absorbing more solar energy and by colliding with other molecules ultimately raises the average kinetic energy of the air and thus its temperature.
That's global warming in a nutshell which can be summarized like this:
1. More large molecules in the air causes more solar energy to be stored in the air which
2. Is passed to all the other molecules in the air due to collisions so
3. The average kinetic energy of the molecules in the air increases and
4. Because temperature is really the same as average kinetic energy, the temperature increases.
Just to finish up... Most of the air is made up of:
1. 2-atom nitrogen, N2 (about 78%)
2. 2-atom oxygen, O2 (about 21%)
3. 1-atom argon, Ar (< 1%)
But the rest of the air is made up of larger molecules - molecules with 3 or more atoms. For instance, carbon dioxide, CO2. Water (H2O) too. And many other molecules too. But notice that these are larger molecules so they can store more energy compared to the N2, O2, and Ar. These larger molecules are called greenhouse gases because of their ability to absorb and store more energy and thus raise temperature like a greenhouse.
The problem with global warming is that, since humans started burning coal and the Industrial Revolution began over 200 years ago, we have been dumping a lot of CO2 into the air during all that time, so, as a result, the temperature has gradually been going up in response to the extra CO2. This is what Svante Arrhenius was worried about because he realized that all that burning coal was dumping CO2 into the air and that CO2 would store more energy. That's why he asked the question describe in the NASA article: “Is the mean temperature of the ground in any way influenced by the presence of the heat-absorbing gases in the atmosphere?”
Global warming is very real.
I'm not sure how else to put this, but this same ___basic___ physics and chemistry explains why Venus and Mars have the atmospheres that they do - and it explains what is happening now. It's not good. Don't invest in beachfront real estate.
...
19 February 2019
Svante Arrhenius, the Man Who Foresaw Climate Change
Climate change Environment History Physics
www.bbvaopenmind.com/.../
======
"...
Throughout his career, Arrhenius followed this interdisciplinary approach, also becoming interested in different questions and phenomena in fields as diverse as meteorology, climatology and cosmology. One of the problems then in vogue in the scientific community that especially caught his interest was to find the cause of the different glaciations that the planet had gone through throughout its history. Arrhenius wanted to find out if the determining factor for these climatic events could be the concentration of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere. John Tyndall had already focused on this, identifying methane, water vapour and CO2 as atmospheric gases that cause the greenhouse effect.
In 1895 Arrhenius wanted to quantify this influence of CO2 on the greenhouse effect, which involved doing endless, complex and tedious calculations by hand—an activity that, apparently, served as a therapy to help him overcome his separation from his first wife. The results he obtained finally came to light in an article published in 1896. In it, Arrhenius concluded that a reduction in the atmospheric CO2 levels to half the then existing ones would result in a drop in the temperature of the planet of between 4 and 5°C, which could lead to a massive cooling like the one that takes place during glaciations.
THE RISKS OF EMISSIONS A CENTURY BEFORE
But he also warned that if those same levels increased by 50%, the planet would experience a warming of between 5 and 6°C, which, as Arrhenius pointed out, meant, among other things, that Scandinavia would enjoy a more benign and pleasant climate. In addition, the article also identified human industrial activity as the main source of new CO2 into the atmosphere. Although he estimated that, at the rate of emissions at that moment, this concentration would take about 3,000 years to reach, we now know that this forecast was very moderate and optimistic.
Arrhenius warned of the risks of the growing CO2 emissions by man and the consequent climate change, almost a century before the world decided to fight global warming. Despite all its serious implications, his study was largely ignored at the time. It was not until the 1970s, when the greenhouse effect began to emerge as a real and imminent concern, that the work of the Swedish scientist was given the value that it deserved.
The above except has this:
" The results he obtained finally came to light in an article published in 1896."
This is the article hyperlinked to that sentence. It is a copy of Arrhenius's paper:
On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground
Svante Arrhenius
Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science
Series 5, Volume 41, April 1896, pages 237-276.
