Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers.

[Spendulus]

But, my dear Spendy, we could have 20 km of sulfuric acid here on earth also if we don't give the oligarchs at the UN $315 TRILLION dollars to save us and let them design and operate a new global economic system.  Don't you know this?

The extent of brainwashing is really amazing. 

Let's see how these guys answer my rebuttal of their expert Tyson.

[hdbuck]

But, my dear Spendy, we could have 20 km of sulfuric acid here on earth also if we don't give the oligarchs at the UN $315 TRILLION dollars to save us and let them design and operate a new global economic system.  Don't you know this?

The extent of brainwashing is really amazing.  

Let's see how these guys answer my rebuttal of their expert Tyson.

It would take a brain for a brainwash tho.

"voidwash" ftw!

[SuperShill]

But, my dear Spendy, we could have 20 km of sulfuric acid here on earth also if we don't give the oligarchs at the UN $315 TRILLION dollars to save us and let them design and operate a new global economic system.  Don't you know this?

The extent of brainwashing is really amazing.  

Let's see how these guys answer my rebuttal of their expert Tyson.

So, he never said you were wrong only that Venus got to be so hot from runaway green house gas effect. Who knows what the planet looked like a million years ago before that happened. Venus is not "going through run away greenhouse gas effect" what your looking at is the result. It went through it and now it is the way it is. Just like Mars lost its atmosphere over time. Venus wasn't always the way it is now.

[Spendulus]

But, my dear Spendy, we could have 20 km of sulfuric acid here on earth also if we don't give the oligarchs at the UN $315 TRILLION dollars to save us and let them design and operate a new global economic system.  Don't you know this?

The extent of brainwashing is really amazing.  

Let's see how these guys answer my rebuttal of their expert Tyson.

So, he never said you were wrong only that Venus got to be so hot from runaway green house gas effect. Who knows what the planet looked like a million years ago before that happened. Venus is not "going through run away greenhouse gas effect" what your looking at is the result. It went through it and now it is the way it is. Just like Mars lost its atmosphere over time. Venus wasn't always the way it is now.

The argument you have, "who knows?" does not help the position of religioscientific advocates who have linked to Tyson as a source.  Such advocates position on "certainty."

What I can say with certainty is that CO2 plays no part in the temperature equilibirum of Venus.  Whatever crap was underneath that So2 cloud layer, the result would be pretty much the same.

As for the past planetary evolution of Venus, you are correct.  We know very little about it.  Exciting fields to examine for sure.  But they are separate and distinct planets, and there is really no reason to take some blithe concept such as "runaway greenhouse," apply it to Venus to support dubious political goals on Earth.  Unless, of course, it really did happen in a fashion that's analogous and from which we can learn.

That is not the case with Venus.  If blind devotion to a cause such as "Climate change" bends scientific understanding to where we cannot examine another planet's evolution with an open mind, this is bad.

If an atmosphere was 20 km deep and the surface pressure was 92 atmospheres (of earth), and the world received twice the heat from the sun as earth, what "SHOULD" the surface temperature be?  Obviously there will not be water in liquid or solid form, and the sulfur atoms will strip the oxygens from h20, leaving so2, then all that matter is gaseous so hence the > 1000 psi pressure at the surface.

[SuperShill]

But, my dear Spendy, we could have 20 km of sulfuric acid here on earth also if we don't give the oligarchs at the UN $315 TRILLION dollars to save us and let them design and operate a new global economic system.  Don't you know this?

The extent of brainwashing is really amazing.  

Let's see how these guys answer my rebuttal of their expert Tyson.

So, he never said you were wrong only that Venus got to be so hot from runaway green house gas effect. Who knows what the planet looked like a million years ago before that happened. Venus is not "going through run away greenhouse gas effect" what your looking at is the result. It went through it and now it is the way it is. Just like Mars lost its atmosphere over time. Venus wasn't always the way it is now.

The argument you have, "who knows?" does not help the position of religioscientific advocates who have linked to Tyson as a source.  Such advocates position on "certainty."

What I can say with certainty is that CO2 plays no part in the temperature equilibirum of Venus.  Whatever crap was underneath that So2 cloud layer, the result would be pretty much the same.

