Carbon's NOT the cause of Global Warming -- David Evans
hanson
class 3 enviros, the little green idiots, up to the chief Green
turds like Al Gore, will cry now: "he lies!" because...
>
:: Evans summarized: "Since 1999, new evidence has
:: seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions
:: are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007
:: the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played
:: only a minor role and was not the main cause of the
:: recent global warming".
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24039067-5013868,00.html
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/07/021040.php
http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2008/080717scientist_v_gore.html
>
ahahahaha... There goes the Carbon tax and there goes
the Carbon cap... ahahahaha... and with it all the graft
that the green shits hoped to fatten their wallets with...
ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA...
>
Now start shedding green crocodile tears you fanatical
green shits... ahahahaha... and start doing what you
should have done decades ago, --- start cursing and
rejecting your Green Bible that gave you false hope from
the get-go, you gullible stupid Green bastards, it taught
you to believe that:
>
-- Green Genesis --:
1 "It doesn't matter what is true ... it only matters what people
= believe is true. -- Paul Watson, Sea Shepard/ex-Greenpeace, &...
2 "If you don't know an answer, a fact, a statistic, then .... make it
= up on the spot... for the mass-media today... the truth is irrelevant."
= -- Paul Watson in Earthforce: An Earth Warrior's Guide to Strategy.
3= "I got the impression that instead of going out to shoot birds,
= I should go out and shoot the kids who shoot birds."
-- Paul Watson, founder of Greenpeace and **Sea Shepherd**
-- Revelations --:
4 "A lot of environmental [sci/soc/pol] messages are simply not
= accurate. We use hype." -- Jerry Franklin, Ecologist, UoW, and...
5 "We make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little
= mention of any doubts we may have [about] being honest."
= -- Stephen Schneider (Stanford prof. who first sought fame as
= a global cooler, but has now hit the big time as a global warmer)
6 "to attract great funding you have to scare the public by making
= things bigger and more dangerous than they really are."
= --Petr Chylek, Prof. Atmospheric Sci., Dalhousie Uni, Halifax
7 "Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the
= right thing" -- Sen.Tim Wirth, Admin of Ted Turner's $1Billion UN-gift.
8 "No matter if the science is all phony, Climate change [provides]
= equality in the world." -- Christine Stewart, Can. Enviro Minister
9 "It is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presen-
= tations" -- Al Gore, Chairman, Gen. Investment Management Bank
>
Modern, attributal definitions of enviro classifications:
========= enviro Class (1) --- the Green shit(s):
...are the ones who advocate, promote, support, legalize,
institute and extort the permit charges, the user fees, the
enviro surtaxes and the CO2/Carbon tax, all reflected in
HIGHER PRICES of goods and services!, ...and being
responsible for much of the OUT-SOURCING!
========= enviro Class (2) -- the Green turd(s):
... are the ones who are recipients and beneficiaries from
the lootings of (1), directly or indirectly.
========= enviro Class (3) -- the Little green idiot(s):
.. are the unpaid, well-meaning ones, in "environmental
groups" who think they do something for the "environment",
when in fact they are only the enablers and facilitators for
(2) who are harvesting the green $$$ that (1) has extorted.
>
>
Thanks for the laughs... ahahaha... AHAHAHAHA....
AHAHAHAHA.... ahahahaha... ahahahanson
marcodbeast
"hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote in message
news:JB8hk.196$GI.143@trnddc05...
> ... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... and all the
> class 3 enviros, the little green idiots, up to the chief Green
> turds like Al Gore, will cry now: "he lies!" because...
It was debunked here last week. lol
marcodbeast
"Peter Muehlbauer" <spamt...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote in message
news:556a84986ograqpfe...@4ax.com...
> scientists" of AGW, when time passes and GH theory becomes obvious to
> crash.
>
> Do they start a self-inquisition?
> "I know, I have transgressed... I am culpable... OK, I'll convert to
> sceptic
> and debunk all the lies for indulgence!"
>
> I think, this will be appreciated as the easiest way and a last chance now
> to
> obtain at least a little bit of their credibility.
> Some more will certainly follow Evans time by time like those before him.
The usual delusional k00kspew from our speshul lil' Nazi. lol Got
another bead on me yet?
Peter Muehlbauer wrote:
> "f-newguy" <wha...@didyousay.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> "ZB00N" <ZB...@w00w00.com> wrote in message
>> news:487d56cf$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>> July 16, 2008
>>
>>> So it has opened a debate, kicked off by Christopher Monckton:
>>>
>>
>> Kicked off by a lying whacko. End of story.
