Climate Change

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent ...

Unread postby webolife » Mon Mar 16, 2009 2:30 pm

Part of the problem with the soot theory for global warming is that particulates in the atmosphere raise its albedo, thereby stimulating cooling. This is true regardless of the color of the clouds/smog.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2536
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Global Warming does another DOH (8(/)

Unread postby katvira » Fri May 22, 2009 12:05 am

Can we actually change global warming enough to help the planet? With environmental policies and G8 summits is actually a possibility to change global warming, with the whole in the ozone layer, the rising sea level, metal polar caps, will it be successful? Can we actually change global warming for the better?
katvira
Guest
 

Re: Global Warming does another DOH (8(/)

Unread postby solrey » Fri May 22, 2009 7:13 am

Yes, the climate changes, naturally and cyclically. Climate change is not anthropogenic, and much like 'mainstream' cosmology, AGW is based on un-proven/false assumptions and incomplete data within the computer models.
The sun is likely entering a long, deep quiet period, similar to the maunder or dalton minimums, which lead to short term ice-ages and wrecked society at the time.

If humans are stupid enough to attempt to cool the planet to offset AGW, we would likely just exacerbate and accelerate the rapidly approaching cooling.

Sunspots are still few and far between, and exceptionally weak.

As of
Spotless Days
Current Stretch: 2 days
2009 total: 116 days (83%)
Since 2004: 627 days
Typical Solar Min: 485 days


A new cycle 24 sunspot (sunspeck) group, 1017, that was very weak and faded out 2 days ago, after lasting just 4 or 5 days, was at a noticeably lower latitude than would be typical for a new sunspot cycle, indicating that this cycle 24 is going to be very weak. Significantly weaker than even NASA's latest prediction, IMHO.
Also, most of the recent sunspots (more like sunspecks) wouldn't have even been seen, thus not counted, over a hundred years ago. I think we're closer to the conditions of the Dalton minimum than we realize.

From an EU perspective, I wonder if the interstellar 'dust cloud' that the solar system is moving through right now might be absorbing, or shunting, some of the current powering the Sun, resulting in such decreased activity.
“Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"
Nikola Tesla
User avatar
solrey
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:54 pm

Re: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent ...

Unread postby moses » Sun May 31, 2009 1:53 am

A recent article on the effect of fires on the Arctic.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 140850.htm
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1102
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

The Definitive 1.5hr Climate Change Rebuttal

Unread postby Groovy_Guy » Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:04 am

I won't waste your time writing a drawn-out explanation of what I just watched. I will give you the link to the youtube video and a link to the PDF file to follow along with the presentation.

What I will say is that this video and the accompanying presentation slides could set the precendent for all climate change/global warming debate.

Here are the links, enjoy:

[url2=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stij8sUybx0]The Video[/url2]

[url2=http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/monckton_2009.pdf]The PDF Slides[/url2]
Groovy_Guy
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 12:26 am

Re: The Definitive 1.5hr Climate Change Rebuttal

Unread postby junglelord » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:36 am

Thats odd.
I had just watched a YOUTUBE video from prisionplanet, about Al Gore dodging the question about the trial in England and the Al Gore fraud film...and I wondered who had sued him?
Well its your presenter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UC1HhEgb ... re=related

It all about financial fraud, plain and simple.
Al Gore has become very rich over his fraudulant thesis.
He even opened a new kind of financial institution, that buys and sells carbon tax credits, and opened it in England.
How clever.
:twisted:
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord
User avatar
junglelord
 
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: The Definitive 1.5hr Climate Change Rebuttal

Unread postby Komorikid » Thu Oct 29, 2009 1:28 am

Excellent presentation.
I love Monckton's concise style and his subject matter is always thoroughly researched.
Conventional wisdom has ruled all branches of science for way too long.
Fiction can't be proven. Fact can't be denied - Paul M
User avatar
Komorikid
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 11:45 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: The Definitive 1.5hr Climate Change Rebuttal

Unread postby Tzunamii » Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:58 am

Excellent material!
Thankyou for posting this.
User avatar
Tzunamii
 
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: The Definitive 1.5hr Climate Change Rebuttal

Unread postby junglelord » Thu Oct 29, 2009 5:55 am

Best 3.5 hours I ever spent.
FALL OF THE REPUBLIC
http://www.spywitnessnews.org/content/f ... rsion-2009

The sad truth from watching the redux videos today and the Republic videos, is that most people still believe the government is for the people, of the people, by the people. Its clear to me that indeed the entire upper levels of government are controlled by forces outside the constitution.

I have been asked before to keep my ideas of a grand conspiracy, out of the forum, but I see no difference between dark matter, dark energy, black holes and gravity only cosmology as full of holes, yet claimed as truth, just as Global Warming and Al Gore run around behind his new bank and his tax credits, along with his Nobel prize.

Follow the money, thats where the power and the corruption lie
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord
User avatar
junglelord
 
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: The Definitive 1.5hr Climate Change Rebuttal

Unread postby ShaneMuir » Sun Nov 08, 2009 10:15 pm

Here is a great site with lots of information on this subject.

They also have great newsletters when new information becomes available.

http://www.climatesceptics.com.au/
ShaneMuir
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 10:07 pm


Re: The Definitive 1.5hr Climate Change Rebuttal

Unread postby allynh » Mon Nov 09, 2009 1:04 pm

The video mentions a program from 1974 that we need to track down.

The Weather Machine - BBC 1974

This is a clip from the program.

Professor George Kukla
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-Vn5AStFWo

Post here if anyone finds the complete video.

