NASA wails about greenhouse gases causing Global Warming, cunningly ignores water vapor

If you pay attention (spoiler: you don't) you know the approximate percentage of CO2 in Earth's atmosphere, right?  

Just kidding: you have no idea.  All you know is, govmint sciency pipo say CO2 is gonna kill all life on duh Erf!

Okay, CO2 comprises 424 parts per million (ppm) of the atmosphere, or 0.0424%.  By contrast, average water vapor in atm is 0.4%, or 4,000 ppm--almost ten times the percentage of CO2.

Now, which do ya think traps more heat: CO2 or water vapor?  

Here's NASA--and keep in mind that the guud, honest gubmint employees at NASA are paid to be huge pushers of duh "CO2 iz gonna kill all duh life on Erf!" theory.  So any admission they make that would tend to show a different factor as being the main cause of Global Warming must be regarded as an "admission against interest," thus likely to be true and then some.  Title of NASA piece:

"How atmospheric water vapor amplifies the greenhouse effect"

"Amplifies," eh?  The word "amplifies" implies that water vapor isn't a major factor, leading readers to think we must look elsewhere for the actual cause.  So the title leads the naive reader to believe that water vapor doesn't actually cause warming.  Bullshit.  Below, NASA admits that water vapor is not only the most abundant "greenhouse gas," but is responsible for half of the heat retained on Earth.

Water vapor is Earth’s most abundant greenhouse gas.  It’s responsible for about half of Earth’s greenhouse effect — the process that occurs when gases in Earth’s atmosphere trap the Sun’s heat.   Greenhouse gases keep our planet livable. Without them, Earth’s surface temperature would be colder by about 59 degrees Fahrenheit.

Since the late 1800s, global average surface temperatures have increased by about 2 F. [1.1 C] The amount of atmospheric water vapor is increasing 1 to 2% per decade.  For every degree Celsius that Earth’s atmospheric temperature rises, the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere can increase by about 7%.

Wait...in the paragraph just above this one the NASA author of this seeming science said water vapor accounts for half of the "greenhouse effect."  And immediately above he claims the amount of water vapor in the air may have increased by "about 7%" in about 140 years.  You said water vapor rose by 7% since the late 1800s, and accounts for half of global warming, is the Earth's temperature 7% higher than in the late 1800s?

But watch as NASA totally dismisses that damaging conclusion below:

Some people mistakenly believe water vapor is the main driver of Earth’s current warming. But increased water vapor doesn’t cause global warming.  Instead it’s a consequence of it. Increased water vapor in the atmosphere amplifies the warming caused by other greenhouse gases.

Wait...NASA says the Earth's temp began to increase in "the late 1800s."  How many cars existed in the late 1800s?  How much heavy industry back then?  How many big coal-fired powerplants?

No cars at all.  No coal powerplants and damn near no huge industries.  Yet NASA claims the Erf's temperature started rising back then.  If CO2 wasn't being emitted at even a fraction of today's levels back then, what do you claim caused the temp to start increasing back then, eh?

As greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane increase, Earth’s temperature rises in response.

Wait, what about water vapor?   You just said it's the cause of half of global warming.  You said water vapor has increased by as much as 7%.  Yet you totally--and conveniently for your goals--imply that water vapor isn't a big cause of Global Worming.  Hmmm....

Finally, 20 paragraphs deep--after most readers have concluded that water vapor has NO effect on warming, we get this admission:

Since warmer air holds more moisture, the amount of water vapor in the air increases. The water vapor then absorbs heat radiated from Earth and prevents it from escaping out to space. This further warms the atmosphere, resulting in even more water vapor in the atmosphere. This is what scientists call a "positive feedback loop." Scientists estimate this effect more than doubles the warming that would happen due to increasing carbon dioxide alone.

Ooohhh, a "positive feedback loop," eh?  Okay, that's potentially bad.  But you ignore the fact that more water vapor makes more clouds, and clouds reflect...wait for it...sunlight.  Which reduces the amount of heat absorbed by the Earth.  Hmmm...sounds self-regulating, eh?

Now read on as NASA lists the so-called greenhouse gases:

The greenhouse gases in the dry air in Earth’s atmosphere include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone, and chlorofluorocarbons.

Following the earlier setup, the author omits water from the list of "greenhouse gases."  Because it's not on NASA's really scienc-y list, most readers understandably think water vapor is NOT a greenhouse gas.  But the author disguises this by saying "dry air."  It's a clever trick.

While making up around 0.05% of Earth’s total atmosphere, they play major roles in trapping Earth’s radiant heat from the Sun and keeping it from escaping into space. Each is driven directly by human activities.>>

Recall that CO2 by itself was 0.0428% of the atmosphere.  Adding methane, nitrous oxide, ozone and "chlorofluorocarbons" only raises the total to 0.05%, so those four new gases combined amount to 0.0072 percent of the atmosphere.  And we absolutely need ozone because it blocks cancer-causing ultraviolet light from reaching Earth.  So don't whine about ozone, eh?

