| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Captain Compassion" |
| Date: |
28 Jul 2007 08:37:22 PM |
| Object: |
Water Experts Find Earth’s Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
Variability of the sun’s irradiance, Global Warming
Water Experts Find Earth’s Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun
By Dennis T. Avery, Hudson Institute
http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/realityzone/UFNwarmingrainfall.htm
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
A team of water experts says the pattern of droughts and floods in
South Africa shows our global warming was triggered by the variability
of the sun’s irradiance rather than by human-emitted CO2. They say
variations in South African rainfall patterns are keyed to periodic
reversals of the sun’s magnetic field—and to the constantly changing
distance between the sun and the earth as both move through space.
In South Africa, alternate 11-year sunspot cycles produce opposite
rainfall results. One complete “double sun cycle” occurs every 20.8
years: the “first” cycle brings a big flood, followed by a small
drought; the next brings a big drought, followed by a small flood.
Lead author Will Alexander used the double sunspot cycle to publicly
predict the end of major South African droughts in both 1995 and 2006.
He notes that South African droughts have often been broken at 11-year
intervals by severe floods associated with sunspot maxima—as in 1822,
1841, 1863, 1874 and 1885. The research summary appears in the June
2007 issue of the Journal of the South African Institution of Civil
Engineering.
The South Africans’ conclusion is reinforced by Dr. Robert Baker of
Australia, who told a recent meeting of the International Geographical
Union that he has found the same 21-year cycle in Australian drought
and rainfall. Baker says “the sun is like a musical instrument,
vibrating in complex patterns,” with all of the planets moving in
similar relationships.
H. N. Bhalme and D. A. Mooley published similar conclusions about
India’s floods and droughts in the Journal of Applied Meteorology,
September, 1981, based on an Indian flood index compiled from 1891 to
1979. They reported that “a highly significant 22-year cycle in the
flood area index was nearly in phase with the 22-year double sunspot
cycle.” Bhalme and Mooley also noted that the western U.S. has a
similar relationship with the double sunspot cycle and severe
flooding.
Clearly, what these water experts are all describing is a global
climate connection with the sun.
The number of sunspots on the sun, and their intensity, varies in a
cycle averaging 11 years. The distance between the sun and the earth
keeps changing slightly and predictably because 1) they move on
slightly varying paths through space; and 2) both bodies accelerate
and decelerate constantly depending on the combined gravitational
forces of the other big planets.
These factors apparently produce the moderate 1,500-year climate cycle
on earth, which was discovered in the Greenland ice cores in 1980s and
has since also been found globally in seabed and lake sediments,
fossil pollen, tree rings and peat bogs.
Earth’s recent global warming occurred too early—before 1940—to be
blamed on human CO2 emissions. The net global warming since 1940 is
only 0.2 degrees C, with none at all since 1998. There’s little
correlation between the earth’s recent temperatures and CO2 levels,
but a strong correlation between the sunspot index and subsequent
changes in our sea-surface temperatures.
The 1,500-year climate cycle shifts temperatures about 2 degrees C
above and then 2 degrees C below the long-term average at the latitude
of Washington and Paris, with greater temperature changes near the
poles. Temperatures change little near the equator, but rainfall
patterns can change greatly; for example, 5,000 years ago the Sahara
was wet enough for grazing and hunting, while Kenya was very dry.
The UN climate change panel has declared the solar variations “too
small” to produce the climate warming of the past 30 years. However, a
recent Danish experiment showed that the solar variations may be
amplified fourfold because they create significant changes in the
earth’s cloud cover. More clouds cool the earth by deflecting more of
the sun’s heat back into outer space.
The evidence for a sun/climate connection keeps pouring in, while all
we hear from the Kyoto crowd is “The computer models agree with each
other.”
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net
.
|
|
| User: "Roger" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
29 Jul 2007 01:20:11 AM |
|
|
"Captain Compassion" <daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote in message
news:flrna3tb306apnrkrhj809mj6429trga2q@4ax.com...
Variability of the sun's irradiance, Global Warming
Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun
By Dennis T. Avery, Hudson Institute
From http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=921
Avery is the author of Saving the Planet with Pesticides and Plastic(Hudson
Institute, 1995). Avery is the editor of Global Food Quarterly, the
newsletter of the Center for Global Food Issues and writes a nationally
syndicated weekly column for the financial newswire "Bridge News". Avery's
article, "What's Wrong with Global Warming?" was published in the August
1999 issue of Reader's Digest. (http://www.cgfi.org/about/davery_bio.htm#2)
Avery is responsible for the erroneous and often reported "fact" that
organically grown food is many times more likely to cause E. coli poisoning
than conventionally grown food. For more information, view a compilation of
articles at http://www.gmwatch.org/p2temp2.asp?aid=48&page=1&op=1.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudson_Institute
The Hudson Institute is a right-leaning U.S. think tank, founded in 1961 in
Croton-on-Hudson, New York, by the futurist Herman Kahn and other colleagues
from the RAND Corporation. The Institute promotes public policy change in
accordance with its stated values of a "commitment to free markets and
individual responsibility, confidence in the power of technology to assist
progress, respect for the importance of culture and religion in human
affairs, and determination to preserve America's national security." It is
the organization about which the phrase "think tank" was originally coined.
http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/realityzone/UFNwarmingrainfall.htm
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
A team of water experts says the pattern of droughts and floods in
South Africa shows our global warming was triggered by the variability
of the sun's irradiance rather than by human-emitted CO2. They say
variations in South African rainfall patterns are keyed to periodic
reversals of the sun's magnetic field-and to the constantly changing
distance between the sun and the earth as both move through space.
In South Africa, alternate 11-year sunspot cycles produce opposite
rainfall results. One complete "double sun cycle" occurs every 20.8
years: the "first" cycle brings a big flood, followed by a small
drought; the next brings a big drought, followed by a small flood.
Lead author Will Alexander used the double sunspot cycle to publicly
predict the end of major South African droughts in both 1995 and 2006.
He notes that South African droughts have often been broken at 11-year
intervals by severe floods associated with sunspot maxima-as in 1822,
1841, 1863, 1874 and 1885. The research summary appears in the June
2007 issue of the Journal of the South African Institution of Civil
Engineering.
The South Africans' conclusion is reinforced by Dr. Robert Baker of
Australia, who told a recent meeting of the International Geographical
Union that he has found the same 21-year cycle in Australian drought
and rainfall. Baker says "the sun is like a musical instrument,
vibrating in complex patterns," with all of the planets moving in
similar relationships.