As for the past planetary evolution of Venus, you are correct.  We know very little about it.  Exciting fields to examine for sure.  But they are separate and distinct planets, and there is really no reason to take some blithe concept such as "runaway greenhouse," apply it to Venus to support dubious political goals on Earth.  Unless, of course, it really did happen in a fashion that's analogous and from which we can learn.

That is not the case with Venus.  If blind devotion to a cause such as "Climate change" bends scientific understanding to where we cannot examine another planet's evolution with an open mind, this is bad.

If an atmosphere was 20 km deep and the surface pressure was 92 atmospheres (of earth), and the world received twice the heat from the sun as earth, what "SHOULD" the surface temperature be?  Obviously there will not be water in liquid or solid form, and the sulfur atoms will strip the oxygens from h20, leaving so2, then all that matter is gaseous so hence the > 1000 psi pressure at the surface.

What Neil Degrasse Tyson says about Venus is not blind devotion, planets start off as Molten rocks and there is a logical chain of events that follows. Venus having the SO2 or Co2 (I'm not a scientist) problem you are speaking of where heat gets trapped on the planet, has to have logically started at some point. Before that point Venus proximity to the sun indicates that it would have been warmer than earth but not scorching as it is now. The mere fact that it went from being any kind of atmosphere that it had, to being an atmosphere such as you speaking can only be cause by that very co2 or so2 gas, getting into the atmosphere somehow - and thus it was a runaway greenhouse gas effect

I respect you man your very intelligent and I can see that from your posts but you are incorrect on this one bud.

Challenge accepted! brain used!

[Spendulus]

But, my dear Spendy, we could have 20 km of sulfuric acid here on earth also if we don't give the oligarchs at the UN $315 TRILLION dollars to save us and let them design and operate a new global economic system.  Don't you know this?

The extent of brainwashing is really amazing.  

Let's see how these guys answer my rebuttal of their expert Tyson.

So, he never said you were wrong only that Venus got to be so hot from runaway green house gas effect. Who knows what the planet looked like a million years ago before that happened. Venus is not "going through run away greenhouse gas effect" what your looking at is the result. It went through it and now it is the way it is. Just like Mars lost its atmosphere over time. Venus wasn't always the way it is now.

The argument you have, "who knows?" does not help the position of religioscientific advocates who have linked to Tyson as a source.  Such advocates position on "certainty."

What I can say with certainty is that CO2 plays no part in the temperature equilibirum of Venus.  Whatever crap was underneath that So2 cloud layer, the result would be pretty much the same.

As for the past planetary evolution of Venus, you are correct.  We know very little about it.  Exciting fields to examine for sure.  But they are separate and distinct planets, and there is really no reason to take some blithe concept such as "runaway greenhouse," apply it to Venus to support dubious political goals on Earth.  Unless, of course, it really did happen in a fashion that's analogous and from which we can learn.

That is not the case with Venus.  If blind devotion to a cause such as "Climate change" bends scientific understanding to where we cannot examine another planet's evolution with an open mind, this is bad.

If an atmosphere was 20 km deep and the surface pressure was 92 atmospheres (of earth), and the world received twice the heat from the sun as earth, what "SHOULD" the surface temperature be?  Obviously there will not be water in liquid or solid form, and the sulfur atoms will strip the oxygens from h20, leaving so2, then all that matter is gaseous so hence the > 1000 psi pressure at the surface.

What Neil Degrasse Tyson says about Venus is not blind devotion, planets start off as Molten rocks and there is a logical chain of events that follows. Venus having the SO2 or Co2 (I'm not a scientist) problem you are speaking of where heat gets trapped on the planet, has to have logically started at some point. Before that point Venus proximity to the sun indicates that it would have been warmer than earth but not scorching as it is now. The mere fact that it went from being any kind of atmosphere that it had, to being an atmosphere such as you speaking can only be cause by that very co2 or so2 gas, getting into the atmosphere somehow - and thus it was a runaway greenhouse gas effect

I respect you man your very intelligent and I can see that from your posts but you are incorrect on this one bud.

Challenge accepted! brain used!

Hey, that's the way to do it.  Go read up on the situation with Venus and come back and go further if you want.  Any level of depth is fine. 

