| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
08 May 2007 01:35:58 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Who's right! carbon controlled or not! |
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/tree/browse_frm/thread/d41d86ee5954eeae/6ac9e87f54142d87?rnum=1&hl=en&_done=%2Fgroup%2Falt.global-warming%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fthread%2Fd41d86ee5954eeae%3Fscoring%3Dd%26hl%3Den%26&scoring=d#doc_6ac9e87f54142d87
http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/abstracts/files/kevin1997_1.html
The most basic premise of this diagram is very incorrect. This is that
the energy from the sun is recieved as the disk that the earth
presents in silouhette. This area is pi r^2. The radiating surface of
the earth is 4 pi r^2.
pi r^2 / 4pir^2 = 1/4.
So they figure, recieved energy of the solar constant of 1368 is
divided by four for average energy recieved of 342. Then it is
considered that .31 of this energy is reflected and not added into the
energy of the heat system. This gives the value of 235Wm-2, which
equates to 254K (-2F), for recieved energy from the sun.
This diagram is invalid from it's basic premise. In deriving an
initial analyses of the earth's recieved radiation and temperature,
one must first analyze a non-rotating sphere and a slowly rotating
sphere without atmosphere. The moon is in the same solar constant and
is a slowly rotating sphere, 28 days.
The average of 342W, implies recieved radiation and radiated energy as
constant and infering the average temperature of about 6C or 40F.
But the fact is that the energy radiated on the dark side of the
sphere, is only energy that is stored in the heat capacity of the
surface. The lowest temperature on the moon is about 40K. The highest
temperture is 396K with the sun at zenith.
If you consider by the simple average of recieved radiation to surface
area for the hemisphere in sunlight, this gives the average of
684Wm-2.
If you consider that on the unlit side of the moon the average
temperature to be 100K, this gives an average of 5.67Wm-2.
In 1 hour, the sunlit side would recieve on average, 2,446,000 Joules
per sq meter.
In 1 hour on the unlit side, on average 20,412 Joules per sq meter is
radiated. This makes a big difference in temperature and the energy
that is absorbed or lost from the heat capacity.
The point with these quantities is that in the sunlight, energy is
absorbed until the surface temperature is at the temperature wherby it
radiates back into space the equivelent energy it recieves. Therefore
the moon goes to 123C, which is very close to the predicted 121C of
the Boltzman Stefan equation for 1368Wm-2.
The strict adherence to the 342Wm-2 is not valid, because there is a
time span and temperature fluctuation with the receipt and loss of
radiation energy. Therefore the equilibrium is acheived, but for time
spans of rotation. This 342 gives absolutely no fundamental point of
beginning analyses of temperature of either the moon or the earth.
The energy received is received at the velocity of light as radiation.
The rate of conduction from the surface and into the interior can
never be this great. The temperature increases only as the energy for
the heat capacity is absorbed. Until the surface temperature reaches
equivelent temperature of radiation density, it is absorbing more
energy than it radiates. Without incident radiation, the radiated
energy comes from the stored energy of the heat capacity.
It is completely futile and invalid, to divide recieved energy by
total area of the sphere. This is the basis of grenhouse theory. It
gives a completely invalid and artificial determination of
temperature, for this reason and because it does not account for the
energy absorbed into the heat capacity.
Also very important is the fact that conduction transfers more energy
at higher temperature than at lower temperature. Thus transfer from
the interior to the zero temperature above the surface becomes slower
as the temperature near the surface decreases.
The most important aspect of the earth, is that 7/10 of the surface is
covered in ocean. The ocean absorbs most of the radiant energy it
receives without it's surface reaching a high radiative temperature.
The ocean surface varies from 86F to 28F. Calculation of the
tempertures of the ocean and it's recieved radiation shows that
without the cooling effect of the 40,600 Joules per mole that is
absorbed as water evaporates, the temperature of the ocean would be
much higher. The temperature of the ocean dictates the temperature of
the atmosphere.
It is impossible for slight warming of the atmosphere to transfer heat
back to the ocean. All theoretical models that have been derived to
show this are fraudulent. Any evidence of warming of the oceans is
proof of another cause of warming trends other than the effect of
specific gases in the atmosphere.
The atmosphere reduces radiation reaching the surface. It gains the
same temperature near to the ocean, and therefore reduces the rate of
heat loss. This is a property of any gas and can be demonstrated to be
no different for CO2 or O2 an N2.
Deatherage
CO2Phobia is a psychological disease. Seek professional help and buy
an air conditioner.
