Posted on 03/21/2007 10:31:06 AM PDT by rrr51
I was listening to the hearings and just heard AlGore say that natural CO2, such as CO2 produced by volcanos, is heavier than CO2 produced by man. Did I hear right? Is that what he said? Is it true? Does anybody know?
That does it! Save us algore, hang yourself it's our only hope.
That does it! Save us algore, hang yourself it's our only hope.
Gee, that's news to me and my former chemistry profs. Did he have the relative weights of the two types of CO2? Is one type better for the atmosphere than another? How? Gore is an idiot, measured by the relatively light weight of his brain vs. the weight of his fat, energy-consuming body.
Climate fluctuates. Temperatures and CO2 levels have varied greatly without human contribution over millions of years. So, obviously, there are major forces other than human activities at work. Ignoring these other forces and implying that some Kyoto-type intervention will resolve unwanted climate change seems ill-conceived.
The tip-off that Gore's case is weak is his insistence that climate change is a "moral issue" rather than a scientific one. The implication is that it is human influence that is BAD in and of itself. And that stopping this BAD behavior is the important objective. The other side of this idea is that natural climate change would be okay.
The "natural = good and unnatural = bad" notion is simplistic and, in my opinion, idiotic. The civilization we currently enjoy is highly unnatural. Yet, virtually every human being (even so-called "greens") strives to enjoy the benefits it provides.
If the climate is changing in unfavorable ways what does it matter whether the cause is natural or unnatural or some combination? Wouldn't preventing the unfavorable change by the most efficient means be the most sensible policy?
Suppose a comet were projected to collide with the Earth. This would be a 100% natural event. Does that mean it's okay? No action needed? Or should we try to avert the collision by unnatural means?
What we need to come to grips with is that, absent any human action, the climate will change. If we want to ameliorate, offset or avert this change we need to think about effective methods of trying to accomplish this. Effective methods are going to have to go beyond the minuscule impacts to be achieved by the Kyoto protocol approach of reducing human-caused emissions. The fact that such effective methods are not part of Al Gore's prescription is pretty convincing evidence that it is control of humans rather than control of climate that is his real agenda.
Whether the BBC program was "right" in every regard isn't the issue. It presents a different interpretation of the data than Al Gore does. In my opinion, it persuasively refutes the idea that controlling CO2 emissions will be sufficient to prevent climate change. The issue then is whether there is something else that can (or should--not everyone agrees that warmer would be worse than cooler) be done to deal with this change. Since there is no evidence that Gore understands the magnitude of the issue, it is clear that following his advice would be the wrong course to take.
That is classic.
This idiot is the go to guy for the "science" of global warming.
FWIW Carbon Monoxide is lighter than carbon dioxide and maybe Al Gore has been inhaling too much of the former.
:
| Gas | Specific Gravity1) - SG - |
| Acetylene (ethyne) - C2H2 | 0.907 |
| Air1) | 1.000 |
| Ammonia - NH3 | 0.596 |
| Argon - Ar | 1.379 |
| Arsine | 2.69 |
| Benzene - C6H6 | 2.6961 |
| Blast Furnace gas | 1.02 |
| Butadiene | 1.869 |
| Butane - C4H10 | 2.0061 |
| Carbon dioxide - CO2 | 1.5189 |
| Carbon monoxide - CO | 0.9667 |
| Carbureted Water Gas | 0.63 |
| Chlorine - Cl2 | 2.486 |
| Coke Oven Gas | 0.44 |
| Cyclobutane | 1.938 |
| Cyclopentane | 2.422 |
| Cyclopropane | 1.451 |
| Decane | 4.915 |
| Digestive Gas (Sewage or Biogas) | 0.8 |
| Ethane - C2H6 | 1.0378 |
| Ethylene (Ethene) - C2H4 | 0.9683 |
| Fluorine | 1.31 |
| Helium - He | 0.138 |
| Heptanes | 3.459 |
| Hexane | 2.973 |
| Hydrogen | 0.0696 |
| Hydrogen chloride - HCl | 1.268 |
| Hydrogen sulfide - H2S | 1.1763 |
| Isobutane | 2.01 |
| Isopentane | 2.48 |
| Krypton | 2.89 |
| Methane - CH4 | 0.5537 |
| Methyl Chloride | 1.74 |
| Natural Gas (typical) | 0.60 - 0.70 |
| Neon | 0.696 |
| Nitric oxide - NO | 1.037 |
| Nitrogen - N2 (pure) | 0.9669 |
| Nitrogen - N2 (atmospheric) | 0.9723 |
| Nitrous oxide - N2O | 1.530 |
| Nonane | 4.428 |
| Octane | 3.944 |
| Oxygen - O2 | 1.1044 |
| Ozone | 1.660 |
| Pentane | 2.487 |
| Phosgene | 1.39 |
| Propane - C3H8 | 1.5219 |
| Propene (Propylene) - C3H6 | 1.4523 |
| Sasol | 0.42 |
| Silane | 1.11 |
| Sulfur Dioxide - SO2 | 2.264 |
| Toluene-Methylbenzene | 3.1082 |
| Water Gas (bituminous) | 0.71 |
| Water Vapor | 0.6218 |
| Xenon | 4.53 |
1) NTP - Normal Temperature and Pressure - is defined as air at 20oC (293.15 K, 68oF) and 1 atm ( 101.325 kN/m2, 101.325 kPa, 14.7 psia, 0 psig, 30 in Hg, 760 torr)
Since specific gravity is the ratio between the density (mass per unit volume) of the actual gas and the density of air, specific gravity has no dimension.
Funny, I heard the same thing about CO. Perhaps Al Gore could be talked into performing an experiment: He could breathe CO for an hour, then we'll weigh him and compare.
.
Wow, just wow, the Goracle needs to be reeled into reality. This man lost his mind a number of years ago and instead of getting him much needed help, leftists shower him with awards and accolades.
See #136. Then read this.
You are wrong and should admit it.
Bump
That it is constant is the assumption that allows the C14/C12 ratio to be used for radiocarbon dating.
However, archaeologists have found there to be periods in history where this apparently wasn't so; as ratios in artifacts from certain specific times are anomalous.
Yes and C-14 comes from Nitrogen bumped upt to C-14 by a beta partical.
Basically, plants preferentially take up CO2 containing lighter carbon isotopes. When fossil fuels (which, after all, are the remnants of ancient organisms) are burned, the CO2 released reflects that mass distribution and is therefore relatively lighter compared to CO2 coming from non-biologic sources.
I need a cigar.
It doesn't matter. This whole thing is just a socialism driven invention to take the place of the failed communist social experiment. Whatever form the CO2 takes whether it is C12, C13 or C14 will not matter. Whether the CO2 is protected or exposed to exterestrial radiation so that it morphs into various isotope forms will not matter in the scheme of things.
I would agree that Al Gore is not the best messenger to convey things to some people.
But the people who would oppose his ideas should do so using correct facts, not vague recollections of their high school chemistry combined with ad hominem attacks.
I always heard that the amount of Carbon 14 on earth should at some point remain constant due to its half life; i.e. it will at some point reach an equilibrium as the amount decaying will equate to the amount created.
The differing amounts of C14 I know has caused some carbon dating to be suspect.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.