[SuperShill]

The term "Runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect" only refers to the process in which, when a green house gas (such as: Methane, Carbon Dioxide, whatever SO2 that you mentioned is) gets released into the atmosphere and stops heat that has entered from escaping.

The mere fact that those gasses are there (and you do acknowledge that they are there) means they had to have gotten there somehow. (you also acknowledge that heat cant escape because of the presence of those gasses being there)

Them getting there and causing that problem is by definition what a "Runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect" is.

What more do I need to look up for this argument exactly?

*Drops Mic*

[tvbcof]

The term "Runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect" only refers to the process in which, when a green house gas (such as: Methane, Carbon Dioxide, whatever SO2 that you mentioned is) gets released into the atmosphere and stops heat that has entered from escaping.

The mere fact that those gasses are there (and you do acknowledge that they are there) means they had to have gotten there somehow. (you also acknowledge that heat cant escape because of the presence those gasses being there)

Them getting there and causing that problem is by definition what a "Runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect" is.

What more do I need to look up for this argument exactly?

*Drops Mic*

The most important greenhouse gas on earth is H20.  It creates the 'greenhouse effect' we have here on earth and has for a very long time.  If it wants to 'run away', it's got the whole ocean with which to do so.

It is not true that 'heat cant escape' with H20 being the primary greenhouse gas nor any other.  There is an equilibrium value reached on every planet which is a function of the various methods by which heat 'escapes' such as overturning and the various energy inputs (mostly solar.)  This equilibrium certainly drifts around and the bands of various ecosystems consequently shift in various ways.

These processes have been going on since the beginning of life on earth a billion or so years ago and it nor any of the various catastrophes have managed to snuff out life yet.  On the contrary, it has resulted in an interesting and wonderful diversity which would be much reduced and much more boring in a 'stable' system.  Anyone who is all freaked out about earth turning into venus overnight has been severely emotionally damaged by the dedicated effort of a band of skillful grifters.  I can hardly believe that anyone is this retarded, but there it is.

[SuperShill]

The term "Runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect" only refers to the process in which, when a green house gas (such as: Methane, Carbon Dioxide, whatever SO2 that you mentioned is) gets released into the atmosphere and stops heat that has entered from escaping.

The mere fact that those gasses are there (and you do acknowledge that they are there) means they had to have gotten there somehow. (you also acknowledge that heat cant escape because of the presence those gasses being there)

Them getting there and causing that problem is by definition what a "Runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect" is.

What more do I need to look up for this argument exactly?

*Drops Mic*

The most important greenhouse gas on earth is H20.  It creates the 'greenhouse effect' we have here on earth and has for a very long time.  If it wants to 'run away', it's got the whole ocean with which to do so.

It is not true that 'heat cant escape' with H20 being the primary greenhouse gas nor any other.  There is an equilibrium value reached on every planet which is a function of the various methods by which heat 'escapes' such as overturning and the various energy inputs (mostly solar.)  This equilibrium certainly drifts around and the bands of various ecosystems consequently shift in various ways.

These processes have been going on since the beginning of life on earth a billion or so years ago and it nor any of the various catastrophes have managed to snuff out life yet.  On the contrary, it has resulted in an interesting and wonderful diversity which would be much reduced and much more boring in a 'stable' system.  Anyone who is all freaked out about earth turning into venus overnight has been severely emotionally damaged by the dedicated effort of a band of skillful grifters.  I can hardly believe that anyone is this retarded, but there it is.

no no no no one is that retarded. I did not (nor do I believe the original person who mentioned the Venus video) mean to imply that earth will turn into Venus over night or even ever. We don't know how Venus evolution actually happened, (as Spendulus stated earlier)

The video is just to imply that Venus is an extreme example of "run away green house gas effect"

The Greenhouse that was Venus' atmosphere, trapped those gasses once they were released and the causality of that did not allow heat to escape- that's what "Runaway Green House Gas" is by definition

for a bunch of smart guys your all not getting a very fucking simple concept

and Also:

yes Oxygen also H2O vapor are Greenhouse gasses and earth once mostly had a methane atmosphere until an Oxygen was released in a  kind of break out sceanrio which happened and changed our atmosphere and since then, our atmosphere has had differing levels of CO2 and Oxygen at different points, yes. In fact, in times where there was a lot of oxygen we had enormous insects because of their breathing tube system.

