NASA admits to warming planet.. Satellite shots - Politics | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Theories and happenings too odd for the main forums.
Look, the Club of Rome, and the British elite came up with this scam to dupe the gullible...It takes little common sense to see that carbon is irrelevant compared to what countries around the world are doing...Besides ,carbon levels are a reflection of temperature,they dont dictate it. By the way, I love the word denier,Ya, I deny not being gullible when their own papers admit the scam

NASA... 5) Man-made Clouds
NASA noted in an October 2005 newsletter, and from other study results, notes that increasingly persistent contrails are turning into man-made clouds that are “…trapping warmth in the atmosphere and exacerbating global warming…” NASA goes on to note that: “…Any increase in global cloud cover will contribute to long-term changes in Earth’s climate. Likewise, any change in Earth’s climate may have effects on natural resources…” (The Power Point Presentation begins at this point in Rosalind’s presentation.) ... speech.htm

Jets leaving persistent jet contrails are changing our climate to the degree that one jet leaving a persistent jet contrail has the following affect according to NASA’s Patrick Minnis (February 2007): “…We had found that (jet) contrails were producing much more cloud cover than we ever thought they did. This one particular aircraft produced a contrail that covered an area of four thousand square kilometers and lingered for six hours. But we also found that there were contrails covering much larger areas and lasting more than twenty hours…”

Dr. Wayne Evans, Atmospheric Scientist: “…You see the two contrails forming…cirrus clouds… While most natural clouds actually reflect more sunlight back into space than they supply infrared heat energy towards the earth. However, cirrus clouds are different. They actually radiate more heat energy than they reflect solar energy back into space. Therefore, cirrus clouds contribute to global warming…”

The news whitwashes the chemtrails before you see are some loop feeds ... 230UTC.gif ... 230UTC.gif
User avatar
By Repeat to Fade
Before I even start:

carbon levels are a reflection of temperature

Why is the earth as warm as it is? I mean in general. Nothing in regards to rising temperature. But where does our heat come from?
User avatar
By liberallad
In all honesty, how is this a surprise.

NASA sends aircraft that go to different planets. There is no doubt that the waste these rockets produce is bad for the environment and there's not much that can change that. NASA is not going to stop their research and finding some sort of green alternative isn't likely. Regardless, the stuff they put in the air is worse than I would originally have imagined.
User avatar
By Nattering Nabob
NASA admits to warming planet..

I too admit to warming the planet...I emit methane gasses daily which contribute to global warming:

Methane's role in global warming underestimated

By Dan Vergano, USA TODAY

Greenhouse gas calculations blame carbon dioxide too much for global warming, and methane too little, suggest researchers Thursday.

In the journal Science, a team led by Drew Shindell of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York finds that chemical interactions between greenhouse gases other than carbon dioxide cause more global warming than previously estimated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and other efforts.

"The total amount of warming doesn't change, just the balance of gasses behind it," Shindell says.

The world's climate warmed an average about 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit from 1906 to 2005, very likely due to industrial greenhouse gases, the IPCC concluded in 2007, adding that carbon dioxide is "most important" greenhouse gas. Methane is a greenhouse gas produced by lanfills, agriculture and some industries.

In the study, Shindell and colleagues added chemical interactions between aerosols and greenhouse gases such as methane and carbon monoxide to a century-long model of climate change. They wanted to see the effects on each gas's "Global Warming Potential," or individual contribution to global warming.

Methane played a bigger role than expected, suggesting that climate treaties such as the 1997 Kyoto Protocol need to consider it more carefully, the study says.

Greenhouse gases are transparent to sunlight, but retain heat in the atmosphere, raising global average temperatures. Burning fossil fuels, deforestation and other human activities have raised greenhouse gas levels to historic values in the last three centuries.

"There is no way, other than aggressive geoengineering, to come close to meeting the world leaders? goal of overall warming not exceeding (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial (levels) without focusing on BOTH carbon dioxide and non-carbon dioxide emissions," says Michael MacCracken of the Climate Institute, by email. "This is not an either-or choice — we must do both to have any chance at all."

Because non-carbon dioxide gasses also cause air pollution, MacCracken and Shindell both suggest that politicians may embrace limiting those emissions in developing nations more quickly than carbon dioxide ones. China has about 750,000 air-quality-related deaths annually according to the World Health Organization, for example.

In December, representatives of 192 nations head to Copenhagen to work on an international agreement to limit emissions. On the international front, "getting priorities right on the non-carbon dioxide greenhouse gases has some real value," says MacCracken, a former Clinton-administration climate scientist. If negotiations keep stalling on carbon dioxide emissions debate, then "all of our efforts on the non-carbon dioxide greenhouse gases won?t make much difference," he says. "There needs to be a deal and, in my view, cutting non-carbon dioxide greenhouse gases and soot can be a helpful bridge to getting an agreement."

Current emissions of aerosols actually cool the atmosphere an average about 1.26 degrees Fahrenheit, notes aerosol expert Joyce Penner of the University of Michigan. "So changing aerosol concentrations through changing greenhouse gas emissions is certainly a factor that needs to be considered," Penner says." I think that what is needed here is a holistic approach to climate control that takes into account all the factors that influence climate change (including the present day "protection" by aerosol emissions)." Source

I'm glad I got that off my chest...
User avatar
By PrintzofDenmark
liberallad wrote:NASA sends aircraft that go to different planets. There is no doubt that the waste these rockets produce is bad for the environment and there's not much that can change that. NASA is not going to stop their research and finding some sort of green alternative isn't likely. Regardless, the stuff they put in the air is worse than I would originally have imagined.

Ha ha ha, you do know that the space shuttle is fuelled by hydrogen and oxygen, so the only "waste" it produces is water and some metal scrap on the bottom of the pacific ocean. But okay the solid-state rockets are fuelled by something else, Aluminium and iron combined with oxygen. Still the waste is aluminium oxide and rust not anything to be afraid of.

Your article is from 2015 and is outdated. Cuba h[…]

And you're unable to refute that socialism, the al[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

Making whataboutisms about colonialism does not ch[…]

USA has lot of investment from EU-Companies, who m[…]