.
|
|
| User: "Bill" |
|
| Title: Re: Who's right! carbon controlled or not! |
08 May 2007 02:20:42 PM |
|
|
<kdthrge@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1178649358.896988.130930@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/tree/browse_frm/thread/d41d86ee5954eeae/6ac9e87f54142d87?rnum=1&hl=en&_done=%2Fgroup%2Falt.global-warming%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fthread%2Fd41d86ee5954eeae%3Fscoring%3Dd%26hl%3Den%26&scoring=d#doc_6ac9e87f54142d87
don't tell AL Gore any of this, the Democraps paid too much for the movie.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cory Bhreckan" |
|
| Title: Re: Who's right! carbon controlled or not! |
08 May 2007 02:45:18 PM |
|
|
Bill wrote:
<kdthrge@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1178649358.896988.130930@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/tree/browse_frm/thread/d41d86ee5954eeae/6ac9e87f54142d87?rnum=1&hl=en&_done=%2Fgroup%2Falt.global-warming%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fthread%2Fd41d86ee5954eeae%3Fscoring%3Dd%26hl%3Den%26&scoring=d#doc_6ac9e87f54142d87
don't tell AL Gore any of this, the Democraps paid too much for the movie.
The argument's over, you lost. Get over it.
--
"For the stronger we our houses do build,
The less chance we have of being killed." - William Topaz McGonagall
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Who's right! carbon controlled or not! |
08 May 2007 06:00:41 PM |
|
|
On May 8, 12:45 pm, Cory Bhreckan <coryvreckan@NO_SPAM.verizon.net>
wrote:
The argument's over, you lost. Get over it.
"Ditto"
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Who's right! carbon controlled or not! |
09 May 2007 11:32:35 AM |
|
|
On May 8, 6:00 pm, wrote:
On May 8, 12:45 pm, Cory Bhreckan <coryvreckan@NO_SPAM.verizon.net>
wrote:
The argument's over, you lost. Get over it.
"Ditto"
So according to your understanding, scientific determinations are made
by who wins the 'debate'. I don't seem to recall that this is the
definition of the word science.
All your statement of this propaganda slogan of the criminal fraud of
AGW means is that heads are going to roll of those that call
themselves scientists. These individuals are publicly funded. They
take this money from society and return no valuable product or
service. The proper term for this is 'parasites'.
The promotion of this postulate upon society of anthropogenic global
warming is called fraud. The greater degree of success this fraudulent
promotion has, increases the severity of this crime. The arena of
social effect in which these proponents act, makes this crime the
highest level of crime possible. With enactment, this crime can be
defined as crimes against humanity and genocide if it causes the
suffering and death of any people. This effect is real as opposed to
your imagined threat from your imagined effect of human causes for
natural warming trends.
At some point there will be proper determination of facts in court.
AGW has entirely avoided the burden of proof to which they should be
subject in order to promote control and interference in peoples lives
and economy.
The prosecution that determines the culpability of these criminals
will not evade this burden of proof when the factual determination of
their criminal and civil liability is proved.
So with your statement, you have settled the issue in your mind. So
you can now shove your head back up your ***** where it belongs, and
enjoy that warm and sedate feeling of your ignorance and the belief
that the debate is over.
Deatherage
CO2Phobia is a psychological disease. Seek professional help and buy
an air conditioner.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: Who's right! carbon controlled or not! |
09 May 2007 12:23:33 PM |
|
|
On May 9, 9:32 am, wrote:
[...]
So when are you going to file suit in federal court? Or are you just
blowing hot air?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Who's right! carbon controlled or not! |
08 May 2007 05:05:08 PM |
|
|
On May 8, 2:45 pm, Cory Bhreckan <coryvreckan@NO_SPAM.verizon.net>
wrote:
Bill wrote:
<kdth...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1178649358.896988.130930@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/tree/browse_frm/thr...
don't tell AL Gore any of this, the Democraps paid too much for the movie.
The argument's over, you lost. Get over it.
The only problem is that there are basic fundamental truths in nature
that the art of physics, is to attempt to understand and to quantify
these physcal realities mathematically. One of these truths is that
temperature of the earth is not dependent upon grenhouse gases.
Therefore another truth is that this theory is fraudulent and the
arguement that you claim to have won is merely a mental fantasy and
fabrication which has nothing to do with the truths of nature.
Therefore the process of this case to US law is criminal fraud. The
greater success you have with this 'arguement' you claim to have won
increases the seriousness of this crime. At some point, a valid
analyses and determination of the facts will be conducted, which you
cannot point to now along with your statement that you have won the
arguement.