None the less if you look up the definition of "Runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect" its when greenhouse gasses get release and smother the planet, allowing the suns heat to enter but not to escape, and this can happen at any point in a planets life but "Run Away Greenhouse Gas Effect" is still what its called.

So even if Venus went from molten rock immediately to the way it is now you would still be correct to say "Venus suffered runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect, when it was very young"

The evidence is there, and there is no need for name calling (name calling is retarded, were arguing about the definition of what to call the chain of events that led up to the current conditions on Venus, if this debate is managing to offend you enough to start calling people retarded you may need to get more fresh air, sunlight and friends)

[Spendulus]

The term "Runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect" only refers to the process in which, when a green house gas (such as: Methane, Carbon Dioxide, whatever SO2 that you mentioned is) gets released into the atmosphere and stops heat that has entered from escaping.

The mere fact that those gasses are there (and you do acknowledge that they are there) means they had to have gotten there somehow. (you also acknowledge that heat cant escape because of the presence those gasses being there)

Them getting there and causing that problem is by definition what a "Runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect" is.

What more do I need to look up for this argument exactly?

*Drops Mic*

The most important greenhouse gas on earth is H20.  It creates the 'greenhouse effect' we have here on earth and has for a very long time.  If it wants to 'run away', it's got the whole ocean with which to do so.

It is not true that 'heat cant escape' with H20 being the primary greenhouse gas nor any other.  There is an equilibrium value reached on every planet which is a function of the various methods by which heat 'escapes' such as overturning and the various energy inputs (mostly solar.)  This equilibrium certainly drifts around and the bands of various ecosystems consequently shift in various ways.

These processes have been going on since the beginning of life on earth a billion or so years ago and it nor any of the various catastrophes have managed to snuff out life yet.  On the contrary, it has resulted in an interesting and wonderful diversity which would be much reduced and much more boring in a 'stable' system.  Anyone who is all freaked out about earth turning into venus overnight has been severely emotionally damaged by the dedicated effort of a band of skillful grifters.  I can hardly believe that anyone is this retarded, but there it is.

no no no no one is that retarded. I did not (nor do I believe the original person who mentioned the Venus video) mean to imply that earth will turn into Venus over night or even ever. We don't know how Venus evolution actually happened, (as Spendulus stated earlier)

The video is just to imply that Venus is an extreme example of "run away green house gas effect"

The Greenhouse that was Venus' atmosphere, trapped those gasses once they were released and the causality of that did not allow heat to escape- that's what "Runaway Green House Gas" is by definition

for a bunch of smart guys your all not getting a very fucking simple concept

and Also:

yes Oxygen also H2O vapor are Greenhouse gasses and earth once mostly had a methane atmosphere until an Oxygen was released in a  kind of break out sceanrio which happened and changed our atmosphere and since then, our atmosphere has had differing levels of CO2 and Oxygen at different points, yes. In fact, in times where there was a lot of oxygen we had enormous insects because of their breathing tube system.

None the less if you look up the definition of "Runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect" its when greenhouse gasses get release and smother the planet, allowing the suns heat to enter but not to escape, and this can happen at any point in a planets life but "Run Away Greenhouse Gas Effect" is still what its called.

So even if Venus went from molten rock immediately to the way it is now you would still be correct to say "Venus suffered runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect, when it was very young"

The evidence is there, and there is no need for name calling (name calling is retarded, were arguing about the definition of what to call the chain of events that led up to the current conditions on Venus, if this debate is managing to offend you enough to start calling people retarded you may need to get more fresh air, sunlight and friends)

A "runaway greenhouse effect" is defined as when greenhouse gasses accumulate until a planet's oceans boil away, due to a POSITIVE FEEDBACK between atmospheric opacity and surface temperature.  The greenhouse effect on Earth warms us about 7C.  The greenhouse effect on Venus warms that planet a certain amount.

