Discussion:
21 Miles. Mauna Loa Observatory to Kilauea volcano.
(too old to reply)
Blue
2018-05-06 19:05:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
21 Miles. Mauna Loa Observatory to Kilauea volcano.

https://twitter.com/GlobalWarmingCo/status/993203386999853056


I think the claim is that when the volcanoes are blowing
that the sensors, won't be counted.

But are they doing it right?

What about when they do count again?

That fresh volcano CO2 has gone some where?

Will be counted?
Catoni
2018-05-06 23:12:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Blue
21 Miles. Mauna Loa Observatory to Kilauea volcano.
https://twitter.com/GlobalWarmingCo/status/993203386999853056
I think the claim is that when the volcanoes are blowing
that the sensors, won't be counted.
But are they doing it right?
What about when they do count again?
That fresh volcano CO2 has gone some where?
Will be counted?
Mauna Loa is considered an active shield volcano; it last erupted in 1950, 1975, and 1984. Between eruptions, it emits variable amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) from fissures at the summit. The observatory is located on the northern slope of the mountain.

CO2 is a heavier than regular mixed gasses air.... and tends to sink....

Scientists figure it is a great place to obtain accurate measurements of the planet's atmospheric CO2 levels.
Wally W.
2018-05-07 03:33:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Catoni
Post by Blue
21 Miles. Mauna Loa Observatory to Kilauea volcano.
https://twitter.com/GlobalWarmingCo/status/993203386999853056
I think the claim is that when the volcanoes are blowing
that the sensors, won't be counted.
But are they doing it right?
What about when they do count again?
That fresh volcano CO2 has gone some where?
Will be counted?
Mauna Loa is considered an active shield volcano; it last erupted in 1950, 1975, and 1984. Between eruptions, it emits variable amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) from fissures at the summit. The observatory is located on the northern slope of the mountain.
CO2 is a heavier than regular mixed gasses air.... and tends to sink....
Scientists figure it is a great place to obtain accurate measurements of the planet's atmospheric CO2 levels.
It takes a PhD ... and some experience writing grant applications ...
to understand why.

It just seems goofy to everyone else.

"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"
Byker
2018-05-07 03:37:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Catoni
Mauna Loa is considered an active shield volcano; it last erupted in 1950,
1975, and 1984. Between eruptions, it emits variable amounts of carbon
dioxide (CO2) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) from fissures at the summit. The
observatory is located on the northern slope of the mountain.
I wonder how much CO2 and SO2 Kilauea has belched out since it has been in
continuous eruption since 1983. Probably a lot more than Homo Sapiens has
produced...
k***@gmail.com
2018-05-07 04:57:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The keeling curve, from Mauna Loa is a total joke. They do everything they can to get some kind of exponent, curve, in the slope for co2 in the atmosphere.
The slope is very nearly linear. One should review the co2 record from the S pole.

What this means, is the atmospheric concentrations have been increasing about 1.8 ppm each year since the standardized testing began in the late 50s.

While human output has gone from 14 billion tons on 1970, 20 billion tons per yr in 2000, to around 50 billion per yr now and growing RAPIDLY.

1ppm is 7.8 billion tons. In figuring concentrations by ppm and mass of atmosphere, co2 is heavy and settles and this is the weight of 1 ppm near surface.

Human co2 is not residing in the atmosphere. It is food for plants including ocean plankton.

Output is not reflected in atmospheric concentrations, Therefor Obama was just blowing out his ass in Paris claiming reductions to control warming at the 2C danger level.
As are all climatologists who can make no sense with their 'settled science'.

No science exist to support the shifting of the yr of the ice cores by 30yrs. There has been enough time now to do direct studies to either confirm or deny the adjustment.

Without this adjustment, the uptick began in the 20s. When human output was barely 4 billion tons per yr. Not even greater than the seasonal fluction due to temperature change.

Therfore a major defeat in the DOOMSDAY SCENARIO that human emissions must be stopped and combated in a death struggle to save the planet from those heathen that use carbon fuels.
k***@gmail.com
2018-05-07 05:04:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Another thing.

At the equator, air mass moves to thr west. Notice how hurricanes move in the tropical zone. Mauna Loa is downwind from thr burning Amazon.

This is a probable reason why the Keeling curve doesn't match the S pole readings.

According to a report from the British Royal Society, the co2 from this burning is greater than that of all the worlds transportation.
k***@gmail.com
2018-05-07 07:29:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
...While human output has gone from 14 billion tons on 1970, 20 billion tons per yr in 2000, to around 50 billion per yr now and growing RAPIDLY...

...1ppm is 7.8 billion tons. In figuring concentrations by ppm and mass of atmosphere, co2 is heavy and settles and this is the weight of 1 ppm near surface....

My mistake. Human emmisions of co2 were 24 billion tons per yr in 2000.

Calculation of weight of 1ppm is simple.

1 millionth of atmosphere in moles. Molar weight of co2 and this many moles. Then consideration for greater density of co2 at the surface. This calculation of 1ppm being 7.8 billion tons is not mine but taken from reference.
k***@gmail.com
2018-05-09 00:33:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
...No science exist to support the shifting of the yr of the ice cores by 30yrs. There has been enough time now to do direct studies to either confirm or deny the adjustment....

The record of atmospheric co2 taken from ice cores is shifted 30 yrs. No one questions this and this portrayal of co2 levels is the backbone of climatology.

Human co2 was not significant until the 50s.
The ice cores show an uptick beginning in the 20s.

The presumption is made without ANY direct science, that the ice registers the co2 at the surface 30 yrs, or 30 layers down.
This is called the 'mean ice age'.

The graph of the ice core record is FALSELY joined with the standardized testing thag began in the 50s.

The layers are about 1 meter thick.
At much depth or pressure, they are purely ice.

It is utterly ridiculous and FRAUD that the ice is permeable to co2 concentrations at the surface at 30 meters.

In any event, the application of direct science can solve this issue.

Attempts have been made to corroborate the 'adjustment'.

Because no direct science is presented, we can presume that the climatologists have none. Their attempts to derive this SIMPLE empirical validation of their graph that FALSLEY depicts human emissions of co2 to be driving atmospheric co2 have failed.

They hide and omit facts for their fraudulent graph.

Where the hell is all the 'science', climate enthusiasts?

Loading...