Therefore, your statement is invalid, a propaganda slogan, and a very
dangerous thing for proponents to believe as they continue their plans
for economic reform which, as fraudulent, is a very serious crime,
which can be proved in court.
Deatherage
CO2Phobia is a psychological disease. Seek professional help and buy
an air conditioner.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Carbon Criminal Polluters" |
|
| Title: Death-Rag said: Somtimes I talk neccessary analyses psuedo evalutation |
08 May 2007 06:27:52 PM |
|
|
Death-Rag said...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/a7859e420ae5e0a9
Death-Rag said: recieving quantitive analyses hahahahahahahahahahahaha
daym calculatet hahahahahahahahahahahaah
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/58a4d69ec69d19e5
Death-Rag said: Somtimes I talk neccessary analyses psuedo
evalutation
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/086634847d9203b3
Death-Rag said: resposibility SKEPTISM wern't grenhouse gases recieved
analyses intitial grenhouse gases.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/cb3146cdcedd19dd
Death-Rag said: awfull funny grenhouse sevaral quantiies per secind
grenhouse theory, appication mathmatics laboratoy
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/3840a64f8bf17935
Death-Rag said: apptitude parasitc validilty repitition.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/aa4c1b9fc293bd82
Death-Rag said: continous specta oscilator oscilator intenstiy
intenstity continulally abiltity Moderen particuilate
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/15926ce35b797481
Death-Rag said: analyses horsehit analyses guilability criticise
disgard raditation Phobiacs transfering ofthe analyses conhesive
grenhouse 'grenhouse gases' analyse pervasivness 'grenhouse theory'.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/5597a473e27cacb8
Death-Rag said: vapoer anlyses transfering dissapated recieving
equivelent inabliltty continully transfering recieved grenhouse
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/4a38a6c8e3b292b3
Death-rag said: notalbly medieavel deliberatly discusion brillliant
hypothessis' electromagntic GRENHOUSE equipartion deleoped raditation
quanlification popstulate YOu analyses temperture occuring recieving
falsly
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/6abb9edf7934e28d
Death-Rag said: continully eluciadated arrises grenhouse fuctuations.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/442155a915794499
Death-Rag said: fulctuation 'science communtiy' aggrees
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/663a6c3e99db32e7
Death-Rag said: Crankpot grenhouse Farenheit bouyant continous
equivelent radition transfering dissapated habital grenhouse grenhouse
gase empircal arguement acutal
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/04221b76dbe700f5
Death-Rag said: continous radition radites frauduent scientifc
analyses restricition My limited education in physics grenhouse
genertation continous mokecules grenhouse freqeucnies radition fouth
power equivelent recieving discription dissapates phyisicists.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/2281f2fbe1a4ec80
Death-Rag said: Grenhouse theory religous fanatics analyses arguements
analyses discusion instead of insultive characterzations Alvagadros
number insultive.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/5673cdd6199a93b0
Death-Rag said: A true analyses grenhouse gases neccasary to adjuct
occuring culmulative.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/0b561a597665319e
Death-Rag said: vegitation Grenhouse gase theory grenhouse gases,
grenhouse gases rule cocentrations.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/953c4c4f50d37db0
Death-Rag said: transfering recieve dumbnest recieved grenhouse
*****.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/db1dd2300c052d7d
Death-Rag said: Grenhouse theory transfering composium themelses
grenhouse
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/227b4dd47714bfe8
Death-Rag said: This is a vey serious matter, severly uneccasarilly
grenhouse theory. 'grenhouse' gases anlyses recieved fouth power
recieving recievese grenhouse establishement.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/5f7cf0a57c32ba35
Death-Rag said: neccesities grenhouse gases intitial theory of
grenhouse gases
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/91115ba9958bbb82
Death-Rag said: enough phyics Actuall applicaton recieving radition
recieving equivelent recieves You inablility metthod Particulary
recieved raditation.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/3b1987f4ba6567a6
Death-Rag said: The analyses evaportation, inductrialization occured.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/161b7a7d02ffb63c
Death-Rag said: inagurated succedded nobel favoratism committiess
benifited widespead modifing.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Phineas T Puddleduck" |
|
| Title: Re: Who's right! carbon controlled or not! |
08 May 2007 05:10:44 PM |
|
|
In article <1178661908.823257.200000@u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
wrote:
Therefore the process of this case to US law is criminal fraud. The
greater success you have with this 'arguement' you claim to have won
increases the seriousness of this crime. At some point, a valid
analyses and determination of the facts will be conducted, which you
cannot point to now along with your statement that you have won the
arguement.