>
> **************************************************************************
> And always the same old AGW procedure.
> "If you have no conclusive counterarguments, then stir up his personal
> past to find something to compromise the person, or simply call it a
> liar." Whenever AGWs do that, their own attitude becomes fractal,
> their statements irrational, and they should be gunned down at this
> moment.
> **************************************************************************
Wonder why his hate speech has these folks' name on it?
http://www.frankenexpress.de/wcms/index.php?section=home
V for Vendicar
"Peter Muehlbauer" <spamt...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote
> I'm very curious to see what would become from the other so called "real
> scientists" of AGW, when time passes and GH theory becomes obvious to
> crash.
Sorry Shit Sack. That isn't gonna happen, as it would require the
overthrow of 400 years of science.
All you have left is Self Delusion and stupidity.
hanson
http://groups.google.com/group/aus.invest/msg/8a69950c26530584?hl=en
the little green idiot #1 predictably came by
to shed organic enviro tears over this issue here:
>
*Carbon's NOT the cause of Global Warming -- David Evans*
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/4415985eaafe202a?hl=en
>
So you do lie thru your green teeth just to hang on
to your dependency to consume dole-outs from the
govt.... But bad green times are coming down on
you, dude... ....and you'll have to work, finally, like
all the hard working people do, whose money you
have sponged off for the last 40 years...
****** The pendulum is swinging back *******
****** and hitting ur useless green ass! *******
Thanks for the laughs!.... ahahaha... ahahanson
hanson
the self-cocksucker as seen in here on video
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/dd691b004e0f87ba?hl=en
obediently came by, as the little green idiot #2,
to shed organic enviro tears over this issue here:
>
*Carbon's NOT the cause of Global Warming -- David Evans*
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/4415985eaafe202a?hl=en
>
Mike Jr.
[snip colorful commentary]
>
> :: Evans summarized: "Since 1999, new evidence has
> :: seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions
> :: are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007
> :: the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played
> :: only a minor role and was not the main cause of the
> http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/07/021040.php
> http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2008/080717scientist_v_gore.html
[snip more colorful commentary]
NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center says this,
"Unlike the surface-based temperatures, global temperature
measurements of the Earth's lower atmosphere obtained from satellites
reveal no definitive warming trend over the past two decades. The
slight trend that is in the data actually appears to be downward."
http://spacescience.spaceref.com/newhome/headlines/essd06oct97_1.htm
"The Answer Lies Partly in a Better Understanding of Water's Role"
As Dr. Miskolczi pointed out,
http://met.hu/doc/idojaras/vol111001_01.pdf
energy considerations will lead to a drop in the relative humidity to
maintain a constant greenhouse factor in the face of increasing CO2.
Aqua satellite measurements are seeing just such a drop in relative
humidity.
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/stories/humidity_20040315/
Follow the physics....
--Mike Jr
Sam Wormley
> NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center says this,
> "Unlike the surface-based temperatures, global temperature
> measurements of the Earth's lower atmosphere obtained from satellites
> reveal no definitive warming trend over the past two decades. The
> slight trend that is in the data actually appears to be downward."
> http://spacescience.spaceref.com/newhome/headlines/essd06oct97_1.htm
>
Dang ice is melting anyway.
ZB0N0
"Sam Wormley" <swor...@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:snchk.264244$yE1.43422@attbi_s21...
Ice is GROWING to a record extent in the Antarctic!
Warmest Regards
Bonzo
"The question scientists should now be asking is not how much it will
warm over the next 50 to 100 years, but why has it warmed so little
during the major carbon dioxide buildup?" Patrick J. Michaels,
Environmental Scientist , University of Virginia
Mike Jr.
> On Jul 21, 7:04 pm, "hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
> [snip colorful commentary]
>
> > :: Evans summarized: "Since 1999, new evidence has
> > :: seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions
> > :: are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007
> > :: the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played
> > :: only a minor role and was not the main cause of the
> > :: recent global warming".http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24039067-5013868,0...
> >http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/07/021040.php
> >http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2008/080717scientist_v_gore.html
>
> [snip more colorful commentary]
>
Better data can be found at
http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/tltglhmam_5.2
For context, see: http://climate.uah.edu/dec2006.htm
UAH is the University of Alabama in Huntsville.
