|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 8, 2020 11:33:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jan 8, 2020 12:21:08 GMT
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 8, 2020 14:03:26 GMT
Ain't gonna live on Disney's farm no more.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 14, 2020 13:13:27 GMT
"William Happer – Climate Models Do CO2 With Incorrect Radiative Wings Posted on 14 January 2020 by E.M.Smith
A bit slow and dense, but important. Picks up in the lsst 10 minutes when you get to conclusions. The basic point is that the computer models use a computation for radiation by CO2 that it wrong, increasing the effect, due to incorrect handling of the “wings” ( further out emission frequencies from broadening) of IR emissions.
Note the the graphs don’t look that much different, but they are LOG graphs, so it is a big deal."chiefio.wordpress.com/2020/01/14/william-happer-climate-models-do-co2-with-incorrect-radiative-wings/
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 15, 2020 4:17:09 GMT
A well reasoned paper what faults are there in the logic it uses? "Climate scientists argue that the thermal energy absorbed by greenhouse gases is re-radiated, causing warming of air, slowing cooling of Earth and even directly warming Earth.
There simply is not enough heat involved in any of these proposed processes to have any significant effect on global warming. Greenhouse-warming theory “just ain’t so.”"rclutz.wordpress.com/2020/01/11/light-bulbs-disprove-global-warming/
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jan 15, 2020 8:13:00 GMT
A well reasoned paper what faults are there in the logic it uses? "Climate scientists argue that the thermal energy absorbed by greenhouse gases is re-radiated, causing warming of air, slowing cooling of Earth and even directly warming Earth.
There simply is not enough heat involved in any of these proposed processes to have any significant effect on global warming. Greenhouse-warming theory “just ain’t so.”"rclutz.wordpress.com/2020/01/11/light-bulbs-disprove-global-warming/ Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 18, 2020 12:05:18 GMT
" GAME OVER! This Madness has to end! Climate scientists insist that rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations (measured in parts per million or ppm) are forcing the Earth’s atmospheric and oceanic temperatures to increase. They base their claim on the premise that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that prevents infrared light from escaping the Earth’s atmosphere. They propose that the trapped infra-red radiation results in a net gain in the energy that is stored in the Earth’s atmosphere (~ 2 %) and oceans (> 90 %)."astroclimateconnection.blogspot.com/2020/01/game-over-this-madness-has-to-end.htmlWell well - a sine wave - let's choose a suitable start and end point draw a straight 'trend line' and panic about the warming/cooling trend
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 18, 2020 16:09:46 GMT
That is about as succinctly stated as possible. Let the "scientists" beware. They will be held to account, not for being wrong, but for being salesmen.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 18, 2020 18:21:48 GMT
A well reasoned paper what faults are there in the logic it uses? "Climate scientists argue that the thermal energy absorbed by greenhouse gases is re-radiated, causing warming of air, slowing cooling of Earth and even directly warming Earth.
There simply is not enough heat involved in any of these proposed processes to have any significant effect on global warming. Greenhouse-warming theory “just ain’t so.”"rclutz.wordpress.com/2020/01/11/light-bulbs-disprove-global-warming/The link to the "harder" science within the article. whyclimatechanges.com/impossible/
|
|
|
Post by duwayne on Jan 18, 2020 19:55:24 GMT
A well reasoned paper what faults are there in the logic it uses? "Climate scientists argue that the thermal energy absorbed by greenhouse gases is re-radiated, causing warming of air, slowing cooling of Earth and even directly warming Earth.
There simply is not enough heat involved in any of these proposed processes to have any significant effect on global warming. Greenhouse-warming theory “just ain’t so.”"rclutz.wordpress.com/2020/01/11/light-bulbs-disprove-global-warming/Nautonnier, this article says "A new LED light bulb, on the other hand, uses a very small amount of electricity to cause a diode to emit a very narrow range of frequencies within the spectrum of visible light. The LED radiates only visible light — it does not radiate heat." Meanwhile, photons, whether their wavelengths are within the visible range (light) or not are small particles of energy. LEDs do radiate heat. That is only 1 of several untrue and/or misleading statements in the article which culminates in the untrue conclusion that "Greenhouse-warming theory 'just ain't so'". These untrue articles then are siezed upon by the warmists to make the broad claim that all skeptics are wrong. There are lot's of good and accurate articles and science which show why the warmists are overestimating the effects of CO2. This isn't one of them.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 18, 2020 20:35:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mondeoman on Jan 18, 2020 23:42:23 GMT
" GAME OVER! This Madness has to end! Climate scientists insist that rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations (measured in parts per million or ppm) are forcing the Earth’s atmospheric and oceanic temperatures to increase. They base their claim on the premise that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that prevents infrared light from escaping the Earth’s atmosphere. They propose that the trapped infra-red radiation results in a net gain in the energy that is stored in the Earth’s atmosphere (~ 2 %) and oceans (> 90 %)." Since when did we add carbon to the atmosphere?
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jan 19, 2020 5:41:11 GMT
[ Snip ] Since when did we add carbon to the atmosphere? It comes out of Ford tailpipes.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 19, 2020 14:57:32 GMT
[ Snip ] Since when did we add carbon to the atmosphere? It comes out of Ford tailpipes. Christine?
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 19, 2020 15:11:50 GMT
A well reasoned paper what faults are there in the logic it uses? "Climate scientists argue that the thermal energy absorbed by greenhouse gases is re-radiated, causing warming of air, slowing cooling of Earth and even directly warming Earth.
There simply is not enough heat involved in any of these proposed processes to have any significant effect on global warming. Greenhouse-warming theory “just ain’t so.”"rclutz.wordpress.com/2020/01/11/light-bulbs-disprove-global-warming/Nautonnier, this article says "A new LED light bulb, on the other hand, uses a very small amount of electricity to cause a diode to emit a very narrow range of frequencies within the spectrum of visible light. The LED radiates only visible light — it does not radiate heat." Meanwhile, photons, whether their wavelengths are within the visible range (light) or not are small particles of energy. LEDs do radiate heat. That is only 1 of several untrue and/or misleading statements in the article which culminates in the untrue conclusion that "Greenhouse-warming theory 'just ain't so'". These untrue articles then are siezed upon by the warmists to make the broad claim that all skeptics are wrong. There are lot's of good and accurate articles and science which show why the warmists are overestimating the effects of CO2. This isn't one of them. DuWayne. Do you have some links to a few of the best of these? I'm collecting. Perhaps you posted them before and I missed them.
|
|