Therefore, your statement is invalid, a propaganda slogan, and a very
dangerous thing for proponents to believe as they continue their plans
for economic reform which, as fraudulent, is a very serious crime,
which can be proved in court.
Kent, you cant even understand freshman level chemistry...
--
Sacred keeper of the Hollow Sphere, and the space within the Coffee Boy
singularity.
COOSN-174-07-82116: alt.astronomy's favourite poster (from a survey taken
of the saucerhead high command).
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Who's right! carbon controlled or not! |
08 May 2007 08:30:53 PM |
|
|
On May 8, 5:10 pm, Phineas T Puddleduck
Kent, you cant even understand freshman level chemistry...
Freahman level chemistry is not sitting around and stroking on the IR
test tube waiting for the AGW genie to jump out.
You make such a statement, you should support it or you are just
displaying your petulant mind and irritation at what is not your rote
repeated rhetoric which you call physics.
Deatherage
CO2Phobia is a psychological disease. Seek professional help and buy
an air conditioner.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Souls Black as Coal" |
|
| Title: Re: Who's right! carbon controlled or not! |
08 May 2007 08:41:00 PM |
|
|
On May 8, 6:30 pm, wrote:
Freahman level chemistry
Deatherage
Death-Rag said...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/a7859e420ae5e0a9
Death-Rag said: recieving quantitive analyses hahahahahahahahahahahaha
daym calculatet hahahahahahahahahahahaah
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/58a4d69ec69d19e5
Death-Rag said: Somtimes I talk neccessary analyses psuedo
evalutation
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/086634847d9203b3
Death-Rag said: resposibility SKEPTISM wern't grenhouse gases recieved
analyses intitial grenhouse gases.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/cb3146cdcedd19dd
Death-Rag said: awfull funny grenhouse sevaral quantiies per secind
grenhouse theory, appication mathmatics laboratoy
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/3840a64f8bf17935
Death-Rag said: apptitude parasitc validilty repitition.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/aa4c1b9fc293bd82
Death-Rag said: continous specta oscilator oscilator intenstiy
intenstity continulally abiltity Moderen particuilate
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/15926ce35b797481
Death-Rag said: analyses horsehit analyses guilability criticise
disgard raditation Phobiacs transfering ofthe analyses conhesive
grenhouse 'grenhouse gases' analyse pervasivness 'grenhouse theory'.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/5597a473e27cacb8
Death-Rag said: vapoer anlyses transfering dissapated recieving
equivelent inabliltty continully transfering recieved grenhouse
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/4a38a6c8e3b292b3
Death-rag said: notalbly medieavel deliberatly discusion brillliant
hypothessis' electromagntic GRENHOUSE equipartion deleoped raditation
quanlification popstulate YOu analyses temperture occuring recieving
falsly
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/6abb9edf7934e28d
Death-Rag said: continully eluciadated arrises grenhouse fuctuations.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/442155a915794499
Death-Rag said: fulctuation 'science communtiy' aggrees
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/663a6c3e99db32e7
Death-Rag said: Crankpot grenhouse Farenheit bouyant continous
equivelent radition transfering dissapated habital grenhouse grenhouse
gase empircal arguement acutal
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/04221b76dbe700f5
Death-Rag said: continous radition radites frauduent scientifc
analyses restricition My limited education in physics grenhouse
genertation continous mokecules grenhouse freqeucnies radition fouth
power equivelent recieving discription dissapates phyisicists.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/2281f2fbe1a4ec80
Death-Rag said: Grenhouse theory religous fanatics analyses arguements
analyses discusion instead of insultive characterzations Alvagadros
number insultive.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/5673cdd6199a93b0
Death-Rag said: A true analyses grenhouse gases neccasary to adjuct
occuring culmulative.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/0b561a597665319e
Death-Rag said: vegitation Grenhouse gase theory grenhouse gases,
grenhouse gases rule cocentrations.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/953c4c4f50d37db0
Death-Rag said: transfering recieve dumbnest recieved grenhouse
*****.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/db1dd2300c052d7d
Death-Rag said: Grenhouse theory transfering composium themelses
grenhouse
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/227b4dd47714bfe8
Death-Rag said: This is a vey serious matter, severly uneccasarilly
grenhouse theory. 'grenhouse' gases anlyses recieved fouth power
recieving recievese grenhouse establishement.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/5f7cf0a57c32ba35
Death-Rag said: neccesities grenhouse gases intitial theory of
grenhouse gases
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/91115ba9958bbb82
