|
Post by itsthesunstupid on Jan 12, 2010 23:55:13 GMT
I tried to see if this had already been posted but could not find it. This is the first I have ready about Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi's work on Climate Constants. Would appreciate input/perspective . . . www.examiner.com/examiner/x-7715-Portland-Civil-Rights-Examiner~y2010m1d12-Hungarian-Physicist-Dr-Ferenc-Miskolczi-proves-CO2-emissions-irrelevant-in-Earths-ClimateFrom the article: Can our climate undergo changes due to the addition of greenhouse gasses? Yes, but only under circumstances great enough to overwhelm the presence of 333 million Cubic miles of water, such as the impact of a large Asteroid and the tremendous heat it would add instantly. Carbon Dioxide is very far inside the greenhouse effect’s self-regulatory barriers. Amounts even double our current emissions, cannot overwhelm this equilibrium. Only the Sun has that immense amount of power, and only water exists in quantities large enough to effect such a change. As long as the sun’s activity is the “business-as-usual” fluctuations and there is water on Earth, CO2 cannot cause or increase global warming.
|
|
|
Post by stranger on Jan 13, 2010 2:07:32 GMT
Since I stick my prominent proboscus in lots of odd places, I am familiar with Dr. Miskolczi and his work. His colleagues think well of him, and his math follows well accepted paths. (NO hockey sticks!) I rather suspect his work will become both better known and better accepted.
Stranger
|
|
|
Post by hairball on Jan 13, 2010 4:27:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by itsthesunstupid on Jan 13, 2010 7:27:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hairball on Jan 13, 2010 7:33:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Jan 17, 2010 15:21:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Jan 17, 2010 15:31:59 GMT
more news I think the details are coming through loud and clear. Allen's remarks from protest against 'Carbon Crooks' " "D. The researchers at the CRU chose to stop using tree ring data to approximate temperatures after 1960. They concluded this data was not accurate since it did not agree with temperatures measured by satellites and ground stations. However, they never question the tree ring data before 1960. If the data does not match after 1960, then using the tree ring data before 1960 to approximate temperatures is probably not accurate either. This is the 'trick' that was used to 'hide the decline.' This is bad science." www.wmicentral.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20402924&BRD=2264&PAG=461&dept_id=505965&rfi=6
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Jan 17, 2010 18:16:53 GMT
"D. This is bad science." One could argue its not bad science for proving there was a MWP. After all it appears Briffa traveled to the corners of the earth in search of trees that quashed the Medieval Warm Period and all he could find were trees that didn't perform when it got warm. Probably all that needs to be done to make it good science is document all his efforts.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 17, 2010 18:29:52 GMT
"The unauthorized release in November 2009 of thousands of e-mails containing correspondence among scientists affiliated with the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) makes clear that insurers, regulators, and anyone else with a serious interest in climate change cannot afford the luxury of simply assuming that the “reports and studies” to which the Task Force white paper alludes present an accurate and unbiased picture of what is known about climate change.
The CRU e-mails show that a close-knit group of the world’s most influential climate scientists actively colluded to subvert the peer-review process (and thereby prevent the publication of research by scientists who disagreed with the group’s conclusions about global warming); manufactured pre-determined conclusions through the use of contrived analytic techniques; and discussed destroying data to avoid government freedom-of-information requests."Quite succinct and unfortunately very true. How can anyone now quote a 'peer reviewed' climate paper and rely on it as a basis for further research? Indeed should research papers using CRU papers as a basis now be called into question?
|
|
|
Post by hairball on Jan 27, 2010 9:44:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by itsthesunstupid on Jan 27, 2010 18:07:33 GMT
Abandon ship! Abandon ship!
Two leading climatologist who contributied to the IPCC report, one from the UK and one from Canada, are calling for the UN to reform the IPCC and "start over". Calling for the cheif's resignation and allowing skeptic input. They want the politicization to end and a return to science. They question temperature records, etc.
When will the rank and file cult members also demonstrate disdain for having been misled by the leaders of the warmist church? Or will they go down with the ship?
|
|
|
Post by hairball on Jan 27, 2010 18:12:30 GMT
If only the Earth was flat; they could jump off the edge.
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on Jan 27, 2010 22:13:42 GMT
Abandon ship! Abandon ship! Two leading climatologist who contributied to the IPCC report, one from the UK and one from Canada, are calling for the UN to reform the IPCC and "start over". Calling for the cheif's resignation and allowing skeptic input. They want the politicization to end and a return to science. They question temperature records, etc. When will the rank and file cult members also demonstrate disdain for having been misled by the leaders of the warmist church? Or will they go down with the ship?
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Jan 28, 2010 3:29:04 GMT
"January 28, 2010 Scientists in stolen e-mail scandal hid climate data" Will prosecute them, unlimited fine.....Oh wait the doomsday clock ticked an extra couple of seconds and the FOI timed out. Now the next level crime is the bureaucracy throwing up its hands and saying no foul, really! www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7004936.ece
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Jan 28, 2010 8:19:44 GMT
"January 28, 2010 Scientists in stolen e-mail scandal hid climate data" Will prosecute them, unlimited fine.....Oh wait the doomsday clock ticked an extra couple of seconds and the FOI timed out. So does that make Phil Jones a felon who skated on a technicality? Wonder if he can waive the statute of limitations for the opportunity to clear his name.
|
|