What's really strange is that you have God devil yes no positive negative right wrong and it always seems to be that like with climate change it's like there's certain percentage of people believe it is a certain percentage of people don't believe and it's too bad that even the people that don't think it's a hoax it's too bad they didn't have just common sense and say okay well let's try this let's just see if it is or not instead of arguing about it my state is in another drought this year's going to be bad again we probably won't have winter probably be cold but no snow no rain or at least not that much but for all the people that believe it is a hoax and you follow others because you don't even know what the fuck you're talking about otherwise you would prove it just like the Earth is proving it to us because it is energy our Earth is energy it is a live and we the people on it just keep destroying it it takes a pounding but it has to breathe just like we do if you only understood we are all one we are not divided who we are not meant to be divided but we are and for all the people that believe and have faith and know that we will all survive this just because we believe in something even bigger and better but someday the truth will come out and I hope it's not too late
Phew, you had me in the first half but your poll questions tell me you know what's what.
Well played.
Climate change is depressingly real and until decoupling from growth and capitalism, it's going to doom us all.
Opinion
37Opinion
Barry Soetoro and other rich politicos and movie stars buying multi-million dollar mansions on the sea front. Gee! I thought the ice caps were melting and the oceans were gonna flood the land! And, if it IS heating up enough to melt the ice caps and cause world flooding, why ARE those bodies of water drying up? Aren't they supposed to be sea level? If the oceans are supposed to be rising from melting ice, those rivers and lakes should be, too! They were talking about the ice caps melting back in the `60's! Still hasn't happened!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1se9xbRRZL8
People like Al Gore and John Kerry town-hopping in private jets to tell US about global warming!
The fact that the won't let us have the tech to run cars on water or even the use of mag-lev.
Ice caps getting bigger, cooler temps in the summer, scientific proof that it's just the Sun going through a heat-up phase.
When has Texas ever been devoid of 100 degree temps in the summer? We went to Clearwater, Fla. back in `77 for a month and the temps were in the 70's to 90's and that was in March! Around that same time, we were being warned of a new ice age coming! THAT never happened, either!!
Groom Lake in New Mexico has been bone dry for decades! We're still here!
We had the dust bowl heat wave back in the `30's or `40's that was much hotter than now and we're still here!
Jupiter's also dealing with warmer temps. How is it that our using gasoline-powered cars is causing Jupiter to heat up?
Climate Change is not a hoax, what is a hoax right now is that the current climate on earth is changing irreparably, at rates unseen in history, in ways which might cause humans to become extinct.
Climate displays multiple 'beats' of different time periods, anything from 50-70 years (the PDO/AMO cycles etc), through to 500 year cycles associated with Little Ice Ages and Medieval Warm Periods etc, through to multi-millenial cycles associated with the tilt of the earth, the earth's orbit around the sun etc, which are the basis for Ice Ages and Interglacials to take place.
These cycles, their causes and how they integrate into a single whole alongside shorter-term influencers like the ENSO, the 22 year double Sunspot/Hale Cycle, are not yet completely understood.
They are understood well enough, however, to completely discredit the notion that carbon dioxide levels are the dominant determinant of climate change.
Climate change is not a hoax. It’s an absolutely indisputable fact that climate is changing and that it always has. There is absolutely no evidence to the contrary.
The only argument surrounding climate change is to what extent human beings are effecting it. There’s an abundance of scientific evidence that strongly suggests people are accelerating aspects of climate change.
The problem is that capitalism reigns supreme. So there will always be one or more people or organizations setting themselves up to profit from change of any and every kind. Once that happens we are rightfully reticent about accepting any “evidence” that isn’t fully transparent, particularly in its sources of funding. That said, BIG money has ALWAYS opposed environmental protection policies. Only new money is backing green progress. This is fundamentally why nothing meaningfully changes. New money is no match for old money.
For the folks refuse to understand science.
Why would climate change cause a drought? Because er. . . its hot.