Thanks...
allynh
 
Posts: 918
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Probable total disproof of planetary greenhouse theories

Unread postby tholden » Mon Dec 07, 2009 3:09 pm

An article of unusual interest has appeared on FR recently with bearing on the question of who between Carl Sagan and Immanuel Velikovsky came closer to having a rational explanation for the 900F surface temperatures found on Venus. Sagan claimed the heat was due to a greenhouse effect while Velikovsky claimed the planet was simply new and hadn't had time to cool.

I am not aware of a third theory for the surface temperature on Venus. If Sagan's theory is actually unworkable, then you'd almost have to assume Velikovsky was correct even if other arguments were lacking.

All of that is aside from the bearing which this article has on the question of man-made global warming of course.....


http://globalwarmingnot.blogtownhall.co ... _ago.thtml

Discussion on FR:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/blogg ... sts?page=1

Century old experiment proves CO2 and IR don't warm atmosphere.
Blogosphere ^ | 6th Dec 2009 | Copied from blog

Posted on Sunday, December 06, 2009 5:23:33 AM by plenipotentiary

Description of simple experiment that shows CO2 can't cause warming by trapping Infra Red (Credit to mystery blogger)

The claim that carbon dioxide (CO2) can increase air temperatures by "trapping" infrared radiation (IR) ignores the fact that in 1909 physicist R.W. Wood disproved the popular 19th Century thesis that greenhouses stayed warm by trapping IR. Unfortunately, many people who claim to be scientists are unaware of Wood's experiment which was originally published in the Philosophical magazine , 1909, vol 17, p319-320.

Wood was an expert on IR. His accomplishments included inventing both IR and UV (ultraviolet) photography. Wood constructed two identical small greenhouses. The description implies the type of structure a gardener would refer to as a "coldframe" rather than a building a person could walk into. He lined the interior with black cardboard which would absorb radiation and convert it to heat which would heat the air through conduction. The cardboard would also produce radiation. He covered one greenhouse with a sheet of transparent rock salt and the other with a sheet of glass. The glass would block IR and the rock salt would allow it to pass.

During the first run of the experiment the rock salt greenhouse heated faster due to IR from the sun entering it but not the glass greenhouse. He then set up another pane of glass to filter the IR from the sun before the light reached the greenhouses. The result from this run was that the greenhouses both heated to about 50 C with less than a degree difference between the two. Wood didn't indicate which was warmer or whether there was any difference in the thermal conductivity between the glass sheet and the rock salt. A slight difference in the amount of heat transfered through the sheets by conduction could explain such a minor difference in temperature. The two sheets probably didn't conduct heat at the same rate.

The experiment conclusively demonstrates that greenhouses heat up and stay warm by confining heated air rather than by trapping IR. If trapping IR in an enclosed space doesn't cause higher air temperature, then CO2 in the atmosphere cannot cause higher air temperatures. The heated air in the greenhouses couldn't rise higher than the sheets that covered the tops of the greenhouses. Heated air outside is free to rise allowing colder air to fall to the ground. Atmospheric CO2 is even less likely to function as a barrier to IR or reflect it back to reheat the ground or water than the sheet of glass in Wood's greenhouse. The blackened cardboard in Wood's greenhouses was a very good radiator of IR as is typical of black substances. The water that covers 70% of earth's surface is a very poor radiator and produces only limited amounts of IR as is typical of transparent substances. Water releases heat through evaporation rather than radiation. The glass sheet provided a solid barrier to IR.

Atmospheric CO2 is widely dispersed comprising less than 400 parts per million in the atmosphere. Trapping IR with CO2 would be like trying to confine mice with a chain link fence. Glass reflects a wider spectrum of IR than interacts with CO2. The glass sheets reflected IR back toward the floor of the greenhouse. CO2 doesn't reflect IR. At the time of Wood's experiment, it was believed that CO2 and other gas molecules became hotter after absorbing IR. Four years later Niels Bohr reported his discovery that the absorption of specific wavelengths of light didn't cause gas atoms/molecules to become hotter. Instead, the absorption of specific wavelengths of light caused the electrons in an atom/molecule to move to a higher energy state. After absorption of light of a specific wavelength an atom couldn't absorb additional radiation of that wavelength without first emitting light of that wavelength. (Philosophical Magazine Series 6, Volume 26 July 1913, p. 1-25) Unlike the glass which reflects IR back where it comes from, CO2 molecules emit IR up and sideways as well as down. In the time interval between absorbing and reemitting radiation, CO2 molecules allow IR to pass them by. Glass continuously reflects IR.

Those who claim that CO2 molecules in the atmosphere can cause heating by trapping IR have yet to provide any empirical scientific evidence to prove such a physical process exists. The experiment by R.W. Wood demonstrates that even a highly reflective covering cannot cause heating by trapping IR in a confined space. There is no way CO2, which at best only affects a small portion of the IR produced by earth's surface, can heat the atmosphere by trapping IR. Contrary to the lie repeated in news stories about climate, science doesn't say that CO2 is causing higher temperatures by trapping IR. Empirical science indicates that no such process exists in this physical universe.
tholden
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:02 pm

FR thread on "climate change(TM)" and Wikipedia

Unread postby tholden » Sat Dec 19, 2009 11:37 am

Interesting discussion on FR about the way Wikipedia operates...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2411194/posts
tholden
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: FR thread on "climate change(TM)" and Wikipedia

Unread postby davesmith_au » Sat Dec 19, 2009 5:25 pm

I really don't like the software freerepublic operates...

Anyhow, why not take my (informal) Wikipedia survey?

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/66DSYZZ All responses welcome!

Cheers, Dave.
"Those who fail to think outside the square will always be confined within it" - Dave Smith 2007
Please visit PlasmaResources
Please visit Thunderblogs
Please visit ColumbiaDisaster
User avatar
davesmith_au
Site Admin
 
Posts: 834
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: Adelaide, the great land of Oz

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests