The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere is a function of temperature. When Earth warms, water evaporates and when Earth cools, water vapor condenses. Doubling water vapor requires a 10 C increase in temperature, but won't induce a 10 C increase in temperature. If this were not the case, we would have a runaway greenhouse effect.
Water vapor is a feedback, not a forcing.
You are still linking to the "Unknown Comic"? From the article by Steven Goddard on Anthony's notorious psuedo-science website, "I’m a professional infrared astronomer..." Really? Then why does he/she not show up in any of the professional journals as such or on any of the lists of professional astronomers? - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ast...
How many layers are there in the atmosphere?
How many of these layers does WV exist? - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_vapor
How well mixed is WV in the atmosphere?
How variable is the amount of WV in the atmosphere? (Hint-think evaporation and precipitation)
How many of these layers does CO2 exist?
How well mixed is CO2 in the atmosphere?
How long does CO2 stay in the atmosphere?
What direction do greenhouse gases radiate the long waves back out at?
Steven Goddard has placed the atmosphere of this planet into a single layer. He certainly cannot be speaking about our atmosphere.
Sure. It's all a huge hoax so people will keep getting their paycheques.
http://www.chem.arizona.edu/chemt/C21/si...
Meanwhile, back in reality, the Canadian government is currently removing climate scientists from their field, they are currently burning past climate science data, and a whole lot of other things in an attempt to hide the data so people will continue being interested in the tar sands. Then again, apparently this same government wants AGW to be a reality so they can tax us to death. Do deniers not even think?
Perhaps you should find out what this 'infrared astronomers' name is? you take a post on an anti-science blog to heart without even a name or a clue as to who it is.
Ah this old chestnut. This debate started back in the early part of the last century. It was debunked as an explanation in the 1950s and 60s. You really have to start labelling this argument as 'desperation' when people at the beginning of one century can't be arsed to read the papers from the middle of the last.
What an idiotic rant. The guy may be senile. He says that "nobody talks about water vapor", when in fact everybody talks about water vapor. Water vapor is a known important feedback. It is a key part of climate sensitivity. Again, somebody is showing he is a denier only because he doesn't know what he is talking about. The site is intended to fool uneducated people and it appears to have worked once again.
Both.
CO2 is a greenhouse gas hence provides warming.
Water vapor is also a greenhouse gas but is a function of temperature, so it's a feedback to CO2.
Both are in climate models.
he's dead wrong on " CO2 doesn’t absorb or radiate in the portion of the spectrum corresponding with earth’s surface temps of 220 to 320 K"
I would say poor recording and data adjustments(cool the past, warm the present).
Goddard again Why do you keep buying into the trash you link to
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/01/25/ir-expert-speaks-out-after-40-years-of-silence-its-the-water-vapor-stupid-and-not-the-co2/
