Is anyone else buying carbon credits to offset CO2 from travel?

[tautologies]

Thank you for responding as it helps to have a scientist's viewpoint. But by you referencing one of my posts, but quoting another of my posts, you are at least confusing, or at most intentionally misdirecting.

Please let me know if, from the view of a scientist (you), my below response to Greenturtle is in error, or if you agree with my statement.

The nitty gritty details can be debated till the end of time. The big picture is plain to see.

.....No way would a honest and conscientious scientist ever agree with these statements. The smallest of details often modify the big picture in the biggest of ways......

Just a warning, I am looking for your answer as my path to saying "checkmate".

Definitely not my intention to mislead. I think there is not enough detail to say either way. Discussions like these aren't scientific discussions, not even close. In general I can see both of your point of views.
In a non-scientific debate Green could argue that by looking at the overwhelming evidence presented by scientists it is plain to see that we have an impact, and for us who aren't specialists at climatology it makes little sense to discuss details. Obviously part of the issue is that a climatologist does work in details and provide part of the overall picture. If one of those parts fail, it MAY (not necessarily) falsify the model. The most common path is that the model is adjusted as most of these details aren't significant enough to fully invalidate the model.

A model is a simplified version of reality that does a job of predicting. If I say given all the variables the model predicts a future value of 10 and the future value ends up being 9, then it does not mean my model is wrong it means we need to look at how the model was inaccurate, and how we can improve. The way climatology works is that our models improve radically with available data, and maturation of models. This development is has been radical in the last decade.

When that is said, our perception usually is the big picture as the models are refined the predictions improve and our overall big picture becomes more correct. Not sure if that explains how I think you both are right? I do agree with Green makes little sense for us to argue details on the models because neither of us are climatologists, because MM's "evidence" / of points of contention supplied are usually nonsense and really not worth anyone's time. I do agree that a climate scientist would normally not argue just big picture. On the other side one of the first checks you put on a project is face validity which is basically a heuristic sense to see if the model is measuring what it is supposed to measure.

I guess that was a pretty long answer to your question.

[marlboroughman]

If anybody was wondering what these guys are talking about, pretty much nothing. It is a technique known as a word salad.
My question still not answered. How the volume of 99.9% gets warmed by volume of just 0.1 (of which 0.04 are magic beans)

[jumptheshark]

The oceans have 99.9% of the earths thermal energy,

You sure about that one ombre?

Pretty sure there is a bit o thermal energy a little further down.

Wait a sec, Don't tell me your a flat earth guy too!?!!

[Greenturtle]

Buying kites, do you read the marketing from the manufacturer only?
--(The information the coal-oil-gas corporations feeds to us through their paid-off politicians and “scientists“)

Or do you read the magazine reviews too?
—(What you hear or read on the various news outlets and internet sites with all their statistics and studies and questionable motives)

Or do you also take into consideration the experience of a friend who has flown the kite?
--(I have friends who work in coal-oil-gas extraction, theyre not shy to tell me it’s destructive as f*k. But I already knew that. Other friends say the fishing in you-name-the-bay has been declining steadily and half of what they do catch is covered in sores etc etc etc)

Or do you fly the kite yourself first before buying it?
--(Look at the world for yourself. See the sheer quantity of pavement and rooftops, deforestation, dead reefs. See how humanity has expanded its industry and development to almost every corner of the globe in such a short time. See and smell the belching smoke from so many sources. Drink the tainted water and see what happens to you. IMAGINE what was there before we came along, and think about the magnitude of the difference. How could any of this impact such a biiiiig planet. Its not that big any more. We’ve been fighting over real estate for a long time already. But, I can still breath, and theres kiteboarding to look forward to all summer, so things cant be that bad............................................................

[marlboroughman]

Wait a sec, Don't tell me your a flat earth guy too!?!!

I am the Oceans driving the climate type a guy, taking energy from the Sun type a guy. How does it work according to you? I am all ears.
Where the energy came from in the Oceans during last two super El Ninos? Tell us. Magic Beans guy. If it came from the atmosphere we must be really boiling.

[jumptheshark]

You make a lot of ussumptions about everyone you comment towards. It's half the reason your such an a$$hole.

Why would anyone ever want to debate you? You don't debate. Youre the biggest word and graph and clip salad the forum has ever seen all while conveniently never actually addressing all of the other issues your arguments are fraught with.

You've never seen me selling magic beans, but rather consistently comment on the destructive nature of your preferred energy sources. Every time it's pointed out to you, you ignore it like the true zealot you are.

Stick to sewing machines. At least with that you can put a veneer of helpful on your otherwise trolling presence here.

[Greenturtle]

If anybody was wondering what these guys are talking about, pretty much nothing. It is a technique known as a word salad.
My question still not answered. How the volume of 99.9% gets warmed by volume of just 0.1 (of which 0.04 are magic beans)

Take a baking pan half full of water out into the sun and let it acclimate with a thermometer in said water.

Now take saran wrap and cover the pan. The saran wrap is so thin, its hardly even there, how could it possibly make any difference when there is so much water, I mean its such a small thing, surely the thermometer will not budge, oh $h!t! It is going up! Fast! What???? How can this be??????? Quick! Search the Internet for statistics! Rebuke rebuke rebuke! Its plastic! Its not the same as gasses!!!! Not a good analagy!!! Numbers numbers numbers meaningless numbers

[marlboroughman]

Tough to answer if I don't let you hide behind "computer model", isn't it.

[marlboroughman]

Do you think CO2 did this? If so how?



Can CO2 do this? Demonstrate, please.

[marlboroughman]

Hello!!! Scientists, PHD's, not even a word salad, nothing?