Death-Rag said: enough phyics Actuall applicaton recieving radition
recieving equivelent recieves You inablility metthod Particulary
recieved raditation.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/3b1987f4ba6567a6
Death-Rag said: The analyses evaportation, inductrialization occured.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/161b7a7d02ffb63c
Death-Rag said: inagurated succedded nobel favoratism committiess
benifited widespead modifing.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Carbon Criminal Polluters" |
|
| Title: Death-rag said: notalbly medieavel deliberatly discusion brillliant hypothessis' electromagntic GRENHOUSE equipartion deleoped raditation quanlification popstulate YOu analyses temperture occuring recieving falsly |
08 May 2007 06:26:45 PM |
|
|
Death-Rag said...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/a7859e420ae5e0a9
Death-Rag said: recieving quantitive analyses hahahahahahahahahahahaha
daym calculatet hahahahahahahahahahahaah
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/58a4d69ec69d19e5
Death-Rag said: Somtimes I talk neccessary analyses psuedo
evalutation
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/086634847d9203b3
Death-Rag said: resposibility SKEPTISM wern't grenhouse gases recieved
analyses intitial grenhouse gases.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/cb3146cdcedd19dd
Death-Rag said: awfull funny grenhouse sevaral quantiies per secind
grenhouse theory, appication mathmatics laboratoy
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/3840a64f8bf17935
Death-Rag said: apptitude parasitc validilty repitition.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/aa4c1b9fc293bd82
Death-Rag said: continous specta oscilator oscilator intenstiy
intenstity continulally abiltity Moderen particuilate
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/15926ce35b797481
Death-Rag said: analyses horsehit analyses guilability criticise
disgard raditation Phobiacs transfering ofthe analyses conhesive
grenhouse 'grenhouse gases' analyse pervasivness 'grenhouse theory'.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/5597a473e27cacb8
Death-Rag said: vapoer anlyses transfering dissapated recieving
equivelent inabliltty continully transfering recieved grenhouse
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/4a38a6c8e3b292b3
Death-rag said: notalbly medieavel deliberatly discusion brillliant
hypothessis' electromagntic GRENHOUSE equipartion deleoped raditation
quanlification popstulate YOu analyses temperture occuring recieving
falsly
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/6abb9edf7934e28d
Death-Rag said: continully eluciadated arrises grenhouse fuctuations.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/442155a915794499
Death-Rag said: fulctuation 'science communtiy' aggrees
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/663a6c3e99db32e7
Death-Rag said: Crankpot grenhouse Farenheit bouyant continous
equivelent radition transfering dissapated habital grenhouse grenhouse
gase empircal arguement acutal
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/04221b76dbe700f5
Death-Rag said: continous radition radites frauduent scientifc
analyses restricition My limited education in physics grenhouse
genertation continous mokecules grenhouse freqeucnies radition fouth
power equivelent recieving discription dissapates phyisicists.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/2281f2fbe1a4ec80
Death-Rag said: Grenhouse theory religous fanatics analyses arguements
analyses discusion instead of insultive characterzations Alvagadros
number insultive.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/5673cdd6199a93b0
Death-Rag said: A true analyses grenhouse gases neccasary to adjuct
occuring culmulative.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/0b561a597665319e
Death-Rag said: vegitation Grenhouse gase theory grenhouse gases,
grenhouse gases rule cocentrations.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/953c4c4f50d37db0
Death-Rag said: transfering recieve dumbnest recieved grenhouse
*****.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/db1dd2300c052d7d
Death-Rag said: Grenhouse theory transfering composium themelses
grenhouse
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/227b4dd47714bfe8
Death-Rag said: This is a vey serious matter, severly uneccasarilly
grenhouse theory. 'grenhouse' gases anlyses recieved fouth power
recieving recievese grenhouse establishement.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/5f7cf0a57c32ba35
Death-Rag said: neccesities grenhouse gases intitial theory of
grenhouse gases
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/91115ba9958bbb82
Death-Rag said: enough phyics Actuall applicaton recieving radition
recieving equivelent recieves You inablility metthod Particulary
recieved raditation.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/3b1987f4ba6567a6
Death-Rag said: The analyses evaportation, inductrialization occured.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/161b7a7d02ffb63c
Death-Rag said: inagurated succedded nobel favoratism committiess
benifited widespead modifing.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
