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

Skip to comments.

Global Warming = Science Fiction
London Telegraph ^ | 09/03/07 | Reason McLucus

Posted on 09/03/2007 1:27:41 PM PDT by kathsua

Two recent studies demonstrate how the hysteria about alleged "global warming" has resulted in wasted research money. As I noted in the previous post, meteorologists have trouble predicting weather conditions a day or two in advance. They cannot possibly predict what will happen decades in the future.

Attempting to predict the future based on science based assumptions is called "science fiction". I've been interested in science fiction for over 40 years. I've even attempted to write some. Science fiction writers make assumptions about reality, including future technology, and then base a work of fiction about it.

The "Star Trek" family of television series is an example of science fiction. In some areas technology (such as cell phones) has progressed faster than suggested on the series, Physicists have doubts about some other aspects of "Star Trek" technology particularly space travel faster than light.

Some science fiction may be prophetic, such as H.G. Wells late 19th Century predictions of air travel, television, super highways and something resembling the Internet. Other science fiction like "Superman" and "Spiderman" is totally improbable. Science fiction writers don't claim they are accurately predicting the future only that some of the things they talk about might happen. Some of us utilize the concept of parallel universes from quantum physics to suggest events that might happen on an earth that developed a little differently from our earth.

Computer based prejections of future events are science fiction, not science fact. The programs make simple assumptions about the impact of certain differences in reality and then project what might happen.

I like to read science fiction, but government shouldn't be financing the production of science fiction by those who falsely claim they are engaged in real science.

This paper recently reported one of these science fiction stories by Dr Richard Betts of the Hadley Centre. Betts claims that plants although plants wouldl grow more with increased atmospheric CO2 they would not take up as much water with flooding as the result. A major problem with the claim is that plants that grow more use more water for that growth. For example, the compound most of us think of when we say "sugar", sucrose, has the chemical formula C12H22O11. Each molecule of sucrose essentially contains 12 carbon atoms and 11 water molecules. Dead leaves, stems, etc. fall onto the ground and then absorb water to hold until taken up by plants. If temperatures increased plants would have to release more water because plants get rid of excess heat by evaporating water.

An American study financed by NASA claims that warming would result in fewer storms but they would have more tornadoes and hail. As a resident of tornado alley in the central U.S. I know that tornadoes and hail are most likely to occur when there is cold air aloft. Cold air is necessary to freeze water droplets into ice and to freeze more water to that ice to form large hail stones. Cold air plays a major role in tornado formation. The biggest tornadoes typically come in front of strong cold fronts.

The British and American governments, among others, should stop wasting money on science fiction and devote more money to accurate daily forecasts.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: computerpredictions; globalwarming; nasa; sciencefiction
If people are getting money for making predictions they are incapable of really making, shouldn't they be prosecuted for fraud?

I think the whole idea of global warming was made up by people who want well paying government jobs, but don't really have any ability. They get paid with our tax money to scare us. Government funds for weather should go to trying to control it rather than making scary predictions.

1 posted on 09/03/2007 1:27:44 PM PDT by kathsua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kathsua
Basic References:

Lawrence Solomon's "The Deniers" (a series of articles on the view of scientists who have been labelled "Global Warming Deniers"):

Other References:

Antarctic Temperature Trend 1982-2004:


This map (left) shows key areas of Antarctica, including the vast East Antarctic ice sheet. The image on the right shows which areas of the continent's ice are thickening (coloured yellow and red) and thinning (coloured blue). © (Left)British Antarctic Survey, (Right)Science

2 posted on 09/03/2007 1:32:26 PM PDT by sourcery (fRed Dawn: Wednesday, 5 November 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kathsua

Algore and his hard of thinking sheeple have perpetrated this alarmist myth long enough. It’s time for real science to put all this junk science garbage to rest once and for all.


3 posted on 09/03/2007 1:32:44 PM PDT by stm (Fred Thompson in 08!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kathsua

What if we all lowered our carbon emissions to a level Gore found acceptable for several years, and....THE AVERAGE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE DIDN’T DECREASE. That would be proof that man-made global warming is all a hoax. Sometimes the best way to convince a fool he is wrong is to let him have his way...


4 posted on 09/03/2007 1:37:35 PM PDT by G8 Diplomat (It's campaign season. Let's rumble!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kathsua

Science Fiction? I wonder what part of global warming they are calling science.


5 posted on 09/03/2007 1:38:35 PM PDT by FreePaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sourcery

yes yes a hoax...and it began to die in 2007....r.i.p.

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/caruba090307.htm


6 posted on 09/03/2007 1:40:55 PM PDT by flat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FreePaul

**Science Fiction? I wonder what part of global warming they are calling science.**

Exactly.

Really good science fiction is, by definition, believable.

GW, by definition, is not.


7 posted on 09/03/2007 1:42:05 PM PDT by Mrs.Z
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kathsua
They tried making "predictions" using conditions from the past i.e. they knew what the weather/ temps were. It didn't work. The "predictions" were wrong. Doesn't that tell them anything?

I predict that global warming will occur every year, in the northern hemisphere, from around mid June to mid September. Now where's my check?

8 posted on 09/03/2007 1:43:25 PM PDT by Pajamajan (Pray for president Bush. Pray for our troops. Pray for congress, Pray for our nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G8 Diplomat

Never. The Dems won Congress and nobody is paying attention to their failures. Nobody cares if a fool is wrong even if it is proven.


9 posted on 09/03/2007 1:45:21 PM PDT by RightWhale (It's Brecht's donkey, not mine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FreePaul

Global Warming = Science Fiction?