>
> "The Answer Lies Partly in a Better Understanding of Water's Role"
>
> As Dr. Miskolczi pointed out,http://met.hu/doc/idojaras/vol111001_01.pdf
> energy considerations will lead to a drop in the relative humidity to
> maintain a constant greenhouse factor in the face of increasing CO2.
>
> Aqua satellite measurements are seeing just such a drop in relative
> humidity.http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/stories/humidity_20040315/
Mike Jr.
Yes. But it seems to have recovered.
We did have a big oscillation. I understand that the ice is newer and
thinner. I would like to understand what drives that variation. One
problem is that the records only go back to 1970s. We don't
understand what the natural variation is.
--Mike Jr
V for Vendicar
"Mike Jr." <n00...@comcast.net> wrote
> NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center says this,
> "Unlike the surface-based temperatures, global temperature
> measurements of the Earth's lower atmosphere obtained from satellites
> reveal no definitive warming trend over the past two decades. The
> slight trend that is in the data actually appears to be downward."
Atmospheric temperatures are not surface temperatures.
URAh MMMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNN
Here are the global average temperatures since 1958. "o" = trend line.
Look at all those "o"'s lined up there. The trend is up, Up, UP.
And most recently the rate of increase is about 2'C per century.
View with mono spaced font.
1958 14.08 *******o***************
1959 14.06 ********o************
1960 13.99 *********o******
1961 14.08 **********o************
1962 14.04 ***********o********
1963 14.08 ************o**********
1964 13.79 **===========o
1965 13.89 *********====o
1966 13.97 **************o
1967 14.00 ***************o*
1968 13.96 **************==o
1969 14.08 *****************o*****
1970 14.03 ******************o
1971 13.90 **********=========o
1972 14.00 *****************===o
1973 14.14 ********************o******
1974 13.92 ***********==========o
1975 13.95 *************=========o
1976 13.84 ******=================o
1977 14.13 ************************o*
1978 14.02 ******************=======o
1979 14.09 ***********************===o
1980 14.18 ***************************o**
1981 14.27 ****************************o*******
1982 14.05 ********************========o
1983 14.26 *****************************o*****
1984 14.09 ***********************=======o
1985 14.06 *********************==========o
1986 14.13 **************************======o
1987 14.27 *********************************o**
1988 14.31 **********************************o****
1989 14.19 ******************************=====o
1990 14.38 ************************************o*******
1991 14.35 ************************************o****
1992 14.12 *************************============o
1993 14.14 ****************************===========o
1994 14.24 **********************************=====o
1995 14.38 ****************************************o***
1996 14.30 **************************************===o
1997 14.40 ******************************************o**
1998 14.57 *******************************************o*************
1999 14.33 ****************************************===o
2000 14.33 ****************************************====o
2001 14.48 *********************************************o*****
2002 14.56 **********************************************o*********
2003 14.55 ***********************************************o*******
2004 14.49 ************************************************o**
2005 14.62 *************************************************o**********
2006 14.54 **************************************************o****
2007 14.57 ***************************************************o*****
-------------------------------------------> Temperature
Correlation Coefficient .8529209
tvor
"marcodbeast" <its@casual> wrote in message
news:bJydna-b6uomhhjV...@comcast.com...
Chuckles Bee = marcodbeast? Is this your new alter ego in the church of the
subgenious? Some fantasy life you lead there chuckie.
Mike
<Execute_The_Traitor_In_The_White_Ho...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Mike Jr." <n00s...@comcast.net> wrote
Take a look at
http://www.remss.com/rss_research/climate_change_in_the_tropics.html
If you take out the peaks attributable to the three El Niños it
doesn't look so bad. I also find it interesting how total atmospheric
water vapor tracks with sea-surface temperature (SST) and lower
tropospheric temperature (LTT).
--Mike Jr
Sam Wormley
> On Jul 21, 11:22 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>> Mike Jr. wrote:
>>> NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center says this,
>>> "Unlike the surface-based temperatures, global temperature
>>> measurements of the Earth's lower atmosphere obtained from satellites
>>> reveal no definitive warming trend over the past two decades. The
>>> slight trend that is in the data actually appears to be downward."
>>> http://spacescience.spaceref.com/newhome/headlines/essd06oct97_1.htm
>> Dang ice is melting anyway.
>
> Yes. But it seems to have recovered.
Recovered?