If the basic temperature on Venus was sufficient to boil away the oceans, then no greenhouse effect needs to be hypothesized to do that.  Venus is much closer to the sun and has about twice the solar energy.  Doubling solar energy on Earth and what happens?

1,260,000,000,000,000,000,000 liters of water on Earth.
1.26 x 10^20

The size of the Earth's side presented to the Sun.
 3.5 x 10^10 square meters

A guess as to how much additional energy would reach the Earth's surface if incoming solar energy were doubled.
3 x 10^2 watts (watt is a joule per second)

A million years is 3.2 x 10 ^13 seconds

How many watts over a million years?
9.6 x 10^15 watts per square meter

How many additional watts on the Earth then?

3.4 x 10 ^26 watts

Assume water starts at a temperature of 25C.  How many watts to boil a liter?
313 kilojoule = 3.1 x 10 ^ 5 joule

Energy to boil all the Earth's water off.
1.26 x 10^20 * 3.1 x 10^5 = 1.26 x 10^26

Therefore, from a starting point with water at 25C, about a half a million years would have been required to boil off all the Earth's water.   However, Venus NEVER HAD A COOLER PERIOD FOR THE WATER TO CONDENSE TO LIQUID.

Like I said, let's just use a few brain cells here.  Just see where they lead.

Accordingly, I submit that the sources you repeat the words of who claim that Venus suffered a "runaway greenhouse effect" are wrong even if they phrase it as "may have suffered."  This seems to be only kowtowing to the climate alarmists and feeding the fear factors.  Yet for this strategy to work requires people to ignorantly ignore the fact that Venus is much closer to the Sun.

[SuperShill]

The term "Runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect" only refers to the process in which, when a green house gas (such as: Methane, Carbon Dioxide, whatever SO2 that you mentioned is) gets released into the atmosphere and stops heat that has entered from escaping.

The mere fact that those gasses are there (and you do acknowledge that they are there) means they had to have gotten there somehow. (you also acknowledge that heat cant escape because of the presence those gasses being there)

Them getting there and causing that problem is by definition what a "Runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect" is.

What more do I need to look up for this argument exactly?

*Drops Mic*

The most important greenhouse gas on earth is H20.  It creates the 'greenhouse effect' we have here on earth and has for a very long time.  If it wants to 'run away', it's got the whole ocean with which to do so.

It is not true that 'heat cant escape' with H20 being the primary greenhouse gas nor any other.  There is an equilibrium value reached on every planet which is a function of the various methods by which heat 'escapes' such as overturning and the various energy inputs (mostly solar.)  This equilibrium certainly drifts around and the bands of various ecosystems consequently shift in various ways.

These processes have been going on since the beginning of life on earth a billion or so years ago and it nor any of the various catastrophes have managed to snuff out life yet.  On the contrary, it has resulted in an interesting and wonderful diversity which would be much reduced and much more boring in a 'stable' system.  Anyone who is all freaked out about earth turning into venus overnight has been severely emotionally damaged by the dedicated effort of a band of skillful grifters.  I can hardly believe that anyone is this retarded, but there it is.

no no no no one is that retarded. I did not (nor do I believe the original person who mentioned the Venus video) mean to imply that earth will turn into Venus over night or even ever. We don't know how Venus evolution actually happened, (as Spendulus stated earlier)

The video is just to imply that Venus is an extreme example of "run away green house gas effect"

The Greenhouse that was Venus' atmosphere, trapped those gasses once they were released and the causality of that did not allow heat to escape- that's what "Runaway Green House Gas" is by definition

for a bunch of smart guys your all not getting a very fucking simple concept

and Also:

yes Oxygen also H2O vapor are Greenhouse gasses and earth once mostly had a methane atmosphere until an Oxygen was released in a  kind of break out sceanrio which happened and changed our atmosphere and since then, our atmosphere has had differing levels of CO2 and Oxygen at different points, yes. In fact, in times where there was a lot of oxygen we had enormous insects because of their breathing tube system.

None the less if you look up the definition of "Runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect" its when greenhouse gasses get release and smother the planet, allowing the suns heat to enter but not to escape, and this can happen at any point in a planets life but "Run Away Greenhouse Gas Effect" is still what its called.