A lot more fiction than science.

People used to sincerely believe in the phlogiston theory, too, in which fire was considered to be a material substance.

Once again, mistaking the pointing finger for the moon.


10 posted on 09/03/2007 1:45:33 PM PDT by alloysteel (Never attribute to ignorance that which is adequately explained by stupidity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kathsua
I think the whole idea of global warming was made up by people who want well paying government jobs, but don't really have any ability.

No, these guys do have ability. They mostly got good grades from very good schools and are now in search of a career. What do you go for with a graduate degree in weather? TV weatherman? Airline forecaster? DoD weather specialist? All of the above and more, but when the positions are filled and the attrition rate is nil what can you do? A good scare will bring grant money in like flies to honey.

That's the ticket!

11 posted on 09/03/2007 2:03:44 PM PDT by Wingy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kathsua

al gore lied, billions were inconvenienced.


12 posted on 09/03/2007 2:20:16 PM PDT by Disciplinemisanthropy (...and that, friends, is what grinds my gears.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sourcery

Wow!!!


13 posted on 09/03/2007 2:23:09 PM PDT by kathsua (A woman can do anything a man can do and have babies besides.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Wingy

right.


14 posted on 09/03/2007 2:24:36 PM PDT by kathsua (A woman can do anything a man can do and have babies besides.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FreePaul

So much of it is simply misanthropic musings.


15 posted on 09/03/2007 2:27:34 PM PDT by Maelstorm (Sometimes the best way to defeat an opponent is to encourage them to be themselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: flat

Good article. Read it earlier today. Was going to post it as a stand alone article.

You did good by posting it here.


16 posted on 09/03/2007 2:29:15 PM PDT by crazyshrink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Disciplinemisanthropy
"al gore lied, billions were inconvenienced."

Poifict!!

17 posted on 09/03/2007 2:31:58 PM PDT by Past Your Eyes (Criticize me if you will but just don't circumcise me any more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Never.

I wasn't suggesting everybody actually do it, it was a hypothetical.

Though I suppose you're right. After all, if proof convinced people no one would believe in global warming in the first place.
18 posted on 09/03/2007 2:46:08 PM PDT by G8 Diplomat (It's campaign season. Let's rumble!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: kathsua

As one whom has made a fine living for 35 years by studying global climate change, I can assure you that it occurs, rigth before global cooling and right afterwards. Sea level, as we know it, was 200’ below us in the past, and also 200’ above us. Since the continents were not in the their present positions, it is hard to acertain what the real effect was. One thing I do know, however, is if you spent the entire GDP of the planet, you would not be able to change a thing.


19 posted on 09/03/2007 2:49:29 PM PDT by richardtavor (Pray for the peace of Jerusalem in the name of the G-d of Jacob)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kathsua

The earth has been WARMING since the last Ice Age..


20 posted on 09/03/2007 2:50:50 PM PDT by hosepipe (CAUTION: This propaganda is laced with hyperbole....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kathsua; OKSooner; honolulugal; Killing Time; Beowulf; Mr. Peabody; RW_Whacko; gruffwolf; ...

FReepmail me to get on or off


Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown

New!!: Dr. John Ray's
GREENIE WATCH

Ping me if you find one I've missed.



21 posted on 09/03/2007 3:09:31 PM PDT by xcamel (FDT/2008 -- talk about it >> irc://irc.freenode.net/fredthompson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sourcery

save


22 posted on 09/03/2007 3:36:27 PM PDT by Bob Eimiller (appeasement "it's the idea that if you feed the alligator he will eat you last." Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kathsua

I think he got one of the arguments wrong, and in a strange way.

That is, it has been discovered that plants open their skin pores to inhale CO2. But when they do so, they lose water. If there is more CO2 in the air, they they don’t need to open their skin pores as widely, so don’t lose as much water.

Therefore, they don’t need to uptake as much water through their roots, and more water stays in the soil. In turn, this means that with more CO2 in the air, typically *dry* soil can support more plants on the same water. This means de-desertification, and more plant growth, and in turn, more CO2 consumption.

One last factor, the question of “Are plants made up of more soil, or more air?”, has been answered. Plants are mostly “air”, made up of mostly CO2 converted to sugar which feeds the growing plant. This means that with just a few trace minerals from the soil, and a *given* amount of water for each plant, the vast majority of the plant is made from CO2.

So a lot more plants means a lot more CO2 used. Not “flooding”, however, because more plants will grow in a dry soil until they have used the available water.


23 posted on 09/03/2007 4:04:41 PM PDT by Popocatapetl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kathsua
Cold air is necessary to freeze water droplets into ice and to freeze more water to that ice to form large hail stones. Cold air plays a major role in tornado formation. The biggest tornadoes typically come in front of strong cold fronts.

An actual greenhouse effect would be warming the upper atmosphere at a greater degree than it warms the ground level so this would mean less divergence of temperature which would mean weaker storms. Any goofball local TV weatherman would know this so why doesn't NASA?

24 posted on 09/03/2007 4:22:22 PM PDT by Perchant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kathsua

Ping for later reading.


25 posted on 09/03/2007 4:35:45 PM PDT by Tanniker Smith (I didn't know she was a Liberal when I married her.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Popocatapetl
Thank you!

But notice the MSM STILL prints the other guy’s story: AND its inaccuracies and assumptions!

26 posted on 09/03/2007 5:17:21 PM PDT by Robert A. Cook, PE (I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: xcamel

Thanks for the pings; I look forward to catching up!


27 posted on 09/04/2007 1:50:43 AM PDT by alwaysconservative (A cheerful heart is good medicine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

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