H. N. Bhalme and D. A. Mooley published similar conclusions about
India's floods and droughts in the Journal of Applied Meteorology,
September, 1981, based on an Indian flood index compiled from 1891 to
1979. They reported that "a highly significant 22-year cycle in the
flood area index was nearly in phase with the 22-year double sunspot
cycle." Bhalme and Mooley also noted that the western U.S. has a
similar relationship with the double sunspot cycle and severe
flooding.
Clearly, what these water experts are all describing is a global
climate connection with the sun.
The number of sunspots on the sun, and their intensity, varies in a
cycle averaging 11 years. The distance between the sun and the earth
keeps changing slightly and predictably because 1) they move on
slightly varying paths through space; and 2) both bodies accelerate
and decelerate constantly depending on the combined gravitational
forces of the other big planets.
These factors apparently produce the moderate 1,500-year climate cycle
on earth, which was discovered in the Greenland ice cores in 1980s and
has since also been found globally in seabed and lake sediments,
fossil pollen, tree rings and peat bogs.
Earth's recent global warming occurred too early-before 1940-to be
blamed on human CO2 emissions. The net global warming since 1940 is
only 0.2 degrees C, with none at all since 1998. There's little
correlation between the earth's recent temperatures and CO2 levels,
but a strong correlation between the sunspot index and subsequent
changes in our sea-surface temperatures.
The 1,500-year climate cycle shifts temperatures about 2 degrees C
above and then 2 degrees C below the long-term average at the latitude
of Washington and Paris, with greater temperature changes near the
poles. Temperatures change little near the equator, but rainfall
patterns can change greatly; for example, 5,000 years ago the Sahara
was wet enough for grazing and hunting, while Kenya was very dry.
The UN climate change panel has declared the solar variations "too
small" to produce the climate warming of the past 30 years. However, a
recent Danish experiment showed that the solar variations may be
amplified fourfold because they create significant changes in the
earth's cloud cover. More clouds cool the earth by deflecting more of
the sun's heat back into outer space.
The evidence for a sun/climate connection keeps pouring in, while all
we hear from the Kyoto crowd is "The computer models agree with each
other."
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
30 Jul 2007 11:08:04 PM |
|
|
On Jul 28, 11:20 pm, "Roger" <roge...@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Captain Compassion" <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote in message
news:flrna3tb306apnrkrhj809mj6429trga2q@4ax.com...
Variability of the sun's irradiance, Global Warming
Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun
By Dennis T. Avery, Hudson Institute
(cut)
Avery is the author of Saving the Planet with Pesticides and
Plastic(Hudson
Institute, 1995).
(cut)
Your add hominem attack on Avery is irrelevant. You'll have to
attack the South Africans who published the original paper.
http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/alexander2707.pdf
- A. McIntire
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
28 Jul 2007 11:20:07 PM |
|
|
Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
Variability of the sun's irradiance, Global Warming
Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun
By Dennis T. Avery, Hudson Institute
http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/realityzone/UFNwarmingrainfall.htm
Sorry, not a credible source - the Hudson Institute is a right-wing
think tank. The board of trustees includes Richard Perle, Alexander
Haig and the recently convicted Conrad Black. Some of the trustees
include Robert Bork, Francis Fukuyama and Ron Dworkin. Iow, a
veritable Who's Who of well-known wingnuts, reactionaries and wankers.
As far as any link between global warming and the sun's irradiance,
well, that was debunked quite some time ago.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
29 Jul 2007 12:58:24 AM |
|
|
On 29 Jul., 06:20, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
Variability of the sun's irradiance, Global Warming
Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun
By Dennis T. Avery, Hudson Institute
http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/realityzone/UFNwarmingrainfall.htm
Sorry, not a credible source - the Hudson Institute is a right-wing
think tank. The board of trustees includes Richard Perle, Alexander
Haig and the recently convicted Conrad Black. Some of the trustees
include Robert Bork, Francis Fukuyama and Ron Dworkin. Iow, a
veritable Who's Who of well-known wingnuts, reactionaries and wankers.
As far as any link between global warming and the sun's irradiance,
well, that was debunked quite some time ago.
Since when is Compassion interested in real facts and truths?
He's just another of those lemmings who "think" that by denying
unpleasant facts on a daily basis, we will make them disappear...
Typical rightard mentality...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roger" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
29 Jul 2007 01:20:56 AM |
|
|
<parsifal50@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185688704.655763.169580@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
On 29 Jul., 06:20, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
Variability of the sun's irradiance, Global Warming
Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun
By Dennis T. Avery, Hudson Institute
http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/realityzone/UFNwarmingrainfall.htm
Sorry, not a credible source - the Hudson Institute is a right-wing
think tank. The board of trustees includes Richard Perle, Alexander
Haig and the recently convicted Conrad Black. Some of the trustees
include Robert Bork, Francis Fukuyama and Ron Dworkin. Iow, a
veritable Who's Who of well-known wingnuts, reactionaries and wankers.
As far as any link between global warming and the sun's irradiance,
well, that was debunked quite some time ago.
Since when is Compassion interested in real facts and truths?
He's just another of those lemmings who "think" that by denying
unpleasant facts on a daily basis, we will make them disappear...
Typical rightard mentality...
What do you expect from someone who stole the identity of another poster?
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
30 Jul 2007 10:59:51 PM |
|
|
On Jul 28, 11:20 pm, "Roger" <roge...@hotmail.com> wrote:
<parsifa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185688704.655763.169580@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
On 29 Jul., 06:20, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
Variability of the sun's irradiance, Global Warming
Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun
By Dennis T. Avery, Hudson Institute
http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/realityzone/UFNwarmingrainfall.htm
Sorry, not a credible source - the Hudson Institute is a right-wing
think tank. The board of trustees includes Richard Perle, Alexander
Haig and the recently convicted Conrad Black. Some of the trustees
include Robert Bork, Francis Fukuyama and Ron Dworkin. Iow, a
veritable Who's Who of well-known wingnuts, reactionaries and wankers.
As far as any link between global warming and the sun's irradiance,
well, that was debunked quite some time ago.
Since when is Compassion interested in real facts and truths?
He's just another of those lemmings who "think" that by denying
unpleasant facts on a daily basis, we will make them disappear...
Typical rightard mentality...
What do you expect from someone who stole the identity of another poster?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The story gave the name of the author. If you weren't all blinded
by your AGW hysteria, and you had the intelligence to look, you could
have done a search and located the original story at
http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/alexander2707.pdf
- A. McIntire
- A. McIntir
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roger" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
31 Jul 2007 02:08:49 AM |
|
|
<alanmc95210@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1185854391.323422.298850@g12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 28, 11:20 pm, "Roger" <roge...@hotmail.com> wrote:
<parsifa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185688704.655763.169580@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
On 29 Jul., 06:20, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
Variability of the sun's irradiance, Global Warming
Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun
By Dennis T. Avery, Hudson Institute
http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/realityzone/UFNwarmingrainfall.htm
Sorry, not a credible source - the Hudson Institute is a right-wing
think tank. The board of trustees includes Richard Perle, Alexander
Haig and the recently convicted Conrad Black. Some of the trustees
include Robert Bork, Francis Fukuyama and Ron Dworkin. Iow, a
veritable Who's Who of well-known wingnuts, reactionaries and wankers.
As far as any link between global warming and the sun's irradiance,
well, that was debunked quite some time ago.
Since when is Compassion interested in real facts and truths?
He's just another of those lemmings who "think" that by denying
unpleasant facts on a daily basis, we will make them disappear...
Typical rightard mentality...
What do you expect from someone who stole the identity of another
poster?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The story gave the name of the author. If you weren't all blinded
I didn't say AUTHOR, I said POSTER.
Can't you fucking read?
by your AGW hysteria, and you had the intelligence to look, you could
have done a search and located the original story at
http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/alexander2707.pdf
- A. McIntire
- A. McIntir
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
01 Aug 2007 08:28:52 AM |
|
|
On Jul 31, 12:08 am, "Roger" <roge...@hotmail.com> wrote:
<alanmc95...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1185854391.323422.298850@g12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 28, 11:20 pm, "Roger" <roge...@hotmail.com> wrote:
<parsifa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185688704.655763.169580@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
On 29 Jul., 06:20, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
Variability of the sun's irradiance, Global Warming
Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun
By Dennis T. Avery, Hudson Institute
http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/realityzone/UFNwarmingrainfall.htm
Sorry, not a credible source - the Hudson Institute is a right-wing
think tank. The board of trustees includes Richard Perle, Alexander
Haig and the recently convicted Conrad Black. Some of the trustees
include Robert Bork, Francis Fukuyama and Ron Dworkin. Iow, a
veritable Who's Who of well-known wingnuts, reactionaries and wankers.
As far as any link between global warming and the sun's irradiance,
well, that was debunked quite some time ago.
Since when is Compassion interested in real facts and truths?
He's just another of those lemmings who "think" that by denying
unpleasant facts on a daily basis, we will make them disappear...
Typical rightard mentality...
What do you expect from someone who stole the identity of another
poster?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The story gave the name of the author. If you weren't all blinded
I didn't say AUTHOR, I said POSTER.
Can't you fucking read?
So you're a moron who attacks the messenger and ignores the message-
that's the point I was making- A. McIntire
by your AGW hysteria, and you had the intelligence to look, you could
have done a search and located the original story at
http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/alexander2707.pdf
- A. McIntire
- A. McIntir- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roger" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
02 Aug 2007 12:24:06 AM |
|
|
<alanmc95210@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1185974932.821416.20730@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 31, 12:08 am, "Roger" <roge...@hotmail.com> wrote:
<alanmc95...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1185854391.323422.298850@g12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 28, 11:20 pm, "Roger" <roge...@hotmail.com> wrote:
<parsifa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185688704.655763.169580@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
On 29 Jul., 06:20, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
Variability of the sun's irradiance, Global Warming
Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun
By Dennis T. Avery, Hudson Institute
http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/realityzone/UFNwarmingrainfall.htm
Sorry, not a credible source - the Hudson Institute is a right-wing
think tank. The board of trustees includes Richard Perle,
Alexander
Haig and the recently convicted Conrad Black. Some of the trustees
include Robert Bork, Francis Fukuyama and Ron Dworkin. Iow, a
veritable Who's Who of well-known wingnuts, reactionaries and
wankers.
As far as any link between global warming and the sun's irradiance,
well, that was debunked quite some time ago.
Since when is Compassion interested in real facts and truths?
He's just another of those lemmings who "think" that by denying
unpleasant facts on a daily basis, we will make them disappear...
Typical rightard mentality...
What do you expect from someone who stole the identity of another
poster?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The story gave the name of the author. If you weren't all blinded
I didn't say AUTHOR, I said POSTER.
Can't you fucking read?
So you're a moron who attacks the messenger and ignores the message-
that's the point I was making- A. McIntire
I'm a moron because I choose to do what I want to do?
I'm a moron because I am capable of questioning the integrity of both the
source and distributer of that information?
Yeah, I'm the moron.
by your AGW hysteria, and you had the intelligence to look, you could
have done a search and located the original story at
http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/alexander2707.pdf
- A. McIntire
- A. McIntir- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
29 Jul 2007 07:45:12 PM |
|
|
Spartakus <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote:
As far as any link between global warming and the sun's irradiance,
well, that was debunked quite some time ago.
If you don't think the sun warms the earth, then maybe you've been
breathing too many hybrid car fumes. Tell us, what ended the ice age and
the little ice age? The sun's output is not constant.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
29 Jul 2007 09:28:33 PM |
|
|
(the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus<sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
As far as any link between global warming and the sun's
irradiance, well, that was debunked quite some time ago.
If you don't think the sun warms the earth, then maybe you've
been breathing too many hybrid car fumes.
If you think that's what I said, it's a miracle you can operate a
computer on so few functioning neurons.
Tell us, what ended the ice age and
the little ice age? The sun's output is not constant.
No it's not, but read the following:
"The scientists examined historical records of solar
activity over the past century, studying measures
such as the number of sunspots and the amount
of light emitted. They found that the total radiation
from the sun peaked in 1985, according to Mike
Lockwood, co-author of the paper published
today in the U.K. journal Proceedings of the
Royal Society A.
"'The sun did a U-turn around 1985, but the
temperatures kept on rising,' Lockwood, a solar
physicist at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
in Chilton, central England, said late yesterday
in a telephone interview. 'Everything on the sun
that could have affected climate has been going
in the wrong direction to cause warming, and
we've seen continued warming.'
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=aLq__5sibbvo&refer=europe
There's the link to the entire article. Follow it and be enlightened.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
30 Jul 2007 11:05:11 PM |
|
|
On Jul 29, 7:28 pm, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
nob...@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus<sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
As far as any link between global warming and the sun's
irradiance, well, that was debunked quite some time ago.
If you don't think the sun warms the earth, then maybe you've
been breathing too many hybrid car fumes.
If you think that's what I said, it's a miracle you can operate a
computer on so few functioning neurons.
Tell us, what ended the ice age and
the little ice age? The sun's output is not constant.
No it's not, but read the following:
"The scientists examined historical records of solar
activity over the past century, studying measures
such as the number of sunspots and the amount
of light emitted. They found that the total radiation
from the sun peaked in 1985, according to Mike
Lockwood, co-author of the paper published
today in the U.K. journal Proceedings of the
Royal Society A.
"'The sun did a U-turn around 1985, but the
temperatures kept on rising,' Lockwood, a solar
physicist at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
in Chilton, central England, said late yesterday
in a telephone interview. 'Everything on the sun
that could have affected climate has been going
in the wrong direction to cause warming, and
we've seen continued warming.'
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=aLq__5sibbvo&refe...
There's the link to the entire article. Follow it and be enlightened.
As you may have noticed, the warmest part of the day is not noon,
but about 2 hours, or 1/12 of a day later. Likewise, the coldest day
of the year is not the winter equinox, but about a month, or 1/12 year
later. Likewise, one would expect a delay in weather change due to
a dampening effect by the oceans. Here's a
paper for you
http://www.umweltluege.de/pdf/Gamma_Rays_and_Climate.pdf
- A. McIntire
.
|
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
31 Jul 2007 06:44:21 PM |
|
|
<> wrote:
On Jul 29, 7:28 pm, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
nob...@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus<sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
As far as any link between global warming and the sun's
irradiance, well, that was debunked quite some time ago.
If you don't think the sun warms the earth, then maybe you've
been breathing too many hybrid car fumes.
If you think that's what I said, it's a miracle you can operate a
computer on so few functioning neurons.
Tell us, what ended the ice age and
the little ice age? The sun's output is not constant.
No it's not, but read the following:
"The scientists examined historical records of solar
activity over the past century, studying measures
such as the number of sunspots and the amount
of light emitted. They found that the total radiation
from the sun peaked in 1985, according to Mike
Lockwood, co-author of the paper published
today in the U.K. journal Proceedings of the
Royal Society A.
"'The sun did a U-turn around 1985, but the
temperatures kept on rising,' Lockwood, a solar
physicist at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
in Chilton, central England, said late yesterday
in a telephone interview. 'Everything on the sun
that could have affected climate has been going
in the wrong direction to cause warming, and
we've seen continued warming.'
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=aLq__5sibbvo&refe...
There's the link to the entire article. Follow it and be enlightened.
As you may have noticed, the warmest part of the day is not noon,
but about 2 hours, or 1/12 of a day later. Likewise, the coldest day
of the year is not the winter equinox, but about a month, or 1/12 year
later. Likewise, one would expect a delay in weather change due to
a dampening effect by the oceans. Here's a
paper for you
http://www.umweltluege.de/pdf/Gamma_Rays_and_Climate.pdf
- A. McIntire
There's not even any sun at all at the South Pole during it's winter,
and no sun at all at the North Pole during its winter. These are the
least likely places to be effected by "green house gasses". All the CO2
we're putting into the atmosphere used to be in the atmosphere. It will
result in a greening of the planet, in theory up to a potential to
create thick marshes which created the oil and coal fields.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
01 Aug 2007 08:32:28 AM |
|
|
On Jul 30, 9:05 pm, "alanmc95...@yahoo.com" <alanmc95...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On Jul 29, 7:28 pm, Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
nob...@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus<sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
As far as any link between global warming and the sun's
irradiance, well, that was debunked quite some time ago.
If you don't think the sun warms the earth, then maybe you've
been breathing too many hybrid car fumes.
If you think that's what I said, it's a miracle you can operate a
computer on so few functioning neurons.
Tell us, what ended the ice age and
the little ice age? The sun's output is not constant.
No it's not, but read the following:
"The scientists examined historical records of solar
activity over the past century, studying measures
such as the number of sunspots and the amount
of light emitted. They found that the total radiation
from the sun peaked in 1985, according to Mike
Lockwood, co-author of the paper published
today in the U.K. journal Proceedings of the
Royal Society A.
"'The sun did a U-turn around 1985, but the
temperatures kept on rising,' Lockwood, a solar
physicist at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
in Chilton, central England, said late yesterday
in a telephone interview. 'Everything on the sun
that could have affected climate has been going
in the wrong direction to cause warming, and
we've seen continued warming.'
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=aLq__5sibbvo&refe...
There's the link to the entire article. Follow it and be enlightened.
As you may have noticed, the warmest part of the day is not noon,
but about 2 hours, or 1/12 of a day later. Likewise, the coldest day
of the year is not the winter equinox, but about a month, or 1/12 year
later.
Sorry, that should be "solstice" on June 21 and December 22, not
"equinox"- A. McIntire
Likewise, one would expect a delay in weather change due to
a dampening effect by the oceans. Here's a
paper for you
http://www.umweltluege.de/pdf/Gamma_Rays_and_Climate.pdf
- A. McIntire- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
30 Jul 2007 03:49:10 PM |
|
|
Spartakus <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote:
nob...@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus<sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
As far as any link between global warming and the sun's
irradiance, well, that was debunked quite some time ago.
If you don't think the sun warms the earth, then maybe you've
been breathing too many hybrid car fumes.
If you think that's what I said, it's a miracle you can operate a
computer on so few functioning neurons.
Tell us, what ended the ice age and
the little ice age? The sun's output is not constant.
No it's not, but read the following:
"The scientists examined historical records of solar
activity over the past century, studying measures
such as the number of sunspots and the amount
of light emitted. They found that the total radiation
from the sun peaked in 1985, according to Mike
Lockwood, co-author of the paper published
today in the U.K. journal Proceedings of the
Royal Society A.
"'The sun did a U-turn around 1985, but the
temperatures kept on rising,' Lockwood, a solar
physicist at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
in Chilton, central England, said late yesterday
in a telephone interview. 'Everything on the sun
that could have affected climate has been going
in the wrong direction to cause warming, and
we've seen continued warming.'
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=aLq__5sibbvo&refer=europe
There's the link to the entire article. Follow it and be enlightened.
This was a "study", and as everyone knows, throw down enough cash and
you can get a study done to prove just about anything. The earth's
temperature has only gone up 0.5 F in the last century. Are those solar
records they studied that went back 100 years that accurate? It's just
more propaganda.
You know the North Pole is mostly floating ice averaging 3 meters thick?
The whole thing could melt and it wouldn't effect sea levels much at
all. The South Pole is 9000 ft thick and land based, but it's also 46 F
colder in the south pole. It's not going to melt because of man made
global warming.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
30 Jul 2007 09:40:04 PM |
|
|
(the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
(the_blogologist) wrote:
Tell us, what ended the ice age and
the little ice age? The sun's output is not constant.
No it's not, but read the following:
"The scientists examined historical records of solar
activity over the past century, studying measures
such as the number of sunspots and the amount
of light emitted. They found that the total radiation
from the sun peaked in 1985, according to Mike
Lockwood, co-author of the paper published
today in the U.K. journal Proceedings of the
Royal Society A.
"'The sun did a U-turn around 1985, but the
temperatures kept on rising,' Lockwood, a solar
physicist at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
in Chilton, central England, said late yesterday
in a telephone interview. 'Everything on the sun
that could have affected climate has been going
in the wrong direction to cause warming, and
we've seen continued warming.'
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=aLq__5sibbvo&refe...
There's the link to the entire article. Follow it and be enlightened.
This was a "study",
You ignorant tosser! That was a research paper published in
"Proceedings of the Royal Academy of Science". That means it was peer-
reviewed from here to Sunday and has far more credibility than the
***study*** cited in Captain Compassion's original post.
and as everyone knows, throw down enough cash and
you can get a study done to prove just about anything.
Sawing off the branch you are sitting on is not the smartest debating
tactic, because the same can be said for the ***study*** cited in
Captain Compassion's original post.
The earth's temperature has only gone up 0.5 F in the last century.
Can you imagine how much energy it took to warm the entire planet by
that half-degree? Here's a free clue - a lot more than it takes to
warm up your bedroom a half-degree.
Are those solar records they studied that went back 100 years
that accurate? It's just more propaganda.
If you have better data, let's see it. Put up or shut up.
You know the North Pole is mostly floating ice averaging
3 meters thick? The whole thing could melt and it wouldn't
effect sea levels much at all.
Irrelevant. Did you know it takes lots, lots more calories to
actually make the ice melt than it does to warm it by half a degree?
Think about the law of conservation. We're still going to have those
extra calories in the atmosphere, looking for something else to do.
When the last polar ice melts, that will be like a springboard for all
kinds of violent climate changes. Sound like fun?
The South Pole is 9000 ft thick and land based, but it's also
46 F colder in the south pole. It's not going to melt because
of man made global warming.
It *is* melting, you ignorant tosser.
http://www.worldviewofglobalwarming.org/pages/antarctica.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
31 Jul 2007 06:44:20 PM |
|
|
Spartakus <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote:
nob...@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
nob...@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) wrote:
Tell us, what ended the ice age and
the little ice age? The sun's output is not constant.
No it's not, but read the following:
"The scientists examined historical records of solar
activity over the past century, studying measures
such as the number of sunspots and the amount
of light emitted. They found that the total radiation
from the sun peaked in 1985, according to Mike
Lockwood, co-author of the paper published
today in the U.K. journal Proceedings of the
Royal Society A.
"'The sun did a U-turn around 1985, but the
temperatures kept on rising,' Lockwood, a solar
physicist at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
in Chilton, central England, said late yesterday
in a telephone interview. 'Everything on the sun
that could have affected climate has been going
in the wrong direction to cause warming, and
we've seen continued warming.'
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=aLq__5sibbvo&refe...
There's the link to the entire article. Follow it and be enlightened.
This was a "study",
You ignorant tosser! That was a research paper published in
"Proceedings of the Royal Academy of Science". That means it was peer-
reviewed from here to Sunday and has far more credibility than the
***study*** cited in Captain Compassion's original post.
Yet another version of might makes right? Your scientists beat mine so I
have to do what you say? What ever happened to proof? And I don't mean
just saying you have proof, but actually proving it.
and as everyone knows, throw down enough cash and
you can get a study done to prove just about anything.
Sawing off the branch you are sitting on is not the smartest debating
tactic, because the same can be said for the ***study*** cited in
Captain Compassion's original post.
The earth's temperature has only gone up 0.5 F in the last century.
Can you imagine how much energy it took to warm the entire planet by
that half-degree? Here's a free clue - a lot more than it takes to
warm up your bedroom a half-degree.
Are those solar records they studied that went back 100 years
that accurate? It's just more propaganda.
If you have better data, let's see it. Put up or shut up.
Yet another version of might makes right? I have to accept your data
because I don't have better data even though your data is not accurate.
The burden of proof is on you, cause you're the one who thinks we should
spend a trillion+ dollars fighting global warming.
You know the North Pole is mostly floating ice averaging
3 meters thick? The whole thing could melt and it wouldn't
effect sea levels much at all.
Irrelevant. Did you know it takes lots, lots more calories to
actually make the ice melt than it does to warm it by half a degree?
Think about the law of conservation. We're still going to have those
extra calories in the atmosphere, looking for something else to do.
When the last polar ice melts, that will be like a springboard for all
kinds of violent climate changes. Sound like fun?
Sounds like you're an idiot.
The South Pole is 9000 ft thick and land based, but it's also
46 F colder in the south pole. It's not going to melt because
of man made global warming.
It *is* melting, you ignorant tosser.
It melts along the edges, just like it's done for millions of years. The
main mass of the South Pole is 46 F cooder than the North Pole and
you're still an idiot.
http://www.worldviewofglobalwarming.org/pages/antarctica.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
31 Jul 2007 10:15:55 PM |
|
|
(the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
(the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
No it's not, but read the following:
"The scientists examined historical records of solar
activity over the past century, studying measures
such as the number of sunspots and the amount
of light emitted. They found that the total radiation
from the sun peaked in 1985, according to Mike
Lockwood, co-author of the paper published
today in the U.K. journal Proceedings of the
Royal Society A.
"'The sun did a U-turn around 1985, but the
temperatures kept on rising,' Lockwood, a solar
physicist at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
in Chilton, central England, said late yesterday
in a telephone interview. 'Everything on the sun
that could have affected climate has been going
in the wrong direction to cause warming, and
we've seen continued warming.'
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=aLq__5sibbvo&refe...
There's the link to the entire article. Follow it and be enlightened.
This was a "study",
You ignorant tosser! That was a research paper published in
"Proceedings of the Royal Academy of Science". That means it was peer-
reviewed from here to Sunday and has far more credibility than the
***study*** cited in Captain Compassion's original post.
Yet another version of might makes right? Your scientists beat mine so I
have to do what you say?
Exactly. And what I would like you to do is stand on your desk with
your butt facing the computer so you have to type in your text by
bending over and facing the keyboard backwards. Your responses will
make a hell of a lot more sense.
What ever happened to proof? And I don't mean
just saying you have proof, but actually proving it.
You want me to take time out from my busy schedule to repeat every
measurement taken by the authors, just to make sure? Or maybe you
want me to hire one of those sky-writing airplanes to transcribe the
entire text in the sky above where you live?
Look, you've got a peer-reviewed research paper published in a
respected science journal going up against a "study" by a coven of
anti-global-warming wankers who don't have a prayer of getting their
"research" published in anything more respectable than World Weekly
News. Who's most likely to have gotten it right?
and as everyone knows, throw down enough cash and
you can get a study done to prove just about anything.
Sawing off the branch you are sitting on is not the smartest debating
tactic, because the same can be said for the ***study*** cited in
Captain Compassion's original post.
I'm sure you had a response, bloggy, but you were drowned out by that
chorus of chirping crickets.