So even if Venus went from molten rock immediately to the way it is now you would still be correct to say "Venus suffered runaway Greenhouse Gas Effect, when it was very young"

The evidence is there, and there is no need for name calling (name calling is retarded, were arguing about the definition of what to call the chain of events that led up to the current conditions on Venus, if this debate is managing to offend you enough to start calling people retarded you may need to get more fresh air, sunlight and friends)

A "runaway greenhouse effect" is defined as when greenhouse gasses accumulate until a planet's oceans boil away, due to a POSITIVE FEEDBACK between atmospheric opacity and surface temperature.  The greenhouse effect on Earth warms us about 7C.  The greenhouse effect on Venus warms that planet a certain amount.

If the basic temperature on Venus was sufficient to boil away the oceans, then no greenhouse effect needs to be hypothesized to do that.  Venus is much closer to the sun and has about twice the solar energy.  Doubling solar energy on Earth and what happens?

1,260,000,000,000,000,000,000 liters of water on Earth.
1.26 x 10^20

The size of the Earth's side presented to the Sun.
 3.5 x 10^10 square meters

A guess as to how much additional energy would reach the Earth's surface if incoming solar energy were doubled.
3 x 10^2 watts (watt is a joule per second)

A million years is 3.2 x 10 ^13 seconds

How many watts over a million years?
9.6 x 10^15 watts per square meter

How many additional watts on the Earth then?

3.4 x 10 ^26 watts

Assume water starts at a temperature of 25C.  How many watts to boil a liter?
313 kilojoule = 3.1 x 10 ^ 5 joule

Energy to boil all the Earth's water off.
1.26 x 10^20 * 3.1 x 10^5 = 1.26 x 10^26

Therefore, from a starting point with water at 25C, about a half a million years would have been required to boil off all the Earth's water.   However, Venus NEVER HAD A COOLER PERIOD FOR THE WATER TO CONDENSE TO LIQUID.

Like I said, let's just use a few brain cells here.  Just see where they lead.

Accordingly, I submit that the sources you repeat the words of who claim that Venus suffered a "runaway greenhouse effect" are wrong even if they phrase it as "may have suffered."  This seems to be only kowtowing to the climate alarmists and feeding the fear factors.  Yet for this strategy to work requires people to ignorantly ignore the fact that Venus is much closer to the Sun.

Venus proximity to the sun is not why it's so hot. Venus is hotter than Mercury which is closer to the sun

Venus is in the life giving zone! Lol no matter how you phrase it I trust Neil Defrasse Tyson over you lol

[Spendulus]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/10/physicist-who-foresees-global-cooling-says-other-s/

Yes, solar physicists have been warning for about 10 years now that we may be entering a period of global cooling similar to the Little Ice Age that occurred in the 1700s.  Unfortunately the solar physicists do not quite fit the hysterical climate greenie's vision of a Denier.

Unfortunately the religious fanatics of junk science do not understand that global cooling indeed does fit under their broad umbrella of "climate change." 

Meanwhile they keep juggling the numbers so that each year is "warmer than the years before" and "breaks all records!"  Of course they can do this with the land based temperatures through the Bureau of Adjustments, but they cannot do it with the satellite temperature readings.

[Spendulus]

Venus proximity to the sun is not why it's so hot. Venus is hotter than Mercury which is closer to the sun

Venus is in the life giving zone! Lol no matter how you phrase it I trust Neil Defrasse Tyson over you lol

Life giving zone?  WTF?

Mercury, like our Moon, immediately radiates it's heat away as it rotates.  One side hot, the other cold. 

Any atmosphere or water/ice system retains and moderates temperature.

The clouds on Venus retain heat.

None of this has any relation to a "runaway greenhouse effect."  Attributing these phenomena to such a buzzword phrase is ignorance of the meaning of the terms, at best.  At worst, it's bastardization of science for political purposes.

[tvbcof]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/10/physicist-who-foresees-global-cooling-says-other-s/

Yes, solar physicists have been warning for about 10 years now that we may be entering a period of global cooling similar to the Little Ice Age that occurred in the 1700s.  Unfortunately the solar physicists do not quite fit the hysterical climate greenie's vision of a Denier.

