Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

When Physics Trumps Hysteria in Global Warming
Grassroots Institute.org ^ | 7/18/07 | Michael R. Fox

Posted on 07/19/2007 5:27:19 AM PDT by Valin

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last
To: Valin; Buffalo Bob
Sorry, Valin but you are under arrest


21 posted on 07/19/2007 6:54:59 AM PDT by WKB (It's hard to tell who's more afraid of Fred Thompson; The Dims or the rudibots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Comment #22 Removed by Moderator

To: Valin
For example, Fred Singer and Dennis Avery pointed out in their book Unstoppable Global Warming that over the past 1,000,000 years in climate observations, there have been about 600 periods of warming, and we can surmise from these cycles that among them are about 599 periods of cooling.

LOL!
Who wrote this? An Englishman?
The understatement is almost painful.

That's gonna leave a mark.
At least among the Gorons who know how to read and join two logical thoughts together...

23 posted on 07/19/2007 7:08:20 AM PDT by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WKB
You'll take me alive Coppers!
24 posted on 07/19/2007 7:11:51 AM PDT by Valin (History takes time. It is not an instant thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: bmwcyle
Men always think they know everything and can fool everyone.

What is less obvious and more dangerous is when science prostitutes itself to "funding", control, self-importance, tenure or whatever drives the darker side of human nature.

25 posted on 07/19/2007 7:12:47 AM PDT by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Buffalo Bob
Already posted about 4 hours ago.

Four hours ago it was 3:15 a.m. and I was fast asleep.
Without knowing the post and the nature of the post I would never think to search for it. Perhaps you missed the memo:

“What do you mean ‘posted already?”
I never saw it before, and I’m the center of the universe!"

26 posted on 07/19/2007 7:18:25 AM PDT by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Popocatapetl
Now, this is a hypothetical argument, but one you might meet if you are arguing against MMGW.

Not much of an argument when you string "So say...", "theoretically...", and *might* together into a cogent discussion of facts, as in science.

That is simply a "warming" computer model in words...

Garbage in --- garbage out.

27 posted on 07/19/2007 7:25:15 AM PDT by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: WKB
Thank you for that image!

I need to start using it.

28 posted on 07/19/2007 7:26:34 AM PDT by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Valin

boomarked


29 posted on 07/19/2007 7:36:21 AM PDT by chaosagent (Remember, no matter how you slice it, forbidden fruit still tastes the sweetest!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PeterPrinciple

This statement can also be applied to the macro-evolution zealots.


30 posted on 07/19/2007 7:45:26 AM PDT by Radioflyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Valin

The Chilling Stars: The New Theory of Climate Change
by Henrik Svensmark

I just finished reading this. Not as well written as I would have liked but the science is all there and over the next several years will be shown to be indisputable. If you care about this issue this book is must-read.


31 posted on 07/19/2007 8:03:29 AM PDT by Paine in the Neck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Paine in the Neck

Agree. I read A LOT about the GWOT and something I’ve noticed is there are a lot of people who really need to take a creative writing class, as some of this stuff while good will put you right to sleep.

I think “New” is the operative word here.
Lord knows I’m not smart enough, or informed enough to say weather or not it’s bunk, but I do look forward to following the debate.


32 posted on 07/19/2007 8:11:32 AM PDT by Valin (History takes time. It is not an instant thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

http://www.te-software.co.nz/blog/augie_auer.htm


33 posted on 07/19/2007 8:30:16 AM PDT by Popocatapetl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Valin
I have read extensively for the past 30 about Marxism, politics, and human nature / motivation.

Somewhere is my readings, I read a statement made by Marx when confronted with the notion that industrialized Western democracies were progressing rapidly both economically and culturally and in doing so, they were eliminating the "impending class struggle" that Marx was relying upon to fulfill his dire predictions.

Marx responded with something to the effect, "Well, we can always use the environment to justify imposing socialism upon the people. After all, no one can actually do anything about the weather."

I believe that's where we are with global warming. It's simply a mechanism to extract wealth from the United States, which will be used to prop up the UN bureaucracies and finally eliminate the freedoms we have enjoyed since our inception.

