Emeritus Professor of Physics resigns over AGW FRAUD!

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

The old canard about volcanoes is exactly that, the amount of CO2 is minuscule compared to the total emissions. It doesn't help the argument to perpetuate myths.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11638

It's no myth, and I didn't say volcanoes emit CO2 to any great amount. The volcanic ash blankets the atmosphere, and causes an extreme amplification of the greenhouse effect for a period of time. This often causes median surface temps on the planet to drop. They believe this was what sparked the Little Ice Age, and maybe even the Big Ice Age as well.

 

[tinfoil]

Are you a research climatologist tinfoil? If NOT, then all you are doing is what's called emoting...

STFU. You aren't a climatologist either.

I've done my own researching into every aspect of global warming. I've spent two years or more posting the details and stuff I said two years ago is now being said by your authorities. The CO2 forcing was overstated. there's a link in this thread to a study which showed the effect of infared light COMING FROM THE SUN was responsible for more warming than models had accounted for and which ahd attributed the forcing to CO2. the models need adjustment.

Exactly what I've been saying for two years.

I even estimated the over-estimate of the CO2 forcing was about 30%

CO2 is at saturation. There is not enough geenhouse effect at further increases of CO2 to worry about. It's a fucking scam.

 

[tinfoil]

It's no myth, and I didn't say volcanoes emit CO2 to any great amount. The volcanic ash blankets the atmosphere, and causes an extreme amplification of the greenhouse effect for a period of time. This often causes median surface temps on the planet to drop. They believe this was what sparked the Little Ice Age, and maybe even the Big Ice Age as well.

Do you have the source of that? I'd like to read it. I had not heard that before.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Do you have the source of that? I'd like to read it. I had not heard that before.

There are a bunch of more detailed sources, but it is mentioned in the Wiki link...

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age"]Little Ice Age - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png" class="image"><img alt="" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c1/2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png/275px-2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/c/c1/2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png/275px-2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png[/ame]

Throughout the Little Ice Age, the world also experienced heightened volcanic activity.[59] When a volcano erupts, its ash reaches high into the atmosphere and can spread to cover the whole Earth. This ash cloud blocks out some of the incoming solar radiation, leading to worldwide cooling that can last up to two years after an eruption. Also emitted by eruptions is sulfur in the form of SO2 gas. When this gas reaches the stratosphere, it turns into sulfuric acid particles, which reflect the sun's rays, further reducing the amount of radiation reaching Earth's surface. The 1815 eruption of Tambora in Indonesia blanketed the atmosphere with ash; the following year, 1816, came to be known as the Year Without a Summer, when frost and snow were reported in June and July in both New England and Northern Europe. Other volcanoes that erupted during the era and may have contributed to the cooling include Billy Mitchell (ca. 1580 ± 20 ), Mount Parker (1641), Long Island (Papua New Guinea) (ca. 1660), and Huaynaputina (1600).[16]

 

[Bfgrn]

What I find strange is that nowhere here is there any attempt to answer why Goldman Sachs is so desperate to get carbon trading up and running? Do you seriously think they give a shit about the environment?

They have been involved in just about every bubble in history. You know as well as I do that they will use carbon offsets to devise derivatives, in the same way that sub-prime mortgages were traded and look how well that turned out. It is another bubble waiting to burst.

I share your concern about derivatives, but you want me to move forward with a debate just as long as it starts with me swallowing all the spin and Al Gore conspiracy theories on cap & trade from your captured sources. What I'm trying to point out tom is that your sources have NO objectivity. They have an agenda, and it is not the agenda that American families share. It is an agenda that benefits a very small group of corporations, cartels and industries that make themselves rich by making the rest of us poor. Your sources don't offer the plus and minus of cap & trade. They offer spin, fear-mongering, guilt by association and slander.

I am concerned about any bill that goes before Congress. The Waxman-Markey climate bill is one of them. Like any legislation in Washington, the Waxman-Markey climate bill is being inundated by lobbying for the benefit of special interest groups, corporations, banks and other interests. Goldman Sachs is not the only one with lobbyists representing them on climate issues. Banks like JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs already have active carbon trading desks that deal in instruments connected to Europe's cap-and-trade system and voluntary markets here.

But the real questions are; WHEN does America finally craft an energy policy? Will we wait for gasoline to go back up to $5 per gallon? And WHAT alternatives are being offered, the status quo is not an option.