Unfortunately the religious fanatics of junk science do not understand that global cooling indeed does fit under their broad umbrella of "climate change." 

Meanwhile they keep juggling the numbers so that each year is "warmer than the years before" and "breaks all records!"  Of course they can do this with the land based temperatures through the Bureau of Adjustments, but they cannot do it with the satellite temperature readings.

I never understood quite why they cannot and do not.  I mean it's not like there seem to be any ethical qualms holding them back and NASA, NOAA, etc have been degraded to blatent political hacks and sub-worthless jokes by this time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7V8foMd3SE

[Spendulus]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/10/physicist-who-foresees-global-cooling-says-other-s/

Yes, solar physicists have been warning for about 10 years now that we may be entering a period of global cooling similar to the Little Ice Age that occurred in the 1700s.  Unfortunately the solar physicists do not quite fit the hysterical climate greenie's vision of a Denier.

Unfortunately the religious fanatics of junk science do not understand that global cooling indeed does fit under their broad umbrella of "climate change." 

Meanwhile they keep juggling the numbers so that each year is "warmer than the years before" and "breaks all records!"  Of course they can do this with the land based temperatures through the Bureau of Adjustments, but they cannot do it with the satellite temperature readings.

I never understood quite why they cannot and do not.  I mean it's not like there seem to be any ethical qualms holding them back and NASA, NOAA, etc have been degraded to blatent political hacks and sub-worthless jokes by this time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7V8foMd3SE

That's pretty darn good, that link.  But I'd disagree with him.  NASA is doing totally amazing stuff with it's robots exploring the solar system.  The payoffs are a thousand to one compared to manned exploration.

It's likely the thing that holds the corruption in check on the satellite temperature numbers is the fact that any ham radio operator can pick up the transmissions and record the data.

[tvbcof]

...

Meanwhile they keep juggling the numbers so that each year is "warmer than the years before" and "breaks all records!"  Of course they can do this with the land based temperatures through the Bureau of Adjustments, but they cannot do it with the satellite temperature readings.

I never understood quite why they cannot and do not.  I mean it's not like there seem to be any ethical qualms holding them back and NASA, NOAA, etc have been degraded to blatent political hacks and sub-worthless jokes by this time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7V8foMd3SE

That's pretty darn good, that link.  But I'd disagree with him.  NASA is doing totally amazing stuff with it's robots exploring the solar system.  The payoffs are a thousand to one compared to manned exploration.

It's likely the thing that holds the corruption in check on the satellite temperature numbers is the fact that any ham radio operator can pick up the transmissions and record the data.

All they'd have to do is encrypt the data.  For 'national security reasons', ya know?  I'm surprised they don't already.

On the subject, I noticed with interest that Japan was putting a CO2 observatory satelite into space at the same time we were.  Their succeeded and ours failed in an unusual malfunction.  Our 2nd attempt was successful.  The question in my mind was why would the Japanese go to the expense?

I hypothesis that Japan was fully aware that CO2 was going to be used as a primary mechanism to siphon the resources of rich countries to poor countries.  It is pretty clear by the time that these efforts were in planning stage that there was a global effort to bring the world's nation states into better parity from a wealth perspective and only slightly less clear that this was a setup for better meshing under an eventual world government.  I suggest that Japan, as a wealthy country, knew that they would be totally fucked if they didn't have access to real CO2 data themselves.

BTW, I agree that sending humans into space is absurd from a cost/benefit perspective.  It's mostly a NASA sideshow for the plebs.  I agree with ramzpaul, however, that it's a better sideshow than 'virtue signaling' via the human resources department and propaganda efforts in social media.

[Spendulus]

...

Meanwhile they keep juggling the numbers so that each year is "warmer than the years before" and "breaks all records!"  Of course they can do this with the land based temperatures through the Bureau of Adjustments, but they cannot do it with the satellite temperature readings.

I never understood quite why they cannot and do not.  I mean it's not like there seem to be any ethical qualms holding them back and NASA, NOAA, etc have been degraded to blatent political hacks and sub-worthless jokes by this time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7V8foMd3SE

That's pretty darn good, that link.  But I'd disagree with him.  NASA is doing totally amazing stuff with it's robots exploring the solar system.  The payoffs are a thousand to one compared to manned exploration.

