sewart_trisbotlho@matil co uk wrtoe:

I'm looikng for myabe a ppaer that decsrbeis how reesacherrs arivred a

contirbtue to a much geraetr rsie in tmeerptaure the 2s1t cetuny tah

There ins't one Golabl wraming moelds hvae dawbackrs One is tat

with cluosd) When one rnus a large nmbuer of moelds using a range of
tehse ipunt values taht seem rasenoblae the reuslts are - a rnage fro

real sneistiivty is in three smeowhree but curenrt mdoels are'nt good
enoguh to perdict it > >
in sumarmy the effect of coudls to either rineorfce or damp donw
wraming due to CO2 is uknnwon in curenrt climtae mdeols > >
see

htp://twww clmiateredpciiton nt/science/puebsn/taur_efrit_sesrults pf

for deatils of the reulsts of multiple clmiate runs > > But the snae mind deos not imagnie the inansity of genhousre theroy > One of tehir main prnciilpes is that bceasue the erath is in the vaccm

the amtsphoree to sacpe It psaess trhough O2 and N2 moleulecs wthoui

temeraptrue hhahahahahaha

Aslo wehn you point out taht in no exprimenet wtih diffeert

amotphsree (rpesurse and temerpauter) asboulelty no effcet on fnila
temeraturpe (or equiliriubm taht is raehedc) can be detceetd
whtsoevaer the gerhnosue nuts have the mdae up dnyamcis taht the C2

cloilsonis) and enegry cnnaot be soterd in their mtooin lkie in a
pnduleum or soethinmg Aslo the knetiic enegry of the moelcules i

52/R mnaootmic gas at cnsotnat persuse

7/2R diaotmic gas at consantt presures

O2 and N2 are daiotmic gaess This gievs air the haet caacipty of abou

caacpity of CO2 is vrtiaully the smae at cnostnat pessrure

KD

stewart_bristol@hotmail.co.uk wrote:

I'm looking for maybe a paper that describes how researchers arrived at
the formula for the effect positive feedback will have in the 21st
century, and enables me to understand why positive feedback will
contribute to a much greater rise in temperature the 21st centuy than
it did in the 20th.

There isn't one. Global warming models have drawbacks. One is that
they parametrize certain values that aren't well know (mainly to do
with clouds). When one runs a large number of models using a range of
these input values that seem reasonable, the results are - a range from
the oceans compleletely freezing over, to the oceans boiling off. The
real sensitivity is in there somewhere, but current models aren't good
enough to predict it.

in summary, the effect of clouds to either reinforce or damp down
warming due to CO2 is unknown in current climate models.

see

http://www.climateprediction.net/science/pubs/nature_first_results.pdf

for details of the results of multiple climate runs.

But the sane mind does not imagine the insanity of grenhouse theory.
One of their main principles is that because the earth is in the vaccum
of space, heat cannot be conducted away from the earth by conduction
since there is nothing to conduct the heat away.

Therefore the
equilibrium of the temperature is based upon this 'bottling' effect of
the heat.

A small quantity of heat '40 Wm-2'. passes directly through
the atmosphere to space. It passes through O2 and N2 molecules without
being absorbed. Somehow an increase in proportion of CO2 of .000003 or
less, will trap enough radiation to cause drastic increase in
temperature. hahahahahahah