physicsguy:

Yes, I’m aware of that though not the name. Not much effect is still an effect.

My understanding is the effect is logarithmic. Each doubling of CO2 increases the radiative forcing. So it takes more and more CO2 to have a warming effect, but that doesn’t mean the effect goes to zero.

Water vapor doesn’t accumulate in the atmosphere as CO2 does. Different situation.

“Fear mongering predictions about climate change keep falling apart”–
https://nypost.com/2025/09/15/opinion/fearmongering-predictions-about-climate-change-keep-falling-apart/

I didn’t view Plaiss’ linked content. But your comment is excellent.

My experiences as a physics educator spanned from fun, to pleasant, to miserable, but one of the high points was the one time I was allowed to teach basic physics. The course eventually arrived at the point where I, the lecturer, was supposed to say “Blah, blah, Poisson’s spot, blah, blah.” Well, I remembered my college physics course and how impressed I was by that example of wave theory, and this time I said, “Hell, let’s demonstrate this!”

I used a nice laser pointer, a hand-held lens to spread the beam, a small ball bearing glued to a microscope slide, and a sheet of Xerox paper as a screen. With the room lights off, it worked beautifully.

While I have a slight knowledge of physics history, I did not know that Poisson was a nay sayer on whether the spot would appear. Fascinating!

I didn’t view Plaiss’ linked content. But your comment is excellent.

My experiences as a physics educator spanned from fun, to pleasant, to miserable, but one of the high points was the one time I was allowed to teach basic physics. The course eventually arrived at the point where I, the lecturer, was supposed to say “Blah, blah, Poisson’s spot, blah, blah.” Well, I remembered my college physics course and how impressed I was by that example of wave theory, and this time I said, “Hell, let’s demonstrate this!”

I used a nice laser pointer, a hand-held lens to spread the beam, a small ball bearing glued to a microscope slide, and a sheet of Xerox paper as a screen. With the room lights off, it worked beautifully.

While I have a slight knowledge of physics history, I did not know that Poisson was a nay sayer on whether the spot would appear. Fascinating!

Look up Beers law vis CO2. The 15micron photons available are depleted by 300ppm CO2. Adding more CO2 doesn’t have much effect on its greenhouse property. Water vapor, by orders of magnitude, is the primary GH gas.

According to the reports linked below NASA, Harvard, and others studying 3I/Atlas have detected that 3I/Atlas is changing it’s course.*

Moreover, they’ve also detected that 3I/Atlas is releasing gas on a precise schedule, every 17 minutes. Random ejections of gas by a comet, yes, but on a strict 17 minute schedule?

No comet does that.

So, it is increasingly looking like 3I/Atlas is some sort of Alien technology.

Current thinking is that, instead of passing well away from Mars–as it would have before these course changes–3I/Atlas could possibly strike Mars and, if it does so, the enormous amount of energy released by this impact, and its destructive power, will not only destroy all of our various rovers on the ground and our satellites in orbit, it will also eject a huge wall of debris which, it is estimated, several years in the future, will intersect with Earth.

* See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCDgjo7qcqo
and see also https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCDgjo7qcqo&t=15s

We are now pumping 37 billion metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year … increasing each year.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas. I see no reason to doubt adding that amount of CO2 each year doesn’t have an effect.

I just don’t see this is in the apocalyptic terms the climate change orthodoxy insists upon. Mine is called the lukewarmist position.

Whatever the effects are, however, I believe we are better off dealing with them as the arise rather than to attempting to abruptly dismantle the global energy infrastructure with Net Zero carbon emissions and convert to “sustainable” energy.

Even if we had to, I still think it would be a disaster to put the climate change folks in charge. They are a leftist political movement, not scientific. They would make things worse.