It's likely the thing that holds the corruption in check on the satellite temperature numbers is the fact that any ham radio operator can pick up the transmissions and record the data.

All they'd have to do is encrypt the data.  For 'national security reasons', ya know?  I'm surprised they don't already.

On the subject, I noticed with interest that Japan was putting a CO2 observatory satelite into space at the same time we were.  Their succeeded and ours failed in an unusual malfunction.  Our 2nd attempt was successful.  The question in my mind was why would the Japanese go to the expense?

I hypothesis that Japan was fully aware that CO2 was going to be used as a primary mechanism to siphon the resources of rich countries to poor countries.  It is pretty clear by the time that these efforts were in planning stage that there was a global effort to bring the world's nation states into better parity from a wealth perspective and only slightly less clear that this was a setup for better meshing under an eventual world government.  I suggest that Japan, as a wealthy country, knew that they would be totally fucked if they didn't have access to real CO2 data themselves.

BTW, I agree that sending humans into space is absurd from a cost/benefit perspective.  It's mostly a NASA sideshow for the plebs.  I agree with ramzpaul, however, that it's a better sideshow than 'virtue signaling' via the human resources department and propaganda efforts in social media.

Today we know much more about Venus than in the Apollo era.  We have landed probes on the planet.   We have a polar orbiter that's mapped the surface.  But thanks to the dumbing down of science, and the constant babble about climate change, today's people know less about Venus than people of the Apollo era.

Yes, it's possible to teach ignorance, and have people eagerly learn it.

[SuperShill]

Venus proximity to the sun is not why it's so hot. Venus is hotter than Mercury which is closer to the sun

Venus is in the life giving zone! Lol no matter how you phrase it I trust Neil Defrasse Tyson over you lol

Life giving zone?  WTF?

Mercury, like our Moon, immediately radiates it's heat away as it rotates.  One side hot, the other cold.  

Any atmosphere or water/ice system retains and moderates temperature.

The clouds on Venus retain heat.

None of this has any relation to a "runaway greenhouse effect."  Attributing these phenomena to such a buzzword phrase is ignorance of the meaning of the terms, at best.  At worst, it's bastardization of science for political purposes.

"Life giving zone" - the zone of proximity around a star in which liquid water could hypothetically be maintained by a suitable planet

This a correct term many people use to describe this particular space around a star

[SuperShill]

Guys on a side note, this has been a very entertaining thread and I would sincerely like to watch some of these documentaries about a global takeover you are discussing. Furthermore I really wish we could somehow send this entire thread to some of the supposed hacks you are calling out (Bill Nye, Neil Degrasse Tyson, Carl Sagan) and see a video of them reading our chat and defending themselves. I know it won't happen but whatever side of the climate change argument you are on, I think you can agree that would be a very interesting video! Have any of them ever done an Reddit Ama?

I'm an anthropologist not a astro-physicist. But they are suppose to be the best and I just would love to hear their response to accusations of their terminology being wrong. For now I trust them, sincerely sorry tho if I am in fact a sheep for that. But I don't think I am.

Thanks for a fun read guys

All the best,

The Shiller

[Spendulus]

Venus proximity to the sun is not why it's so hot. Venus is hotter than Mercury which is closer to the sun

Venus is in the life giving zone! Lol no matter how you phrase it I trust Neil Defrasse Tyson over you lol

Life giving zone?  WTF?

Mercury, like our Moon, immediately radiates it's heat away as it rotates.  One side hot, the other cold.  

Any atmosphere or water/ice system retains and moderates temperature.

The clouds on Venus retain heat.

None of this has any relation to a "runaway greenhouse effect."  Attributing these phenomena to such a buzzword phrase is ignorance of the meaning of the terms, at best.  At worst, it's bastardization of science for political purposes.

"Life giving zone" - the zone of proximity around a star in which liquid water could hypothetically be maintained by a suitable planet

This a correct term many people use to describe this particular space around a star

I'm baffled by how anyone would think that the native temperatures of Venus, with or without a greenhouse effect, would support liquid water.