Goofball_star_dot_etal wrote in
:

In fact, over the last 100 years CO2 concentrations have increased by
30% due mainly to human-induced emissions from fossil fuels. Because
CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the increased concentrations have contributed
to the recent warming and probably most of the warming over the last
50 years.


I always love these statisticians. If the concentration of anything you
can name that will dissolve in water rises from .10 parts per billion to
..13 parts per billion, then you tell them it rose 30%, in an effort to
scare them.

Of course and in fact, this anything you wish to make a government funded
career out of is barely detectable by the finest laboratory equipment at
this concentration level, you forgot to mention, in your grant application.
All the funders need to know is it rose, unexpectedly, by 30% and they
damned well let you find out why for $2.1B before it goes any higher!

Larry
--

Goofball_star_dot_etal wrote in
:

Myth 2 - Solar activity is the main driver of climate change
Temperature change, 1850-2000


Let's test it! Take away the sun for, say, a month. Then, if anyone
survives, we'll write a report noting how much effect the sun has on
climate change from April 1 to May 1, 2007.....unless, of course, it proves
our alarm department is looney, then we'll bury the truth with the victims
of the experiment.

Larry
--

Any fool can see that solar activity IS the driver of all climate on
Earth....including climate changes. Even political fools can detect it!

Goofball_star_dot_etal wrote in
:

Myth 5 - Climate models are too complex and uncertain to provide
useful projections of climate change


Horse****! They can't even predict the weather next weekend. How can they
predict the temperature in 2017? The Farmer's Almanac is closer than the
computer models, none of which EVER agree until the eye of the storm passes
directly over your position.

I speak with some authority on this subject, having stood in the demolished
neighborhood in the pitch black, staring in awe up through the eye of
Hurricane Hugo in '89 at midnight in Summerville, SC. The stars were never
so beautiful as they were in the center of the big vacuum cleaner!

Larry
--
This I'm wrong? Compare 2006's hurricanes with the awful predictions that
produced vast government support for the Hurricane Industry of Miami.
Predictions or propaganda??

Goofball_star_dot_etal wrote in
:

The bottom line is that current models enable us to attribute the
causes of past climate change and predict the main features of the
future climate with a high degree of confidence. We now need to
provide more regional detail and more complete analysis of extreme
events.


OK, so what DID cause the Little Ice Age in the middle of the smoke
stacks during the height of the coal-fired industrial revolution??



Solar activity

Solar activity events recorded in radiocarbon.During the period
1645–1715, right in the middle of the Little Ice Age, solar activity as
seen in sunspots was extremely low, with some years having no sunspots at
all. This period of low sunspot activity is known as the Maunder Minimum.
The precise link between low sunspot activity and cooling temperatures
has not been established, but the coincidence of the Maunder Minimum with
the deepest trough of the Little Ice Age is suggestive of such a
connection [22]. The Spörer Minimum has also been identified with a
significant cooling period during the Little Ice Age. Other indicators of
low solar activity during this period are levels of carbon-14 and
beryllium-10 [23]. The low solar activity is also well documented in
astronomical records. Astronomers in both Europe and Asia documented a
decrease in the number of visible solar spots during this time period.


[edit] Volcanic activity
Throughout the Little Ice Age, the world also experienced heightened
volcanic activity. When a volcano erupts, its ash reaches high into the
atmosphere and can spread to cover the whole earth. This ash cloud blocks
out some of the incoming solar radiation, leading to worldwide cooling
that can last up to two years after an eruption. Also emitted by
eruptions is sulfur in the form of SO2 gas. When this gas reaches the
stratosphere, it turns into sulfuric acid particles, which reflect the
sun's rays, further reducing the amount of radiation reaching the earth's
surface. The 1815 eruption of Tambora in Indonesia blanketed the
atmosphere with ash; the following year, 1816, came to be known as the
Year Without A Summer, when frost and snow were reported in June and July
in both New England and Northern Europe.

Larry
--
Man just can't stand it when HE is not in control of his environment....

He's not.....

Cessna 310 wrote in news:K2EOh.3425$Jm7.2307
@newsfe03.lga:

I don't have a link for the video, but
if someone can provide one, it would make for an interesting discussion.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XttV2C6B8pU

It came from BBC, not ITN...sorry.

Larry
--
Youtube has it in its entirety....EVERYONE should watch it!

Cessna 310 wrote in
:

Can't find the actual video, but I think the link you provided is
related.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XttV2C6B8pU

Larry
--

"KLC Lewis" wrote in
:

Wrong focus. Yes, the entire paper supports that the recent CO2 rise
is due to human activity -- and that I do not dispute. It is clear
that we are generating CO2 which would not otherwise be put into the
atmosphere. Nevertheless, the amount that we are generating does not
approach that which is generated by natural processes.



The other problem is we do NOT live in a plastic bubble or fish tank,
sealed against external influences, like the solar wind.
Environmentalists always treat Earth like some kind of dome city where
the air comes from the government's own air recycling.

It's just like the lakes. According to greenies, because of over 100
years of 2-stroke boat engines spewing Quaker State SAE30, carefully
mixed at 15:1 until very recently, all lakes should be about 3" deep in
partially burned motor oil that trails out behind the boats.