The earth's temperature has only gone up 0.5 F in the last century.
Can you imagine how much energy it took to warm the entire planet by
that half-degree? Here's a free clue - a lot more than it takes to
warm up your bedroom a half-degree.
[chirp, chirp]
Are those solar records they studied that went back 100 years
that accurate? It's just more propaganda.
If you have better data, let's see it. Put up or shut up.
Yet another version of might makes right? I have to accept your data
because I don't have better data even though your data is not accurate.
You do not have better data, and you have not demonstrated that the
data in the research paper is inaccurate. What would Occam say in
this situation?
The burden of proof is on you, cause you're the one who thinks we should
spend a trillion+ dollars fighting global warming.
That's a number pulled completely out of your nether regions.
You know the North Pole is mostly floating ice averaging
3 meters thick? The whole thing could melt and it wouldn't
effect sea levels much at all.
Irrelevant. Did you know it takes lots, lots more calories to
actually make the ice melt than it does to warm it by half a degree?
Think about the law of conservation. We're still going to have those
extra calories in the atmosphere, looking for something else to do.
When the last polar ice melts, that will be like a springboard for all
kinds of violent climate changes. Sound like fun?
Sounds like you're an idiot.
Never in the entire history of Usenet has anyone come up with a more
original, more cutting and more effective response!
The South Pole is 9000 ft thick and land based, but it's also
46 F colder in the south pole. It's not going to melt because
of man made global warming.
It *is* melting, you ignorant tosser.
It melts along the edges, just like it's done for millions of years. The
main mass of the South Pole is 46 F cooder than the North Pole and
you're still an idiot.
I guess Jay Zwally, Isabella Velicogna and their colleagues are idiots
too, since they found that there is a net loss of ice happening at the
Antarctic.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/sci/tech/4790238.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/science/nature/4767296.stm
Really, your ignorance of the relevant science is appalling, and you
should confine your frat house *****-waving for a safer environment,
preferably the business end of a cheese grater.
.
|
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
01 Aug 2007 10:32:08 AM |
|
|
Spartakus <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote:
nob...@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
nob...@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) wrote:
This was a "study",
You ignorant tosser! That was a research paper published in
"Proceedings of the Royal Academy of Science". That means it was peer-
reviewed from here to Sunday and has far more credibility than the
***study*** cited in Captain Compassion's original post.
Yet another version of might makes right? Your scientists beat mine so I
have to do what you say?
Exactly. And what I would like you to do is stand on your desk with
your butt facing the computer so you have to type in your text by
bending over and facing the keyboard backwards. Your responses will
make a hell of a lot more sense.
Is that your scientific method response?
What ever happened to proof? And I don't mean
just saying you have proof, but actually proving it.
You want me to take time out from my busy schedule to repeat every
measurement taken by the authors, just to make sure? Or maybe you
want me to hire one of those sky-writing airplanes to transcribe the
entire text in the sky above where you live?
I just want proof of what you say, and not just saying that some expert
said so, and therefore I should just accept what he says because he's an
"expert".
Look, you've got a peer-reviewed research paper published in a
respected science journal going up against a "study" by a coven of
anti-global-warming wankers who don't have a prayer of getting their
"research" published in anything more respectable than World Weekly
News. Who's most likely to have gotten it right?
So then, since your scientist has more political backing than mine, then
your scientist wins? It's just nonsense. Where's your proof?
and as everyone knows, throw down enough cash and
you can get a study done to prove just about anything.
Sawing off the branch you are sitting on is not the smartest debating
tactic, because the same can be said for the ***study*** cited in
Captain Compassion's original post.
I'm sure you had a response, bloggy, but you were drowned out by that
chorus of chirping crickets.
<creek> <creek>
The earth's temperature has only gone up 0.5 F in the last century.
Can you imagine how much energy it took to warm the entire planet by
that half-degree? Here's a free clue - a lot more than it takes to
warm up your bedroom a half-degree.
[chirp, chirp]
<creek> <creek>
Are those solar records they studied that went back 100 years
that accurate? It's just more propaganda.
If you have better data, let's see it. Put up or shut up.
Yet another version of might makes right? I have to accept your data
because I don't have better data even though your data is not accurate.
You do not have better data, and you have not demonstrated that the
data in the research paper is inaccurate. What would Occam say in
this situation?
Since he lived during the medieval warming period he'd probably wouldn't
be too concerned. You do know all this CO2 we're putting in the
atmosphere used to be in the atmosphere?
The burden of proof is on you, cause you're the one who thinks we should
spend a trillion+ dollars fighting global warming.
That's a number pulled completely out of your nether regions.
How much do you think we ought to spend? These are the programs that
Nasa is working on:
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/8595/globalwarmingtb2.jpg
News article(s) about it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/6369971.stm
Documentary that goes with this article: 60 min
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=286000425078890061
Exposed: Climate of Fear 42 min
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2951065823736508883
You know the North Pole is mostly floating ice averaging
3 meters thick? The whole thing could melt and it wouldn't
effect sea levels much at all.
Irrelevant. Did you know it takes lots, lots more calories to
actually make the ice melt than it does to warm it by half a degree?
Think about the law of conservation. We're still going to have those
extra calories in the atmosphere, looking for something else to do.
When the last polar ice melts, that will be like a springboard for all
kinds of violent climate changes. Sound like fun?
Sounds like you're an idiot.
Never in the entire history of Usenet has anyone come up with a more
original, more cutting and more effective response!
And no more true.
The South Pole is 9000 ft thick and land based, but it's also
46 F colder in the south pole. It's not going to melt because
of man made global warming.
It *is* melting, you ignorant tosser.
It melts along the edges, just like it's done for millions of years. The
main mass of the South Pole is 46 F cooder than the North Pole and
you're still an idiot.
I guess Jay Zwally, Isabella Velicogna and their colleagues are idiots
too, since they found that there is a net loss of ice happening at the
Antarctic.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/sci/tech/4790238.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/science/nature/4767296.stm
Studies find the net losses which have been going on for thousands of
years, but ignore the net gains that occur every winter, in order for
net gains for the global warmest.
Really, your ignorance of the relevant science is appalling, and you
should confine your frat house *****-waving for a safer environment,
preferably the business end of a cheese grater.
Is that your scientific opinion or some some left wing rant?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
02 Aug 2007 09:29:32 PM |
|
|
Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
nob...@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
nob...@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) wrote:
This was a "study",
You ignorant tosser! That was a research paper published in
"Proceedings of the Royal Academy of Science". That means
it was peer-reviewed from here to Sunday and has far more
credibility than the ***study*** cited in Captain Compassion's
original post.
Yet another version of might makes right? Your scientists beat
mine so I have to do what you say?
