Too Much Medical Marijuana In Boulder

To those of us living in Boulder and surrounding communities, it may come as a surprise that many people remain unconvinced that the use of fossil fuels is the main contributor to current climate change

An example of what happens when such concentrations are too high can be seen by looking at our planetary neighbor, Venus: the Venusian atmosphere is more than 96 percent carbon dioxide (compared to 0.038 percent on Earth), and the temperature can reach 460 C, which is hotter than your oven can get. On the other hand, the planet Mars has a very thin atmosphere is quite cold at -63 degrees C (-81 F). Venus, Earth and Mars are often referred to as the “Goldilocks” planets. Venus is the porridge that is too hot, Mars is porridge that is too cold and Earth is just right.

http://www.boulderweekly.com/

That is what smoking the whacky weed will do for you. Mars has 95% CO2, and the partial pressure of CO2 in Mars atmosphere is about an order of magnitude larger than on Earth. Yet temperatures are extremely cold on Mars. How did the Boulder author miss that part?

Advertisement

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Too Much Medical Marijuana In Boulder

  1. Al Gored says:

    But isn’t stress from AGW now a legitimate reason for getting access to this medicine?

    Not yet?

  2. GregO says:

    “Starting April 30th, consumers using their American Express cards to buy medical marijuana received notice that their cards were declined. The rejection of the cards is due to American Express’ decision to no longer allow purchases of such products with their cards.”

    http://www.businessinsider.com/american-express-nixes-purchase-of-medical-marijuana-2011-5#ixzz1NKJqkC29

  3. Independent says:

    And Venus is closer to the sun, Mars further away…but I’m sure that has a negligible effect. CO2 is the real “whacky weed” don’t you know.

  4. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

    OT

    but I think related.

    A debate on the BBC about whether bin Laden should have been killed, caputred, or whatever. The gamut seems to be covered.

    I’m with Douglass Murry in it.

  5. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

    OT

    This is the best Michelle Obama could come up with to dress in to meet the Queen:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/8533499/Michelle-Obama-fights-to-control-summer-dress-in-windy-London.html

    I’m at a loss for words.

  6. A K Haart says:

    “Mars has a very thin atmosphere”

    While Venus has a surface atmospheric pressure of about 90 atmospheres. For many folk, that’s what’s known as a clue.

  7. Jimbo says:

    I noticed the avoidance of Mars’ co2 also. 😉

  8. Stefan says:

    Did I hear once that the moon reaches over 100C in the day in sunlight? If that is true, then isn’t the question just:

    how can the moon get hotter than the Earth if the Earth is supposed to also have a blanket of CO2 keeping it extra warm?

    I’m asking here because it seems like such basic issue, that I wonder if I just totally misunderstood it.

  9. Richard Todd says:

    If we continue to increase carbon dioxide levels, we may reach a point where our joints won’t light!

  10. PhilJourdan says:

    A mind is a terrible thing to waste – unless it is already wasted.

  11. Charles Higley says:

    Stupid is as stupid does.

    The 90 atmospheres of pressure on Venus completely determines the temperature. Likewise, the low atmospheric pressure on Mars explains its chilly climate.

    Atmospheric composition is either largely irrelevant or a minor factor, just was the Earth’s climate is about 30 deg C higher than it would be without any heat-trapping gas. However, most of the warmth probably is from having an atmosphere at all and water vapor is responsible for 95% of the heat-trapping effect. Also, the effects of added heat-trapping gases follow Beer’s Law and more CO2 has an ever decreasing effect, being 90-95% spent.

    They claim that doubling CO2 would warm the atmosphere by 0.1 deg C and then water vapor augments that like a magnifying glass. In the real world, the effect of doubled CO2 is more like 0.01 deg C, and CO2 and water vapor get in each other’s way such that they do not simply add their effects, let alone any fabled magnification. [There is also not enough available carbon to double CO2, even if we tried; we might manage about 20%. Why? CO2 partitions 50 to 1 into the oceans such that, to double CO2, we would have to produce 51 times the empirical amount to double CO2 in the atmosphere.]

    What does happen, if heat-trapping gases were to warm the lower atmosphere, is the convectional flow of the atmosphere, responsible for 85% of heat transfer to altitude (and patently ignored by the IPCC, shhhh), would be ramped up, effectively increasing the heat transfer rate of this huge, global heat engine. The overall effect would be a bit of cooling, not warming.

  12. suyts says:

    lol, I keep re-reading the paragraph, so does the author posit CO2= a denser atmosphere?

  13. Bruce says:

    Ummm … Vostok Antarctica has gotten down to -90C.

    Thats a powerful gas Co2 – makes it colder than Mars.

  14. Scott says:

    So anyone that’s been here a while knows I disagree with the whole pressure determines temperature regime. However, that’s not what I’m here to discuss.

    I’d rather look at the logic presented in the Boulder Weekly article.

    We have:

    Temps: Venus > Earth > Mars

    and

    Distance to Sun: Venus < Earth Earth > Mars

    and finally

    CO2: Venus > Earth < Mars

    So both proximity and pressure show perfect correlations/anticorrelations, while CO2 is the only one that doesn't show a relationship like that. Yet CO2 is pointed to as the sole culprit???? Yes, I realize that everything is interrelated (line broadening of CO2 due to pressure being an obvious one), but still…what kind of logic is being presented?

    -Scott

    • suyts says:

      Exactly, there isn’t a line of logic that I can follow.

      But from the para quoted, I get, “Venus: the Venusian atmosphere is more than 96 percent carbon dioxide (compared to 0.038 percent on Earth), ..”. So, Venus CO2> Earth CO2. And Venus temp > Earth temp. So, ^ CO2 = ^temp.
      But, then next sentence, “On the other hand, the planet Mars has a very thin atmosphere is quite cold at -63 degrees C (-81 F)” So, Earth P > Mars P and Earth temp > Mars Temp so, ^ P = ^ T

      All that is very nice, except one (CO2) isn’t obviously connected with the other (pressure), nor does the author attempt to connect the two. What kind of disjointed logic is that? Do these people reason through what they write? Or even read what they write?
      (I’m using the “^” as a sign for “more or increased”)

    • PhilJourdan says:

      Scott – Liberal Logic – the less logic – the more liberal.

    • Scott says:

      I think people realize what I meant, but I had an obvious typo:

      Distance to Sun: Venus Mars

      Should have been Venus < Earth < Mars

      -Scott

    • mkelly says:

      “So anyone that’s been here a while knows I disagree with the whole pressure determines temperature regime.”

      Mt. Everest is roughly 28 degrees N latitude. Daytona Beach, Fl. is roughly 29 degrees N latitude. Since they are roughly the same latitude they get roughly the same sunshine. So why is Daytona Beach warmer than the top of Everest?

      I am not sure “determines” is the right word but it should not be eschewed in toto.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s