Skip to comments.No Smoking Hot Spot (The Australian)
Posted on 07/17/2008 10:06:33 PM PDT by Nipfan
I DEVOTED six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia's compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector.
FullCAM models carbon flows in plants, mulch, debris, soils and agricultural products, using inputs such as climate data, plant physiology and satellite data. I've been following the global warming debate closely for years.
When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty good: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the old ice core data, no other suspects.
(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.news.com.au ...
Australia is literally on the brink of, as he says, wrecking our economy by introducing an emissions scheme which even the opposition supports. We need many more like this to force them to think again.
This guy is no expert..... we all know the Earth is experiencing climate change.... if he were an expert he’d know that, and wouldn’t be using the phrase, “global warming”.
The Lying Libs and the trained-seal public who willingly bent over and greased themselves for the LL's with the snake oil the LL's were selling.
What a joke. These liberal morons should all be sterilized before they further contaminate the global gene pool with more brain-dead lemmings with daddy's chin, mommy's eyes, and Fido's IQ.
In my humble opinion, that is...
The earth has experienced warming in the latter part of the 20th Century which, as you say, is part of the normal cycle. There is nothing wrong with how he expressed it because he makes it clear that he was concerned that it was man made until the facts showed otherwise.
And after CO2, when everybody’s driving little hydrogen-fuel-cell-powered S*boxes, it will be conveniently discovered that water vapor is - surprise! surprise! - yet another “greenhouse gas.”
Yes, in case you were wondering, those ARE in fact sarcasm quote marks above.
What the alarmists/doomists should have said at the start is that there is a possibility that man-made carbon emissions might increase global warming. Instead they said the issue was settled...no further arguments please...WE ARE NOT TAKING ANY MORE QUESTIONS!!! If they had said from the beginning that we are unsure, but we plan to study the issue carefully, many more people might have given them some slack. Now their crusade has been blown out of the water with the acknowledgement that temperature increases have predated carbon increases throughout earth’s history.
Quite a record to determine we have dramatic and historic planet-wide changes and can categorically say that man is causing it. Boneheads!
The really funny part is that we may not have a choice, with all the rules and regulations, not to mention new taxes, in the pipeline.
Fox_Mulder77, I didn’t notice the sarc tag. I guess I’m a bit touchy. I was so pleased to something in the mainstream press (and The Australian certainly is that) that I felt very protective about it.
But your underlying point finally got through. There’s no doubt that the first reaction will be to attack the messenger.
Sarcasm isn’t needed. Water vapor in fact is the largest atmospheric component. It’s a key part of smog, haze and other naturally occuring ‘pollution’. Trees excrete billions of tons of water vapor every day...
Clouds...well, you know what clouds are made from....
The Labor Government is about to deliberately wreck the economy in order to reduce carbon emissions.. . . When it comes to light that the carbon scare was known to be bogus in 2008, the ALP is going to be regarded as criminally negligent or ideologically stupid for not having seen through it. And if the Liberals support the general thrust of their actions, they will be seen likewise.And if the the Republicans (are you listening, Senator McCain?) do likewise in America, they will be no better.The onus should be on those who want to change things to provide evidence . . . [and] Computer models and theoretical calculations are not evidence, they are just theory . . . for why the changes are necessary.
He’s also got a half a dozen other degrees, including science which, I note, are not shown in the article I linked but I’m pretty sure were included in the printed version. I can check on Monday.
New!!: Dr. John Ray's
Ping me if you find one I've missed.
The print version of the article showed his qualification as BSc, BE-EE, MA(Syndey), MS-EE, MS-Stat, PhD EE (Stanford)
In the interests of "full disclosure" they should have admitted that they could care less about global warming and carbon emissions, except as a tools to further their socialist/communist agendas against freedom, democracy, and capitalism.
Remember, when Gorby got run out of the former Soviet Union (where he gave not a damn about the environment), he founded "Green Cross" and international organization of watermelons (green on the outside, red on the inside).
And lets not forget Green Peace co-founder Patrick Moore (an actual scientist), who broke with his organization because it was taken over by leftists, ceased to be about science and the environment, and became all about socialist politics. Moore also supports the use of nuclear energy, which Green Peace opposes (but only in western democracies where there is no danger of being killed for it).
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.