On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 10:44:55 -0500, BAR penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|Gene Kearns wrote:
|
| ".....variations in radiation from the surface of Mars are fueling
| strong winds that stir up giant dust storms, trapping heat and raising
| the planet's temperature. "
| http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...4/s1890339.htm
|
| I guess it is the giant dust storms, here on Earth, that make our
| weather even vaguely comparable to Mars. Or not.
|
|
|What is causing the variations in radiation?

Dust.

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:03:05 -0000, penned the
following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:


|
|You do realize that water vapor has risen rapidly, don't you? Do you
|have any idea why?

Watch out, man, watch out..... when he realizes it is the same
document he wanted to quote with me, but wouldn't accept as fact, he's
probably going to cut and run........

So, you consider the IPCC document as fact, the whole truth and nothing but?
The document can be rendered useless using some of it's opening statements:

"The statements presented here are based largely on data sets that cover the
period since 1970" ( Weren't we in a cooling cycle during the 70's? )

"There is, however, a notable lack of geographical balance in the data and
literature on observed changes, with marked scarcity in developing
countries." (With such a vast amount of data missing how do we know for sure
that warming isn't a localized phenomena?)

"Based on satellite observations since the early 1980s" (The beginning of
the
current warming cycle)

"A global assessment of data since 1970 has shown it is likely that
anthropogenic warming has had a discernible influence on many physical and
biological systems." (Likely, discernable? I thought the debate was over)

There are literally hundreds of CYA statements in this document.
How anyone (without an agenda) can take this document as fact is beyond me.

wrote in message
ps.com...
On Nov 12, 2:14 pm, "BillP" wrote:
wrote in message

You do realize that water vapor has risen rapidly, don't you?

Do you have proof of this?

Yes.


Well very good then.
Do you have any proof as to why it is?

How about cloud cover, is it increasing, decreasing?

On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:00:51 GMT, BillP penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|
|"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
.. .
| On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:03:05 -0000, penned the
| following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
|
|
| |
| |You do realize that water vapor has risen rapidly, don't you? Do you
| |have any idea why?
|
| Watch out, man, watch out..... when he realizes it is the same
| document he wanted to quote with me, but wouldn't accept as fact, he's
| probably going to cut and run........
|
|So, you consider the IPCC document as fact, the whole truth and nothing but?

No, not necessarily, but then I think any document would be rendered
useless if you cherry picked out of context sentences that seem to
"prove" your point.

|The document can be rendered useless using some of it's opening statements:

That is simply a foolish statement, totally devoid of any logic.

|"The statements presented here are based largely on data sets that cover the
|period since 1970" ( Weren't we in a cooling cycle during the 70's? )

It was a bit of populist science, never supported by the scientific
community. It was actually very akin to the present feeling that
humans couldn't possibly have any effect on global warming.

|"There is, however, a notable lack of geographical balance in the data and
|literature on observed changes, with marked scarcity in developing
|countries." (With such a vast amount of data missing how do we know for sure
|that warming isn't a localized phenomena?)

Would you really like to make the case that global warming is only
taking place in developing countries?

|"Based on satellite observations since the early 1980s" (The beginning of
|the
|current warming cycle)

"The beginning of the current warming cycle" seems to be your
incorrect assumption, possibly based on the old erroneous populist
ideas of a "cooling cycle."

|"A global assessment of data since 1970 has shown it is likely that
|anthropogenic warming has had a discernible influence on many physical and
|biological systems." (Likely, discernable? I thought the debate was over)

Why are you trying to quote from a document that is (1) from a working
group and (2) is not even edited. The quote from the IPCC document
says:

"The understanding of anthropogenic warming and cooling influences on
climate has improved since the Third Assessment Report (TAR), leading
to very high confidence that the global average net effect of human
activities since 1750 has been one of warming. "

|There are literally hundreds of CYA statements in this document.
|How anyone (without an agenda) can take this document as fact is beyond me.

If I was absolutely convinced that the world was flat, gazing at a
globe would probably **** me off, too.....

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:16:31 -0500, Gene Kearns
wrote:

No, not necessarily, but then I think any document would be rendered
useless if you cherry picked out of context sentences that seem to
"prove" your point.

What about the opposite - cherry picked data to "prove" the concept of
"Global" warming aka, Climate Change?

On Nov 13, 5:04 pm, "BillP" wrote:
wrote in message

ps.com...

On Nov 12, 2:14 pm, "BillP" wrote:
wrote in message

You do realize that water vapor has risen rapidly, don't you?

Do you have proof of this?

Yes.

Well very good then.
Do you have any proof as to why it is?

Yes, because warm air can sustain a higher concentration of water
vapor than cooler air without becoming saturated.
Here, I'll educate you some mo
http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/mockler.html


How about cloud cover, is it increasing, decreasing?

Yes.

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:00:51 GMT, BillP penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|
|"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
.. .
| On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:03:05 -0000, penned the
| following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
|
|
| |
| |You do realize that water vapor has risen rapidly, don't you? Do you
| |have any idea why?
|
| Watch out, man, watch out..... when he realizes it is the same
| document he wanted to quote with me, but wouldn't accept as fact, he's
| probably going to cut and run........
|
|So, you consider the IPCC document as fact, the whole truth and nothing
but?

No, not necessarily, but then I think any document would be rendered
useless if you cherry picked out of context sentences that seem to
"prove" your point.


When a document starts out


|The document can be rendered useless using some of it's opening
statements:

That is simply a foolish statement, totally devoid of any logic.

|"The statements presented here are based largely on data sets that cover
the
|period since 1970" ( Weren't we in a cooling cycle during the 70's? )

It was a bit of populist science, never supported by the scientific
community. It was actually very akin to the present feeling that
humans couldn't possibly have any effect on global warming.

|"There is, however, a notable lack of geographical balance in the data
and
|literature on observed changes, with marked scarcity in developing
|countries." (With such a vast amount of data missing how do we know for
sure
|that warming isn't a localized phenomena?)

Would you really like to make the case that global warming is only
taking place in developing countries?

|"Based on satellite observations since the early 1980s" (The beginning of
|the
|current warming cycle)

"The beginning of the current warming cycle" seems to be your
incorrect assumption, possibly based on the old erroneous populist
ideas of a "cooling cycle."

|"A global assessment of data since 1970 has shown it is likely that
|anthropogenic warming has had a discernible influence on many physical
and
|biological systems." (Likely, discernable? I thought the debate was over)

Why are you trying to quote from a document that is (1) from a working
group and (2) is not even edited. The quote from the IPCC document
says:

"The understanding of anthropogenic warming and cooling influences on
climate has improved since the Third Assessment Report (TAR), leading
to very high confidence that the global average net effect of human
activities since 1750 has been one of warming. "

|There are literally hundreds of CYA statements in this document.
|How anyone (without an agenda) can take this document as fact is beyond
me.

If I was absolutely convinced that the world was flat, gazing at a
globe would probably **** me off, too.....

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------