34 posted on 07/19/2007 8:59:02 AM PDT by Texas Jack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Popocatapetl
Thank you for that link, but I'm afraid that I'm all out of time to read moonbat sites, even when the author has access to Excel.
Windows for radiated heat to "sneak through"? Who is this respondent, and how many peer-reviewed papers has he published?

While commenting on minutiae, he and others like him ignore the the larger question, if anthropogenic CO2 is the culprit, how to explain the factual statement early in this article?

"... over the past 1,000,000 years in climate observations, there have been about 600 periods of warming, and we can surmise from these cycles that among them are about 599 periods of cooling."
Please note that most of those cycles occured before there were any "anthropos' to "genic".
The silence is defeaning.

And yes, I have read hundreds of "refutations" to the findings of the real scientists. I don't need to read more, thank you.

35 posted on 07/19/2007 9:02:28 AM PDT by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

I am not an advocate of MMGW, to the point where I have devised a test to determine the rationale of those arguing in its behalf, that you may find interesting.

It is based on the fact that many who advocate MMGW, do so only because of two axioms they have for *any* efforts to reduce MMGW:

1) That whatever solutions increase their political power as its primary goal, and,

2) That whatever solutions *must* reduce consumption, lower standards of living, result in less development, and otherwise inhibit individual and national aspirations.

If these two axiomatic conditions are not met, they have no other interest in the advocacy of MMGW, and will move on to other environmental issues that they believe will advance their hidden agenda.

Therefore, the test of this is straightforward, and can be made in argument against them.

“If anthropogenic global warming exists, would you accept a solution to it that would support continued economic development and prosperity, increased fuel use, increased consumerism, and for energy companies to become far wealthier than they are now?”

The typical MMGW advocate would be horrified at the very idea of people having more, using more, becoming wealthier, improving their lot, and not surrendering an iota of political power to the MMGW advocates in the process.

But if someone thinks that such increasing prosperity is a grand idea, then they are probably reasonable as far as climatology and environmental science go. Their arguments can at least be looked at objectively, without obviously being advocacy concealed as research.

The bottom line is that todays MMGW advocates are almost all made in the image of Paul Ehrlich, of “The Population Bomb” infamy. That is, their two motives have not changed a bit, only the subject they are trying to create a public panic with.

They are indifferent to the fact that their hysterical projections never come about, only that they succeeded or failed to give them the power and control that they wanted.

Were they to get the power and control they wanted, they would make no serious effort to stop MMGW, because they would be of the belief that their having power automatically solves the problem. It simply ceases to be an issue.


36 posted on 07/19/2007 10:39:56 AM PDT by Popocatapetl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Valin

B4L8r


37 posted on 07/19/2007 10:48:20 AM PDT by Kevmo (We should withdraw from Iraq -- via Tehran. And Duncan Hunter is just the man to get that job done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Helotes

Dips like Algore will never admit they are wrong. They will argue that ‘in the spirit’ of helping mankind, they wanted to sound the alarm.


38 posted on 07/19/2007 2:59:53 PM PDT by Pistolshot (Every woman, who can, should learn to shoot, and carry a gun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Popocatapetl
The answer to that is to find out the 'energy spectrum' of the Earth, i.e. the percentage of total energy radiated to space by Earth at each wavelength.

So if (say) only 1% of the radiant energy is at the wavelengths blocked by CO2, then a doubling of that gas will not have much of an effect--it depends on whether the absorption is linear with increasing CO2 concentration, the solubility of CO2, in the oceans and its temperature dependence, the change in plant growth and how much CO2 is fixed by new plants, etc.

It's not as cut and dried as some people would have it.

Cheers!

39 posted on 07/21/2007 2:15:41 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
“What do you mean ‘posted already?” I never saw it before, and I’m the center of the universe!"

I thought geocentrism was passe'.

...oh, I'm sorry. That sentence is egocentrism. :-)

Cheers!

40 posted on 07/21/2007 2:18:03 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson