Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 08/14/2010 9:13:25 AM PDT by Danae
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for years has been predicting the greenhouse effect can spin out of control. They claim that there exists a scientific consensus that CO2 is pushing the planet into an unrestrained greenhouse effect, that it’s raising global temperatures and it must be stopped. IPCC was created in the 1980s by the United Nations. They have released findings that say that carbon-based emissions released into the atmosphere by humans, mostly in wealthy, Western countries, must be reduced, or a catastrophe will result. They have frequently used this scare tactic. It has been easy to frighten people, as the science involved takes some significant and serious study. Most people have relied on expert opinions because they lack their own expert knowledge in the field, a factor the IPCC has relied upon in the past.
Today Hungarian atmospheric physicist Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi, says he has found and proven that the IPCC and their experts are wrong in their theory about how the greenhouse effect works. In the process, he has shown that changing CO2 concentrations are not the determining factor the IPCC and other scientists claim.
(snip)
To put it very simply, Dr. Miskolczi has described previously unknown properties of our atmosphere.
The science is so difficult to follow that no one can refute the IPCC without discussing concepts most of the public don’t have the time or desire to learn. So by default the IPCC has owned the conversation and the playing field. What’s more, they have some big allies in supporting positions.
At the time of his original discovery Dr. Miskolczi was a contractor for NASA and had published many times in renowned journals with his colleagues there; he resigned his position in 2005 when NASA refused to publish work contradicting AGW.
Link please - I’d like to read the whole thing.
Problem with examiner apparently.....
Article is linked to AIM.org as well. http://www.aim.org/aim-column/blacklisted-scientist-challenges-global-warming-orthodoxy/
Thanks for the post/link. Defund the U.N. - UNaccountable totalitarians and their front-groups/enablers/machinations.
Paper here for any brave souls who want to read it:
http://miskolczi.webs.com/
Sorry, wrong link. Full paper here:
http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/E&E_21_4_2010_08-miskolczi.pdf
I looked around the Examiner searching for the article and it does indeed seem they are half a bubble out of level.
Thanks for the AIM link.
“Global warming” ... how retro!
Thanks for posting it Dr. C! I have not been able to as of yet, though I have had it now for a couple of months.
One of the biggest challenges in reading this paper beyond the science, is the english it is written it. It is HARD to follow because of that. The translation from Hungarian to English is HARD and has been a significant obstacle for me to overcome in learning this science from Dr. Zagoni.
Both Dr. Miskolczi and Dr. Zagoni are brilliant and valiant scientists who have lost their jobs and careers in standing up for the truth. So I have really worked hard with Dr. Z to put this discovery into understandable language.
If/when things don’t make sense, let me know, I will put you in touch with Dr. Zagoni and I am 100% certain he will do all he can to clarify anything.
Oh I sure as heck hope to make it just that!
I try to simplify the science into terms ordinary people can understand:
What property of CO2 allows it to heat the atmosphere beyond the heating it receives from the sun?
Furthermore, since it has this amazing heating ability (by which it creates energy that wasn’t there), why haven’t we harnessed it for a novel kind of power plant?
I think that, instinctively, people understand that energy must come from an outside source. The “global warming” proponents try to obscure that little fact by using highly technical terms and advanced mathmatics. However, the idea that CO2 cannot amplify (i.e. create) existing energy is simple and requires no advanced math.
Yep. The argument has been, well CO2 is a trace greenhouse gas, if you increase the concentrations of it, you increase the greenhouse effect.
WRONG
It is impossible to “increase the greenhouse Effect” It is a strick mathematical ...Physical... property of our atmosphere. It is measurable and it fluctuates around an equilibrium value, which is dictated by the incoming energy of the sun. When more energy hits the earth, the greenhouse effect fluctuates in response in order to maintain the equilibrium it creates.
Mankind cannot overcome 300 million cubic miles of water. It is Water Vapor which is the utterly dominate greenhouse gas. CO2 is measured in parts per million. Compared to Water Vapor, it is an ant shoving a mountain alone. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, but it is irrelevant in Earth’s atmosphere and climate.
I appreciate the offer, but the science is way above my pay grade. I’d probably have to study the paper for a week or more and I still likely wouldn’t understand most of the equations etc. even if it was written in perfect English. I get the “gist” of his argument in the same way I get the “gist” of string theory. Were I asked to defend or explain either in a court of law, it would be well beyond my capabilities.
So I commend Dr. Z on his work, but the people he needs to educate/convince are the climate scientists who now are spreading disinformation. Hopefully having this paper in a peer-reviewed journal will facilitate that objective.
I can fix that! LOL
That was the overall intention. And to inform the public in understandable language to apply pressure in that very direction. Even James Hansen’s former boss at NASA has come out and denounced AGW.
The tide is turning.
It has taken me a year to really understand this stuff, and I have only just scratched the surface of it.
The ability of CO2 to absorb and emit infrared radiation while transmitting visible light.
since it has this amazing heating ability (by which it creates energy that wasn’t there
No one is claiming that CO2 creates energy that wasn't there.
Excellent. The movie “Excalibur” is my only other reference for the charm.
It was created for the movie. As far as I know it has no real historical connotation.
The translation is: “Serpent’s breath, charm of death and life, thy omen of making.” from http://dandalf.com/charm.html Really its an interesting look at the origins of the language the filmmaker used.
Ah... I love that movie, I am gonna have to go dig it out of the CD archive (cardboard box in garage LOL).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.