tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4952595738511215645.post8000719914410594098..comments2012-10-13T22:36:24.217-04:00Comments on Climate Earth: Physics of Global WarmingAndrewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02424828944374256179noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4952595738511215645.post-11052070909281441372009-12-06T10:44:23.967-05:002009-12-06T10:44:23.967-05:00The Stefan-Boltzmann law is only good for ideal bl...The Stefan-Boltzmann law is only good for ideal black bodies and is not 100% accurate for bodies with filtered light - ie colored objects like the Earth. Please run a search for "0707.1161v4.pdf" for more details on the physics.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4952595738511215645.post-74970308386535440852009-07-09T17:12:27.464-04:002009-07-09T17:12:27.464-04:00Label me a skeptic, but didn't Arhenius state ...Label me a skeptic, but didn't Arhenius state that a doubling of CO2 would result in an increase of 1.6 degrees Celsius? According to what I've read, our current contribution to the total CO2 level is about 3%. Assuming natural levels remain unchanged (we can't change them), wouldn't our contribution have to climb over 33 times their current level to equate to a doubling (wholly man-made) of CO2? <br /><br />I've noticed the IPCC downplay the role of naturally produced CO2, trying to show the importance to man-made CO2. What is the physical difference between the two? If there is a difference, why were the temperatures swinging wildly before man's existence?<br /><br />I noticed the quote "The oceans have a tremendous capacity for storing heat and it will take a long time before they reach equilibrium." Define: "long time" in terms of years.<br /><br />Given all this, why is there any form of hysteria regarding global warming?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com