Exactly. And what I would like you to do is stand on your desk with
your butt facing the computer so you have to type in your text by
bending over and facing the keyboard backwards. Your responses
will make a hell of a lot more sense.
Is that your scientific method response?
That's my "shake loose some common sense from blogologist" response.
It doesn't seem to have had any positive effect.
What ever happened to proof? And I don't mean
just saying you have proof, but actually proving it.
You want me to take time out from my busy schedule to repeat
every measurement taken by the authors, just to make sure? Or
maybe you want me to hire one of those sky-writing airplanes to
transcribe the entire text in the sky above where you live?
I just want proof of what you say, and not just saying that some expert
said so, and therefore I should just accept what he says because he's
an "expert".
Look, tosser, we don't *prove* things - we support propositions with
*evidence* - with *facts* that you can check and measure. What facts
are you having difficulty with? That the research paper I cited
exists? That the Royal Academy of Science exists? (That would be a
surprise to Steven Hawking, not to mention Isaac Newton.)
Look, you've got a peer-reviewed research paper published in a
respected science journal going up against a "study" by a coven of
anti-global-warming wankers who don't have a prayer of getting their
"research" published in anything more respectable than World Weekly
News. Who's most likely to have gotten it right?
So then, since your scientist has more political backing than mine, then
your scientist wins? It's just nonsense. Where's your proof?
No, tosser, it's more like, my scientist used sounder methodology than
your scientist, and therefore the chances that my scientist got it
right are overwhelmingly in his favor.
Are those solar records they studied that went back 100 years
that accurate? It's just more propaganda.
If you have better data, let's see it. Put up or shut up.
Yet another version of might makes right? I have to accept your data
because I don't have better data even though your data is not accurate.
You do not have better data, and you have not demonstrated that the
data in the research paper is inaccurate. What would Occam say in
this situation?
Since he lived during the medieval warming period he'd probably wouldn't
be too concerned. You do know all this CO2 we're putting in the
atmosphere used to be in the atmosphere?
Yeah, about 600 million years ago. The earth's climate was a
veritable blast furnace at that time. Sound like fun?
The burden of proof is on you, cause you're the one who thinks we should
spend a trillion+ dollars fighting global warming.
That's a number pulled completely out of your nether regions.
How much do you think we ought to spend? These are the programs that
Nasa is working on:
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/8595/globalwarmingtb2.jpg
News article(s) about it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/6369971.stm
Documentary that goes with this article: 60 min
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=286000425078890061
Exposed: Climate of Fear 42 min
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2951065823736508883
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
You're aware, aren't you, that the "rockets creating sulphur clouds"
proposal is a pet idea of Dr. Paul Crutzen, who is a past Nobel Prize
winner but who seems to have lost his marbles. Crutzen is not
affliated with NASA, and NASA has no plans to implement this idea.
You had me going there, bloggy. Here I thought you were an obdurately
stupid and scientifically illiterate idiot, and it turns out that you
are a supremely talented satirist.
.
|
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
03 Aug 2007 07:56:11 AM |
|
|
Spartakus <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote:
You do not have better data, and you have not demonstrated that the
data in the research paper is inaccurate. What would Occam say in
this situation?
Since he lived during the medieval warming period he'd probably wouldn't
be too concerned. You do know all this CO2 we're putting in the
atmosphere used to be in the atmosphere?
Yeah, about 600 million years ago. The earth's climate was a
veritable blast furnace at that time. Sound like fun?
The climate was such that it produced thick layers of rotting vegetation
in the deserts of the middle east to produce those oil fields. That's
what oil and coal is, ancient rotted vegetation.
The burden of proof is on you, cause you're the one who thinks we should
spend a trillion+ dollars fighting global warming.
That's a number pulled completely out of your nether regions.
How much do you think we ought to spend? These are the programs that
Nasa is working on:
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/8595/globalwarmingtb2.jpg
News article(s) about it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/6369971.stm
Documentary that goes with this article: 60 min
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=286000425078890061
Exposed: Climate of Fear 42 min
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2951065823736508883
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
You're aware, aren't you, that the "rockets creating sulphur clouds"
proposal is a pet idea of Dr. Paul Crutzen, who is a past Nobel Prize
winner but who seems to have lost his marbles.
They are apparently taking him seriously.
Crutzen is not
affliated with NASA, and NASA has no plans to implement this idea.
Those are some of the "solutions" NASA is studying.
You had me going there, bloggy. Here I thought you were an obdurately
stupid and scientifically illiterate idiot, and it turns out that you
are a supremely talented satirist.
If you lack any logical argument or evidence, just resort to insults. It
makes you sound really intelligent when you do that.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
03 Aug 2007 09:39:24 AM |
|
|
(the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
You do not have better data, and you have not demonstrated that the
data in the research paper is inaccurate. What would Occam say in
this situation?
Since he lived during the medieval warming period he'd probably wouldn't
be too concerned. You do know all this CO2 we're putting in the
atmosphere used to be in the atmosphere?
Yeah, about 600 million years ago. The earth's climate was a
veritable blast furnace at that time. Sound like fun?
The climate was such that it produced thick layers of rotting vegetation
in the deserts of the middle east to produce those oil fields. That's
what oil and coal is, ancient rotted vegetation.
The point is, 600 million years ago, the earth was *uninhabitable* by
human beings. For most of human history, CO2 levels have stayed at
around 250 to 280 parts per million. It is currently 350 ppm. We are
returning carbon to the atmosphere that was sequestered for millennia
faster than it can be resequestered. If we keep it up, the earth will
once again be uninhabitable by human beings.
Sound like fun?
How much do you think we ought to spend? These are the programs that
Nasa is working on:
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/8595/globalwarmingtb2.jpg
News article(s) about it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/6369971.stm
Documentary that goes with this article: 60 min
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=286000425078890061
Exposed: Climate of Fear 42 min
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2951065823736508883
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
You're aware, aren't you, that the "rockets creating sulphur clouds"
proposal is a pet idea of Dr. Paul Crutzen, who is a past Nobel Prize
winner but who seems to have lost his marbles.
They are apparently taking him seriously.
Who is taking him seriously?
Crutzen is not
affliated with NASA, and NASA has no plans to implement this idea.
Those are some of the "solutions" NASA is studying.
Document or retract.
You had me going there, bloggy. Here I thought you were an obdurately
stupid and scientifically illiterate idiot, and it turns out that you
are a supremely talented satirist.
If you lack any logical argument or evidence, just resort to insults. It
makes you sound really intelligent when you do that.
Being called a supremely talented satirist insults you? Such thin
skin.
Btw, you have not produced one logical argument or offered any
credible evidence, so you're a fine one to complain.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Governor Swill" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
03 Aug 2007 01:34:41 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 07:39:24 -0700, Spartakus <spartakus@my-deja.com>
wrote:
The point is, 600 million years ago, the earth was *uninhabitable* by
human beings. For most of human history, CO2 levels have stayed at
around 250 to 280 parts per million. It is currently 350 ppm. We are
returning carbon to the atmosphere that was sequestered for millennia
faster than it can be resequestered. If we keep it up, the earth will
once again be uninhabitable by human beings.
Sound like fun?
This battle will be won when we discover profitable and broadly
marketable uses for the excess carbon and begin sequestering it in
household devices. Carbon fiber is already in lots of things.
Swill
--
Picture of the day
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
03 Aug 2007 05:37:06 PM |
|
|
Spartakus <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote:
nob...@nowheres.com (the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
You do not have better data, and you have not demonstrated that the
data in the research paper is inaccurate. What would Occam say in
this situation?
Since he lived during the medieval warming period he'd probably wouldn't
be too concerned. You do know all this CO2 we're putting in the
atmosphere used to be in the atmosphere?
Yeah, about 600 million years ago. The earth's climate was a
veritable blast furnace at that time. Sound like fun?
The climate was such that it produced thick layers of rotting vegetation
in the deserts of the middle east to produce those oil fields. That's
what oil and coal is, ancient rotted vegetation.
The point is, 600 million years ago, the earth was *uninhabitable* by
human beings.
OMG!!! Did you really say that?? LMAO
For most of human history, CO2 levels have stayed at
around 250 to 280 parts per million. It is currently 350 ppm. We are
returning carbon to the atmosphere that was sequestered for millennia
faster than it can be resequestered. If we keep it up, the earth will
once again be uninhabitable by human beings.
Concentrations of CO2 only become dangerous above 50,000 ppm.
Sound like fun?
How much do you think we ought to spend? These are the programs that
Nasa is working on:
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/8595/globalwarmingtb2.jpg
News article(s) about it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/6369971.stm
Documentary that goes with this article: 60 min
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=286000425078890061
Exposed: Climate of Fear 42 min
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2951065823736508883
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
You're aware, aren't you, that the "rockets creating sulphur clouds"
proposal is a pet idea of Dr. Paul Crutzen, who is a past Nobel Prize
winner but who seems to have lost his marbles.
They are apparently taking him seriously.
Who is taking him seriously?
Crutzen is not
affliated with NASA, and NASA has no plans to implement this idea.
Those are some of the "solutions" NASA is studying.
Document or retract.
Just type - "global warming" (in quotes) in NASA's search engine, over
4000 hits, just on NASA's site. They are all over that monkey....
http://www.nasa.gov/
You had me going there, bloggy. Here I thought you were an obdurately
stupid and scientifically illiterate idiot, and it turns out that you
are a supremely talented satirist.
If you lack any logical argument or evidence, just resort to insults. It
makes you sound really intelligent when you do that.
Being called a supremely talented satirist insults you? Such thin
skin.
Btw, you have not produced one logical argument or offered any
credible evidence, so you're a fine one to complain.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
04 Aug 2007 07:13:46 PM |
|
|
(the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
(the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
You do not have better data, and you have not demonstrated that
the data in the research paper is inaccurate. What would Occam
say in this situation?
Since he lived during the medieval warming period he'd probably
wouldn't be too concerned. You do know all this CO2 we're putting
in the atmosphere used to be in the atmosphere?
Yeah, about 600 million years ago. The earth's climate was a
veritable blast furnace at that time. Sound like fun?
The climate was such that it produced thick layers of rotting
vegetation in the deserts of the middle east to produce those
oil fields. That's what oil and coal is, ancient rotted vegetation.
The point is, 600 million years ago, the earth was *uninhabitable*
by human beings.
OMG!!! Did you really say that?? LMAO
You are so out of your league, bloggy. Don't be fooled by that poster
of Raquel Welch in "One Million Years B.C.". Humans have only been
around for about 250,000 years.
For most of human history, CO2 levels have stayed at
around 250 to 280 parts per million. It is currently 350
ppm. We are returning carbon to the atmosphere that
was sequestered for millennia faster than it can be
resequestered. If we keep it up, the earth will
once again be uninhabitable by human beings.
Sound like fun?
Concentrations of CO2 only become dangerous above 50,000 ppm.
Having fun with with your strawman?
How much do you think we ought to spend? These are the
programs that Nasa is working on:
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/8595/globalwarmingtb2.jpg
News article(s) about it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/6369971.stm
Documentary that goes with this article: 60 min
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=286000425078890061
Exposed: Climate of Fear 42 min
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2951065823736508883
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
You're aware, aren't you, that the "rockets creating sulphur clouds"
proposal is a pet idea of Dr. Paul Crutzen, who is a past Nobel Prize
winner but who seems to have lost his marbles.
They are apparently taking him seriously.
Who is taking him seriously?
Answer: bloggy takes his seriously.
Crutzen is not affliated with NASA, and NASA has
no plans to implement this idea.
Those are some of the "solutions" NASA is studying.
Document or retract.
Just type - "global warming" (in quotes) in NASA's search engine, over
4000 hits, just on NASA's site. They are all over that monkey....
http://www.nasa.gov/
Liar! :-)
Nothing about "rockets creating sulphur clouds", bloggy.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Baldin Lee Pramer" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
31 Jul 2007 10:32:05 PM |
|
|
On Jul 29, 6:45 pm, (the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
As far as any link between global warming and the sun's irradiance,
well, that was debunked quite some time ago.
If you don't think the sun warms the earth, then maybe you've been
breathing too many hybrid car fumes. Tell us, what ended the ice age and
the little ice age? The sun's output is not constant.
You aren't smart enough to have an opinion on this. Stick to beer and
football.
BLP
.
|
|
|
| User: "the_blogologist" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
01 Aug 2007 10:32:08 AM |
|
|
Baldin Lee Pramer <baldinpramer@msn.com> wrote:
On Jul 29, 6:45 pm, (the_blogologist) wrote:
Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:
As far as any link between global warming and the sun's irradiance,
well, that was debunked quite some time ago.
If you don't think the sun warms the earth, then maybe you've been
breathing too many hybrid car fumes. Tell us, what ended the ice age and
the little ice age? The sun's output is not constant.
You aren't smart enough to have an opinion on this. Stick to beer and
football.
BLP
I will as soon as you stop trying to rob my wallet.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tartarus" |
|
| Title: Re: Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun |
29 Jul 2007 01:45:02 AM |
|
|
On Jul 28, 7:37 pm, Captain Compassion <dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net>
wrote:
The evidence for a sun/climate connection keeps pouring in,
Wow, really? The *sun* is connected to climate? That's *incredible*!!!
Tartarus
.
|
|
|
|
