FReepmail me to get on or off
Ping me if you find one I've missed.
Posted on 10/13/2009 7:48:06 AM PDT by SmithL
"What happened to global warming?" read the headline - on BBC News on Oct. 9, no less. Consider it a cataclysmic event: Mainstream news organizations have begun reporting on scientific research that suggests that global warming may not be caused by man and may not be as dire and eminent as alarmists suggest.
Indeed, as the BBC's climate correspondent Paul Hudson reported, the warmest year recorded globally "was not in 2008 or 2007, but 1998." It's true, he continued, "For the last 11 years, we have not observed any increase in global temperatures."
At a London conference later this month, Hudson reported, solar scientist Piers Corbyn will present evidence that solar-charged particles have a big impact on global temperatures.
Western Washington University geologist Don J. Easterbrook presented research last year that suggests that the Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO) caused warmer temperatures in the 1980s and 1990s. With Pacific sea surface temperatures cooling, Easterbrook expects 30 years of global cooling.
EPA analyst Alan Carlin - an MIT-trained economist with a degree in physics - referred to "solar variability" and Easterbrook's work in a document that warned that politics had prompted the Environmental Protection Agency and countries to pay "too little attention to the science of global warming" as partisans ignored the lack of global warming over the past 10 years. At first the EPA buried the paper, then it permitted Carlin to post it on his personal Web site.
In May, Fortune reported on the testimony of John Christy, University of Alabama-Huntsville Earth System Science Center director, before the House Ways and Means Committee. Christy is a 2001 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report signatory who believes human effects have a warming influence, but rejects the disaster scenarios.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Go Ma’Nature! Put a nail in the global warming hoax!!!
Ummmmmm, duh? so what they are saying is the sun affects our heating?
In his answers there remaineth falsehood, iirc. What happened to 1934? Seems that one was hotter than 1998.
If it’s imminent, then it’s eminent, I suppose.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Probably, unless it’s enemant.
Prince Charles better stock up on horse blankets for both the misses and his polo ponies.
Keep this in mind, the mantra is now Global Climate Change kind of heads I win tails you lose.
Vince
No, no, that’s too far fetched.
If a car heats up sitting in the sun ( with windows closed ) that's a "greenhouse effect", Like a "greenhouse". But if the car started cooling when left out in the sun - with the windows up - it has NOTHING to do with a greenhouse effect..
What are the liberals saying? It doesn't make any sense. Can someone explain?
Yawn - the Chicken Littles will simply replace Gobal Warming with a new scam. The money and perks shelled out by the Leftists in congreess and the White House to America’s enviro-alarmists of one sort or another make it inevitable.
Then he'll never be able to tell the difference.
The “greenhouse effect” STRICTLY and scientifically stated (not the more recent re-interpretation by climate scientists) refers to a very clear process.
Visible light from the sun passes easily through the “transparent” to VISIBLE light and is absorbed by the materials inside the car (or the greenhouse). That energy heats the material, and the HEAT is radiated off the material. That heat is in the form of INFRARED radiation, which does NOT pass easily through the glass since glass is not transparent to those wavelengths, and is therefore trapped in the car. THIS ALONE constitutes a true “greenhouse effect”
For the energy to “escape” it must heat the glass, or otherwise be conducted to the “skin” of the car, and from there be radiated back into the atmosphere, or be released by opening the door.
I’m sure that one of the “scientists” will have a study that shows that if it wasn’t for global warming, it would be even cooler than it is, and that we are interfering with the earths necessary cooling mechanisms.
Class action lawsuit against Al Gore and his deliberate hoax.
I believe 1934 was the hottest year on record in the US, while 1998 was the global hottest year on record.
“...from there be radiated back into the atmosphere, or be released by opening the door.”
Thanks, I really have a clearer understanding of the process now.
I guess this means that want us to go back to using fluororocarbons to increase the size of the ozone hole ;-)
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.