What happened to all of it? It floats, which is why I don't find it in
the mud squishing up between my toes with the blood suckers. It's not on
the beach or rocks sticking up. Where'd it all go? I musta dumped a
hundred gallons of it in that tank all those years. Why is it suddenly
such a problem when it never showed up at all like Exxon Valdez?

Answer - MONEY....Government funding.

Larry
--

"Larry" wrote in message
...
"KLC Lewis" wrote in
:

Wrong focus. Yes, the entire paper supports that the recent CO2 rise
is due to human activity -- and that I do not dispute. It is clear
that we are generating CO2 which would not otherwise be put into the
atmosphere. Nevertheless, the amount that we are generating does not
approach that which is generated by natural processes.



The other problem is we do NOT live in a plastic bubble or fish tank,
sealed against external influences, like the solar wind.
Environmentalists always treat Earth like some kind of dome city where
the air comes from the government's own air recycling.

It's just like the lakes. According to greenies, because of over 100
years of 2-stroke boat engines spewing Quaker State SAE30, carefully
mixed at 15:1 until very recently, all lakes should be about 3" deep in
partially burned motor oil that trails out behind the boats.

What happened to all of it? It floats, which is why I don't find it in
the mud squishing up between my toes with the blood suckers. It's not on
the beach or rocks sticking up. Where'd it all go? I musta dumped a
hundred gallons of it in that tank all those years. Why is it suddenly
such a problem when it never showed up at all like Exxon Valdez?

Answer - MONEY....Government funding.

Larry
--


I think this might answer the question...

http://www.greatlakeswiki.org/index...._on,_Big_River


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

* Larry wrote, On 3/29/2007 8:08 PM:
Goofball_star_dot_etal wrote in
:

The bottom line is that current models enable us to attribute the
causes of past climate change and predict the main features of the
future climate with a high degree of confidence. We now need to
provide more regional detail and more complete analysis of extreme
events.


OK, so what DID cause the Little Ice Age in the middle of the smoke
stacks during the height of the coal-fired industrial revolution??

As always, you're confused about the facts. The minimum for the
"Little Ice Age" was about 1700, while the beginning of the Industrial
Revolution was about 1760 or later. While the Industrial Revolution
was a profound change in England in the first years, it took 100 years
for it to spread around the world.

Larry wrote:
"OK, so what DID cause the Little Ice Age in the middle of the smoke
stacks during the height of the coal-fired industrial revolution??

Solar activity

Solar activity events recorded in radiocarbon.During the period
1645–1715, right in the middle of the Little Ice Age, solar activity as
seen in sunspots was extremely low, with some years having no sunspots at
all. This period of low sunspot activity is known as the Maunder Minimum.
The precise link between low sunspot activity and cooling temperatures
has not been established, but the coincidence of the Maunder Minimum with
the deepest trough of the Little Ice Age is suggestive of such a
connection [22]. The Spörer Minimum has also been identified with a
significant cooling period during the Little Ice Age. Other indicators of
low solar activity during this period are levels of carbon-14 and
beryllium-10 [23]. The low solar activity is also well documented in
astronomical records. Astronomers in both Europe and Asia documented a
decrease in the number of visible solar spots during this time period.


[edit] Volcanic activity
Throughout the Little Ice Age, the world also experienced heightened
volcanic activity. When a volcano erupts, its ash reaches high into the
atmosphere and can spread to cover the whole earth. This ash cloud blocks
out some of the incoming solar radiation, leading to worldwide cooling
that can last up to two years after an eruption. Also emitted by
eruptions is sulfur in the form of SO2 gas. When this gas reaches the
stratosphere, it turns into sulfuric acid particles, which reflect the
sun's rays, further reducing the amount of radiation reaching the earth's
surface. The 1815 eruption of Tambora in Indonesia blanketed the
atmosphere with ash; the following year, 1816, came to be known as the
Year Without A Summer, when frost and snow were reported in June and
July in both New England and Northern Europe."

While this is one discussion I don't want to be a part of, I do remember
way-back when the newscasters used to report on solar sunspot activity
(complete with pictures) on the evening news, and its current and
projected influence on the weather. And as for the person who wrote
something about not believing that these so-called climate researchers
have a financial stake in pushing global warming, you really need an
education about how government money works. The global warming issue is
a huge money machine with a crapload of very greedy mouths to feed, and
it is no different in that respect than our current medical system or
any number of other corrupted groups out there looking to feed in the
grant trough. Researchers who get grant money are clearly and easily
influenced by money and whatever the grantor wants, they usually get. It
is very rare when a *scientific* reseacher who gets grant money does
pure uninfluenced research. And BTW, I have seen numerous programs on
Discovery and other channels about Volcanos and there have been many
references to their enormous and lasting influence on the earth's
weather. Recently there was an announcement on the news about the ozone
"hole" getting smaller due to the recent reduction of airborne gases
from the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo (sp?) a few years ago. There is
clearly much more going on in this world than most people can grasp, and
most scientists are looking at their own little world through a
microscope and reporting politics as *science*. Flame away, I am
deleting the rest of this thread anyway.