Someone was complaining earlier about graphs not being zeroed. In order to correct this, I plotted CO2 mole fraction vs. year.
Hopefully that makes everyone happy.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Conspiracy Theory!
- “No One Is Above The Law”
- CNN Experts Discuss Medicine
- Looking For Their Lost Keys
- Rapid Climate Change
- CBS News 1982 : One Fourth Of Florida To Drown
- Affordable Transportation
- “Why Scientific Fraud Is Suddenly Everywhere”
- She Hates Her State
- Climate Friendly War
- Office Of Climate Change And Health Equity And Environmental Justice
- “100% Non-Carbon By 2030”
- 1991 : United Nations Calls For Genocide
- Mainstream Fascism In Academia
- California Finds A New Way To Drive Businesses Out
- Powerful Climate Mathematics
- NY Times – Cameras Are Racist
- Forests Cause Forest Fires
- Climate Engineering
- The World’s Worst Scientists
- “Trees are feasting on decades of carbon dioxide emissions”
- A Real Hockey Stick
- A Real Hockey Stick
- Doubling Energy Costs
- Doubling Energy Costs
Recent Comments
- Conrad Ziefle on Conspiracy Theory!
- Conrad Ziefle on Conspiracy Theory!
- Tony Heller on Conspiracy Theory!
- czechlist on Conspiracy Theory!
- Disillusioned on Conspiracy Theory!
- John on Conspiracy Theory!
- Tony Heller on Conspiracy Theory!
- dm on Conspiracy Theory!
- arn on “No One Is Above The Law”
- Wes Tyler on “No One Is Above The Law”
Ah! Now I see! Worse than I thought.
that’s cherry picking.
Funny!
LOL, much better!
That is what a trace gas would look like.
A bottom line inhabitant.
Your mole fraction graph got me thinking about grapf scaling. Imagine if Al Gore presented a big stage scale temperature reconstroction from 1850 to now using equal spacing for each year (say 12″) and each degree (also 12″). He would have a temperature trend that would be 161 feet long (he’d need a big stage) with a 7.2 inch temperature rise. I don’t think Al would do something like that because it would have a striking similarity to the flatness to your mole fraction graph and we would laugh at Al when he acted all crazed about the trend.
heh heh heh. It would also be interesting to plot CO2 concentrations in dB versus time.
Too much vertical exageration for my liking.
Or you could always plot its ability to control the global temperature, over time….errr, guess the graphs would look about the same….
Considering that 99.96% of the atmosphere is non-GHGs and has essentially nothing to do with keeping Earth warm, is the fact that this line looks flat really all that interesting, surprising, or meaningful?
Given that 2-3% of the atmosphere is made up of water vapour, your numbers are off by about a factor of a hundred.
Nothing new there though.
Actually that is not true.
You forgot CONDUCTION.
I was answering ChrisD,who forgets that there are other ways to keep the atmosphere warm.
Very clever, keep on keeping on Mr. Goddard.
Richard Lindzen on how the scale of the graph creates global warming hysteria:
3:00 video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsMV5-NRp2Y