thrw_skpt

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by thrw_skpt 10y ago

   Thanks for the link, it's fascinating. I'll see if I can download some data and play with it to get a feel for it. As for the water vapor condensation, thanks for pointing me into the relevant part of the report, I'll take a
2. 2.▲
   by thrw_skpt 10y ago

   > "You're applying equations which are not appropriate to the system." Why are you saying this? Because it's not in the paper you linked? Are you sure that equation is not appropriate, and if so, because you know of a
3. 3.▲
   by thrw_skpt 10y ago

   I guess I skipped one or two steps in my mea culpa, so I'll cover them here. You posted this link https://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-residence-time.htm In this link, after a short introduction, we learn that there ar
4. 4.▲
   by thrw_skpt 10y ago

   I'm not sure why you rush to dimiss me like that. The question was "what would make you believe that AGW is real", and I mentioned that the climate models should be falsifiable. We know climate models cannot predict the weath
5. 5.▲
   by thrw_skpt 10y ago

   Your link pretty much says "on average the CO2 stays in the atmosphere for 3-4 years, but if we change the definition, then it's up to 1000 years".
6. 6.▲
   by thrw_skpt 10y ago

   I see several things about the climate science that can be substantially improved. * general discourse. Whenever someone raises some objection, the response is not a thoughtful argument, but many times a quick dismissal. you are certainly n