Someone please red-pill me on climate change and why humans have

>>9110566
more humans = more cows and sheep = more farts = more methane in the athmosphere.

>Ruminants are responsible for about 25% of the methane produced in Britain.

Climate change is fake. It's politically driven environmentalist fearmongering.
If you light fires things warm up obviously but planetary scale heating and cooling is done by the sun.

File: gw-spectrum-tropical-pacific.jpg (119KB, 1024x763px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1024x763px

The Earth receives energy in the form of radiation from the sun, primarily at the higher end of the infra-red to near ultraviolet range
It then re-emits that energy as radiation back out into space, primarily in the infra red range
The atmosphere is more absorbent at some wavelengths and less absorbent at others

Carbon dioxide is mostly transparent at higher frequencies, but mostly opaque in the infra-red range
The primary fuel source of humans since the industrial revolution has been fossil hydrocarbons, which are molecules composed of hydrogen and carbon which have been trapped beneath the surface of the Earth for millions of years
Burning hydrocarbons produces water and carbon dioxide (and soot, if there is not enough oxygen)
By burning a large quantity of hydrocarbons, humans have increased the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere

Because CO2 is transparent at the wavelengths of light received from the sun, but more opaque at the wavelengths of light emitted by the Earth, there is a net gain of energy into the atmosphere which leads to an overall increase in temperature
Hotter bodies emit more radiation, so eventually the Earth will heat up to the point it is emitting as much energy as it is receiving again and thermal equilibrium is reached
However, the increased thermal energy in the atmosphere and oceans is predicted to have many undesirable consequences

Various other gases, such as methane, which are produced in large quantities by human activities have similar effects to CO2

File: Solar_Spectrum.png (36KB, 800x595px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 800x595px

>>9110682
Solar radiation spectrum before and after atmospheric absorption, data from the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Terrestrial Reference Spectra (http://rredc.nrel.gov/solar/spectra/am1.5/ - please ignore their use of the Papyrus font)

File: cbook.png (41KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 800x600px

>>9110691
Absorption spectrum of carbon dioxide, data from National Institute of Standards and Technology (http://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=C124389&Type=IR-SPEC&Index=1)

File: curve_s.gif (81KB, 974x781px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 974x781px

>>9110695
Expected emission spectrum of a blackbody of Earth's temperature versus spectrum detected from Earth by satellite, data from NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/schmidt_05/)

File: cumulative_global_1751_2007.jpg (38KB, 792x612px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 792x612px

>>9110700
Cumulative global emission of carbon dioxide (data from http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/tre_glob.html and http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/overview_2007.html)

File: graph-co2-1200x720.png (62KB, 1200x720px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 1200x720px

>>9110719
Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration (data from https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/weekly.html)

>>9110722
And if you have any further questions:
https://skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-global-warming-intermediate.htm

File: CC_global carbon cycle.png (7KB, 400x222px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 400x222px

>>9110566
>know nothing
read everything
https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php

>>9110727
>>9110731
Loool skeptic m'lady
Skepticism is for fedoralords

File: d96.jpg (27KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 600x600px

>>9110682
>>9110691
>>9110695
>>9110700
>>9110719
>>9110722
Damn son

>>9110735
Healthy scepticism is the basis of the scientific method - 'Take nobody's word for it'.

Excessive scepticism is as foolish as face value credulousness, although in this particular argument it's usually just a facade and an attempt to claim the language of rational scientific scepticism for the unscientific denial of high quality empirical data.

>>9110748
Fedoralord.
Lol, I bet you think we don't have objective evidence for God.
Look up Behe.
BTFO

File: UN IPCC on logarithmic CO2 effect..jpg (76KB, 578x351px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 578x351px

>>9110682
John Cook forgot to mention this.

The short-term influence of various concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide on the temperature profile in the boundary layer
(Pure and Applied Geophysics, Volume 113, Issue 1, pp. 331-353, 1975)
- Wilford G. Zdunkowski, Jan Paegle, Falko K. Fye

Climate Sensitivity: +0.5 °C

Questions Concerning the Possible Influence of Anthropogenic CO2 on Atmospheric Temperature
(Journal of Applied Meteorology, Volume 18, Issue 6, pp. 822-825, June 1979)
- Reginald E. Newell, Thomas G. Dopplick

* Reply to Robert G. Watts' "Discussion of 'Questions Concerning the Possible Influence of Anthropogenic CO2 on Atmospheric Temperature'"
(Journal of Applied Meteorology, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp. 114–117, January 1981)
- Reginald E. Newell, Thomas G. Dopplick

Climate Sensitivity: +0.3 °C

CO2-induced global warming: a skeptic's view of potential climate change
(Climate Research, Volume 10, Number 1, pp. 69–82, April 1998)
- Sherwood B. Idso

Climate Sensitivity: +0.4 °C

Revised 21st century temperature projections
(Climate Research, Volume 23, Number 1, pp. 1–9, December 2002)
- Patrick J. Michaels, Paul C. Knappenberger, Oliver W. Frauenfeld, Robert E. Davis

Climate Sensitivity: +1.9 °C
Limits on CO2 Climate Forcing from Recent Temperature Data of Earth
(Energy & Environment, Volume 20, Number 1-2, pp. 177-189, January 2009)
- David H. Douglass, John R. Christy

Climate Sensitivity: +1.1 °C

On the Observational Determination of Climate Sensitivity and Its Implications
(Asia-Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Sciences, Volume 47, Number 4, pp. 377-390, August 2011)
- Richard S. Lindzen, Yong-Sang Choi

Climate Sensitivity: +0.7 °C

https://friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/RebuttalSkepticalScience.pdf
http://www.populartechnology.net/2012/03/truth-about-skeptical-science.html