Heat causes evaporation, in case certain folks don't know what evaporation is. . . it is when water turns from a liquid into a vapor. It goes into the atmosphere. And the funny thing is, this causes the process to accelerate. As more water evaporates and go into the air, it causes the atmosphere to become thicker, trapping more heat on the surface of the earth.
Then with that much moisture in the air, you end up with bigger rainstorms, tsunamis, hurricanes, etc.
Ask Pakistan about climate change, 1/3 of that nation is underwater. And they are a pissed off nuclear armed country.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/3xDC_KL4ujk
I like how climate alarmists keep claiming when the cities will be destroyed and the oceans will rise and kill most of humanity. According to them we are all dead and have died many times in the last 50 years.
It is BS spread by people trying to profit from idiots, which the world is filled with. The same idiots that fell for the Y2K lies.
Climate change is not a hoax. The earth has undergone climate change many times over the past several millennia We humans have made the mistake of thinking that the earth is static, and now we're finally learning that it's not, and that we have to deal with it.
Climate change is inevitable. Yes, it may have been exacerbated by human intervention, but it's going to happen regardless.
Climate change is real, the one thing that no one has ever answered though is how much is man made.
I would love to see what exact percentage is man made, is it 5% or 50% or somewhere in between and with indisputable evidence. Not some theory on why it is that amount.
The earth has gone through natural changes itself, so is this another one of those? or is man kind responsible for speeding it up by 15%.
The fact that this has all happened many times before, and we are in fact in the middle of a Ice age.
Honestly we are not even in a particularly warm part of the current and unusual cool interglacial.
Indeed the current interglacial which has already lasted for about as long as they tend to last is due to end in the next thousand years or so.
When the Ice inevitably returns we will all very much wish Global Warming were a thing.
I found it interesting in Al Gores documentary An Incovenient Truth he demonstrated the Earths temperature rises and falls all the time throughout its history. Its normal. Yet towards the end he does the “Omg what IF it went all the way up here?”
Climate change is based on what if.
None of the above. But it is an unparalleled hoax and an embarassment to "science." What hubris that we think we have even 1/10,000 ability to measure the temperature of the Earth and its atmosphere, much less control variables and understand the complexity of it all. Seriously, what kind of secular religion is this insanity. Thanks for asking.
Yeah pretty crazy, there are many people that are in denial, partly because there house has never been destroyed by a natural disaster, they turn on a tap, and that's where water comes from, and the supermarket is packed full of shiny colourful packaged products. There are places in the middle east that only get water for an hour once a fortnight. Shit might hit many fans really soon.
Rivers are at its lowest and the temperatures are rising everywhere. So much heat waves. With the drought we can see dinasoar prints and human activity. So it could be that we had a higher PPM CO2 level. Global temp and co2 levels are in sync. When u burn that fuel it has to go somewhere. It just dosent disappear.
None, just proves overpopulation and overindustrialization are ravaging the world plus telescopes acting as spece mirrors and thus creating effective space lasers with the sun to amplify heat on selectal areas to encourage weakness and rapid surrender from an opposing military force, it's really day 2 Art of War actions
The same repetitive news cycles from as far back as 70s and the matching weather records to conform. It is a con and we will go to any length to defy make babies, spread, and rule over all things in the world...
waiting to see which jackass is gonna make some lie
It is not a hoax but some people rather than work towards constructive solutions or adaptations would rather get personally offended that their behavior may be contributing to the problem.
Voted F. Anybody who doesn’t believe rich folks who fly around the world to tell us that we need to reduce our living standards and pay them more money to fix the climate is obviously an idiot.
The climate always changes. Anthropomorphic "global warming" is globalist propaganda. Besides. CO2 increasing means more oxygen, more green vegetation and better crop yields.
I voted D. It is always that hot in texas. Look at the record books. The whole thing is a hoax. The problem is the crazy democrats are going to break the bank to prove its a hoax.
You can also add your opinion below!
