A Few Things Ill Considered

A layman's take on the science of Global Warming featuring a guide on How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic.

Friday, May 05, 2006

send this to... Digg it! | Technorati | Del.icio.us | Reddit | Furl | Spurl

Finally, Proof Positive!

(Part of the How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic guide)

Objection:
There is no proof of global warming.

There are other takes to this objection, but this seems worth its own post!

Answer:
Climate Science has thus far proved unable to pull the woolies over the eyes of the public. Time after time, the meager offerings of globally averaged temperature trends, vanishing arctic sea ice, shrinking glaciers, melting ice sheets, earlier springs, satellite analyses of upper tropospheric temperatures and a comprehensive theory supported by the massive computational power of sophisticated computer models have been dismissed, denied and rebutted one by one.

But no more! At last the real smoking gun has been found, the definitive trend has, er.. revealed itself. Was it NASA that found the proof? Or NOAA? Will you see it in the IPCC AR4? No. From the Climate Research Institute of Victoria's Secret (hey, why shouldn't they get in on all that grant money?) comes proof positive of a sustained and rapid Global Warming trend:

ExxonMobil, eat my shorts!

Other Guides, by Category

Labels:

4 Comments:

  • At May 05, 2006 1:17 PM, Blogger Dano said…

    I agree coby: these clowns are approaching ridicule and all of us should address them, Dano-like. OK, maybe not that aggressively, but still.

    Best,

    D

     
  • At May 22, 2006 5:11 AM, Anonymous Peter K Anderson aka Hartlod(tm) said…

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

     
  • At May 22, 2006 8:45 AM, Blogger coby said…

    Peter,

    Your comment was deleted because it was excessively long, off topic and consisted of identical material to that you have presented elsewhere on this blog.

    If ever you have something new to present and can do so in a concise way at an appropriate spot, I am more than happy to let it remain whether I think it has any merit or not.

     
  • At July 19, 2006 2:53 AM, Blogger Peter K. Anderson said…

    To produce, from incident Energy within Infrared (region) Radiation (IrR) such a rise in median temperature that could present a total rise allowing for this current ~0.7 degree C residual (after Conduction/Convection), with notice of the actual materials involved, would require more ENERGY to be presented within IrR than can be either observed, or survived by land surface life (over 90% saline water) as it is seen bio-formed.

    The (high microwave especially) energy within IrR will not produce 'sun burn' (a mild radiation burn from UV-A and UV-B) but would induct (interact to produce) too much intrinsic 'heat' (kinetic energy) in outer cellular structures, stopping internal cellular processes, killing those cells, and most likely preventing the formation of 'life as we know it' (bio-forming). There is not thus possible a supposed 'greenhouse warming amplification' process, it is not evidenced NOW, nor could sufficient energy EVER be so produced to the surface within IrR to induct the Kinetic Energy levels required when measured as Temperature, as they are often within the 'greenhouse platform'.

    I will be outlining further, with demonstrative slides, at the site:-
    http://hartlod.blogspot.com/

    So the 'proof positive' is that there CANNOT be any 'greenhouse warming effect' and is realised by the very existence of HUMANITY as it is bio-formed, and it seems the preclusion of any possibility for a 'greenhouse warming effect' is about to be pushed back to 7 MILLION YEARS.

    More spuriously made and vindictive deletion will only require me to reprise this now 270 word message. Perhaps discussion should be made.

    Your's,
    Peter K. Anderson a.k.a. Hartlod(tm)
    From the PC of Peter K Anderson
    E-Mail: Hartlod@bigpond.com

     

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home