I hope you are aware that cap & trade is a market based approach to control pollution as opposed to "command and control" regulation. Americans need an education on free markets. We need to understand that a 'cheap' energy sources like coal is really the most expensive. In a true free market coal could not compete with efficient sources like wind and solar. But industries like coal and petroleum through political clout have bought the ability to escape the rules of a free market by externalizing their costs and internalizing their profits. We have socialism and welfare for corporations and 'fee' markets and feeding troughs for the people.

There is one thing that always gets lost in discussions about climate and pollution. That is the false argument that we must choose between the economy and the environment. Good environmental policies and practices are also good economic practices.

 

[Damocles]

I didn't make the claim that I have degree in climatology. I posted a linked article written BY scientists that HAVE a degree in climatology.

tinfoil has either emoted without qualification OR he is guilty of plagiarism.

Not quite, he posted articles by people who understand it as well and has shown repeatedly how and where he has formed his opinion based on information provided. Pretending that this post here is in a vacuum and that no other posts from the past have ever existed is only performed by those who begin in a weak position.

Tin, however "obnoxious" he may seem to you, has a firm grasp on this subject.

Again, it doesn't matter if you don't claim expertise. Speaking about how strongly you "support" what you don't understand doesn't make it any wiser if those you think "know" are performing bad science as reported by other scientists and the only thing you have to "support" your argument is that the other poster has no specific degree on the subject... If that was always the burden needed to allow posting this site couldn't exist.

The reality is we spend many hours speaking on our formed opinions on subjects we have knowledge of but do not have degrees in every day on this website. Pretending that this subject alone cannot be spoken of without a specific degree is foolhardy at best.

 

[Bfgrn]

Not quite, he posted articles by people who understand it as well and has shown repeatedly how and where he has formed his opinion based on information provided. Pretending that this post here is in a vacuum and that no other posts from the past have ever existed is only performed by those who begin in a weak position.

Tin, however "obnoxious" he may seem to you, has a firm grasp on this subject.

Again, it doesn't matter if you don't claim expertise. Speaking about how strongly you "support" what you don't understand doesn't make it any wiser if those you think "know" are performing bad science as reported by other scientists and the only thing you have to "support" your argument is that the other poster has no specific degree on the subject... If that was always the burden needed to allow posting this site couldn't exist.

The reality is we spend many hours speaking on our formed opinions on subjects we have knowledge of but do not have degrees in every day on this website. Pretending that this subject alone cannot be spoken of without a specific degree is foolhardy at best.

Tinfoil can post any emotion he wants, but if he is going to make a scientific statement, it is still only emoting unless he brings some proof. I'm not his nanny, so it is not my job to research his posts.

You are welcome to keep on emoting too.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Tinfoil can post any emotion he wants, but if he is going to make a scientific statement, it is still only emoting unless he brings some proof. I'm not his nanny, so it is not my job to research his posts.

You are welcome to keep on emoting too.

Yeah guys... the best thing to do is post scientific facts like I did, then he shuts his yap and ignores your posts. To heck with emoting! lol

 

[Bfgrn]

Yeah guys... the best thing to do is post scientific facts like I did, then he shuts his yap and ignores your posts. To heck with emoting! lol

Yea Dix...your scientific facts...warming is good for us and we'll adapt. Sponsored by Western Fuels.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Yea Dix...your scientific facts...warming is good for us and we'll adapt. Sponsored by Western Fuels.

Doesn't matter if "warming" is good or bad for us, the Earth is going to get warmer, then cooler, it's been doing this for billions of years, and there is nothing we can do to change it. Given the fact that life exists on Earth after billions of years with these cycles, I think it's safe to say we'll probably survive.

 

[Bfgrn]

Doesn't matter if "warming" is good or bad for us, the Earth is going to get warmer, then cooler, it's been doing this for billions of years, and there is nothing we can do to change it. Given the fact that life exists on Earth after billions of years with these cycles, I think it's safe to say we'll probably survive.

Man hasn't been here for billions of years, the planet has. And the planet doesn't care what life forms it supports or doesn't support.

Human beings must take that responsibility upon themselves.

Global Warming: Future Temperatures Could Exceed Livable Limits, Researchers Find

ScienceDaily (May 5, 2010) — Reasonable worst-case scenarios for global warming could lead to deadly temperatures for humans in coming centuries, according to research findings from Purdue University and the University of New South Wales, Australia.

Researchers for the first time have calculated the highest tolerable "wet-bulb" temperature and found that this temperature could be exceeded for the first time in human history in future climate scenarios if greenhouse gas emissions continue at their current rate.

Wet-bulb temperature is equivalent to what is felt when wet skin is exposed to moving air. It includes temperature and atmospheric humidity and is measured by covering a standard thermometer bulb with a wetted cloth and fully ventilating it.

The researchers calculated that humans and most mammals, which have internal body temperatures near 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit, will experience a potentially lethal level of heat stress at wet-bulb temperature above 95 degrees sustained for six hours or more, said Matthew Huber, the Purdue professor of earth and atmospheric sciences who co-authored the paper that will be published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Word of the day for you...

could
–verb
1. a pt. of can
1 .–auxiliary verb
2.(used to express possibility): I wonder who that could be at the door. That couldn't be true.
3.(used to express conditional possibility or ability): You could do it if you tried.

Now.... You COULD sprout wings out your ass and go flying off into the stratosphere with your ignorant nonsense, but I seriously doubt we would ever be that lucky!

 

[Bfgrn]

Doesn't matter if "warming" is good or bad for us, the Earth is going to get warmer, then cooler, it's been doing this for billions of years, and there is nothing we can do to change it. Given the fact that life exists on Earth after billions of years with these cycles, I think it's safe to say we'll probably survive.

Let me know when it is cooling and not just an emotion.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Let me know when it is cooling and not just an emotion.

Are you drinking tonight? That didn't even make any sense.

The Earth, for billions of years, has warmed and cooled... before humans were even here to emit greenhouse gases... and it will continue to warm and cool for as long as Earth exists, regardless of what we do!

...If you don't like it, move to Mars or Venus!

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Here, Bfoon... let me get you started...

http://www.redcolony.com/

 

[Bfgrn]

Are you drinking tonight? That didn't even make any sense.

The Earth, for billions of years, has warmed and cooled... before humans were even here to emit greenhouse gases... and it will continue to warm and cool for as long as Earth exists, regardless of what we do!

...If you don't like it, move to Mars or Venus!

Funny you mentioned Mars and Venus, because I was wondering if you live on THIS planet.

Did your dad ever tell you 'you can't have your cake and eat it too'?

Bfgrn... there is not a debate over whether temperatures are rising. Earth has had warming and cooling cycles as long as it has existed... we already knew this. The question has always been, whether or not MAN is causing the current warming.... NO DATA EXISTS TO SHOW THAT TO BE THE CASE!!!!

So Dix, you are saying is that you 'feel' temperatures will cool, that they are 'going to' cool, 'could' cool, should' cool.

No scientist, physicist, or climatologist, can say with absolute certainty, that man is causing ANY global warming. They had a bunch of theories and ideas that this MIGHT be happening

Dixie, No scientist, physicist, or climatologist, can say with absolute certainty that this warming 'there is not a debate over' will be followed by cooling. They have a bunch of theories and ideas that this MIGHT happen, is 'going to' happen, 'could' happen, 'should' happen.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Man hasn't been here for billions of years, the planet has. And the planet doesn't care what life forms it supports or doesn't support.

Human beings must take that responsibility upon themselves.

Global Warming: Future Temperatures Could Exceed Livable Limits, Researchers Find

ScienceDaily (May 5, 2010) — Reasonable worst-case scenarios for global warming could lead to deadly temperatures for humans in coming centuries, according to research findings from Purdue University and the University of New South Wales, Australia.

Researchers for the first time have calculated the highest tolerable "wet-bulb" temperature and found that this temperature could be exceeded for the first time in human history in future climate scenarios if greenhouse gas emissions continue at their current rate.

Wet-bulb temperature is equivalent to what is felt when wet skin is exposed to moving air. It includes temperature and atmospheric humidity and is measured by covering a standard thermometer bulb with a wetted cloth and fully ventilating it.

The researchers calculated that humans and most mammals, which have internal body temperatures near 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit, will experience a potentially lethal level of heat stress at wet-bulb temperature above 95 degrees sustained for six hours or more, said Matthew Huber, the Purdue professor of earth and atmospheric sciences who co-authored the paper that will be published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

While the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change central estimates of business-as-usual warming by 2100 are seven degrees Fahrenheit, eventual warming of 25 degrees is feasible, he said.

I would love to see the data that supports the above.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Let me know when it is cooling and not just an emotion.

Let us know when we get back to significant levels of warming.... and not just an emotional outburst by you.

 

[Bfgrn]

I would love to see the data that supports the above.

Why, are you a climatologist?

 

[Damocles]

Tinfoil can post any emotion he wants, but if he is going to make a scientific statement, it is still only emoting unless he brings some proof. I'm not his nanny, so it is not my job to research his posts.

You are welcome to keep on emoting too.

My point is that there are a myriad of posts by Tin that do bring the evidence he uses to support his position directly onto the board. Pretending they don't exist because you don't want to read them doesn't make you "better" or seem "smarter" nor does it mean anybody is "emoting".