Again, for reference, there almost ten times more water vapor in the air than CO2, and eight times more than the entire list of "other" greenhouse gases.  But again, the NASA author is ignoring water vapor.  And there sure as hell is a reason.

None of the five greenhouse gases listed above can be changed into liquid in the atmosphere.  If non-condensable gases weren’t increasing, the amount of atmospheric water vapor would be unchanged from its pre-industrial revolution levels.>>

And yet you claimed temps started increasing back before there was ANY appreciable carbon dioxide release.  What caused that increase, eh?  You won't say, but clearly it was NOT CO2.

Carbon Dioxide Is Still King

Carbon dioxide is responsible for a third of the total warming of Earth’s climate due to human-produced greenhouse gases. Small increases in its concentration have major effects. A key reason is the length of time carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere.

Methane, carbon dioxide, and chlorofluorocarbons don’t condense, and they aren’t particularly chemically reactive or easily broken down by light.  So they remain in the atmosphere for anywhere from years to centuries, depending on the gas.

Then the NASA article shows a table listing CO2 at the top, with a "100-year global warming potential" of one.  Next is methane, with a potential of 28-36.  Then is nitrous oxide, listed as 265-298.

Wait, where's water vapor on this list?

Not shown.  Yet it contributes half of the total heat-trapping effect on the planet.  So why did they leave it out?

Because...wait for it...they can't blame YOU for water vapor, and there's no way to do anything at all about it, so they can't plausibly tax you to 'fix it.' 

To repeat for my Democrat friends:  Cunning politicians know they can't feasibly tax you to reduce water vapor, because all but the dumbest people on Earth would quickly realize it was a total scam.  So although the Powers That Be grudgingly admit (20 paragraphs in) that water accounts for fully half the heat retention, they quickly play that off as "Increased water vapor is NOT a cause of ANYTHING, but merely...an effect of the other gases."

So they effectively ignore water vapor and instead scream about something they can blame YOU for doing (driving, heating your home, using fertilizer to grow food and so on).

Starting to see the con yet?  

You have no way of refuting what the "experts" tell you, so you believe whatever they say--because you naively believe they're honest.

I don't wanna say they're literally dishonest, but they obviously know who's paying 'em.  Government employees get paid to take whatever position their bosses want.  University scientists are in a slightly better position because if they have tenure they can't be fired, but if they blow the whistle on the scam they can't get their papers published.  And the university has often cut their travel budget, citing some bullshit excuse.  (Amusingly, no other department travel budget gets cut.)  The message is clear, and every other academic quickly gets it:  Don't tell the truth that Global Warming is NOT caused by CO2.  Or methane, or nitrous oxide.

SO...your last line of defense against spending literally trillions on useless bullshit programs to "cut global worming" is...congress.  Unfortunately congress doesn't know anymore about the science than you do.  And they all realize that voting against any policy that claims it will reduce global worming makes 'em unpopular.  So...

Typical Democrat: "I believe guvmint scientists always tell the truth.  Why would they lie?  So what if we spend half a trillion or so on projects to reduce CO2 from the air, including those Faaaabulous just-announced projects to actually remove CO2 and store it underground!  The govmint has LOTS of money, and if it needs more it just prints it, right?  So it really doesn't cost anything to be pro-active [cool buzzword, eh?] about trying to cut Global Warming, eh?"

So the main so-called "fix" pushed by the biden regime is to stop producing oil and gas, cuz those *could* be used for heat--which makes the "dread poison" CO2!!  But what cutting oil and gas really does is doom your kids to a life similar to that of third-world residents.  Because what enables Americans to live as well as we do is...wait for it...abundant, low-cost energy.

End abundant, low-cost energy and you drop to third-world status. 

The biden regime constantly tells you you need to buy an electric car, implying that doing so will save the planet.  They never explicitly say that, of course, but the subliminal message is there: "Good people care about saving the planet, so they buy electric cars."  And moronic, dipshit pols in California and other Dem-ruled shitholes have already passed laws making it illegal to sell gasoline-powered cars after 2035 or so.  Seriously.

Democrat: "Why you say dat a problem?  Electric cars beez guuud!  We jus' plug 'em in at night an' ev'ryting beez FINE!  Cuz we gots LOTS of 'lectricity.  An' 'lectric don' make none o' dat awful CO2 whut beez killin' duh Erf!"

Wow.

If you continue to believe the con, you deserve what's coming.

Source: NASA  

https://climate.nasa.gov/explore/ask-nasa-climate/3143/steamy-relationships-how-atmospheric-water-vapor-amplifies-earths-greenhouse-effect/