Bill Penrose
> ... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... and all the
> class 3 enviros, the little green idiots, up to the chief Green
> turds like Al Gore, will cry now: "he lies!" because...
The Shroud of Turin syndrome. Three labs dated the shroud, using the
most accurate and careful methods available at the time, and all three
laboratories agreed that the Shroud was a fraud. Yet today, there are
more believers than ever.
No matter how strong the evidence, folks will believe what their
politics tells them to believe. The fact that the climate change
evidence is complex, murky and contradictory doesn't help.
The scientific part of me says, don't even bother learning about the
subject, because no one cares about facts anyway.
The personal side of me says, hey, I'll be dead in 10 or 15 years. Why
should I care? Fill the SUV tank and let's go for a drive before it's
time to rot. Let the grandkids deal with it.
Dangerous Bill
(planning to start a marina in my Arizona driveway)
Live United
> ... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... and all the
> class 3 enviros, the little green idiots, up to the chief Green
> turds like Al Gore, will cry now: "he lies!" because...
>
> :: Evans summarized: "Since 1999, new evidence has
> :: seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions
> :: are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007
> :: the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played
> :: only a minor role and was not the main cause of the
This was retarted it has been proven that C02 is the damn cause of GW!
hanson
The_Whi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:axehk.
18876$Ec.1...@read2.cgocable.net...
>
hanson wrote:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/4415985eaafe202a?hl=en
>
"Mike Jr." <n00...@comcast.net> wrote
NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center says this,
"Unlike the surface-based temperatures, global temperature
measurements of the Earth's lower atmosphere obtained from satellites
reveal no definitive warming trend over the past two decades. The
slight trend that is in the data actually appears to be downward."
>
aka VD Scotty, aka Scott Nudds, Scuttled his Nutts, nuddled and wrote:
Atmospheric temperatures are not surface temperatures.
URAh MMMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNN
[snip]
2007 14.57 *******o***************
:: [snip]
>>
<orangata...@googlemail.com> wrote
where did you get this data?
>
"Steve Thomas" <misled...@aol.com> wrote to VD Scotty:
So you did get your numbers from the liar at NASA.
>
hanson wrote:
... ahahahaha... hold your horses. VD-Scotty wouldn't
know that. VD Scotty doesn't even know how to fuck
right. Read here how hilarious VD Scotty is... ahaha:
http://groups.google.com/group/aus.invest/msg/8a69950c26530584?hl=en
Thanks for the laughs, VD Scotty and you guys
ahahaha.... ahahahanson
hanson
>
Little green idiot #3 "Live United" <xavier...@gmail.com>
wrote in message
news:1aafe65b-d521-45a7...@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
"hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/4415985eaafe202a?hl=en
... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... and all the
class 3 enviros, the little green idiots, up to the chief Green
turds like Al Gore, will cry now: "he lies!" because...
>
...ahahahaha...& surely little green idiot #3 got in line & belched:
"Live United" <xavier...@gmail.com>
This was retarted it has been proven that C02 is the damn
cause of GW!
>
Thanks for the laughs, Xavier. Your "retarted C-zero-2"
is impressive.... ahahahahaha... See now, you are #3,
receiving the Bronze medal for being a crying Little GI.
Try to cry louder and more fanatical to get in league with
these 2 unemployable pinko loosers and loud mouths:
>
#1 = VD-Scotty who doesn't even know how to fuck right:
http://groups.google.com/group/aus.invest/msg/8a69950c26530584?hl=en
#2 = "marcodbeast" <its@casual>, aka Ouroboro_Rex
the self-cocksucker as seen in here on video
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/dd691b004e0f87ba?hl=en
V for Vendicar
"Mike" <n00...@comcast.net> wrote
> Take a look at
> http://www.remss.com/rss_research/climate_change_in_the_tropics.html
No problem.....
Average Tropical Temperature anomolys in the 1980's were around -0.1 In
the 2000's it's +0.2
Approximate change +0.3
We have seen more than twice this much warming in the higher latitutdes.
"Mike" <n00...@comcast.net> wrote
> If you take out the peaks attributable to the three El Niños it
> doesn't look so bad. I also find it interesting how total atmospheric
> water vapor tracks with sea-surface temperature (SST) and lower
> tropospheric temperature (LTT).
Why would you find that interesting? Higher temperatures = more
evaporation = higher H2O vapour levels.
This is exactly what the models predict. Strong H2O feedback due to
higher amounts of water in the atmosphere.
--Mike Jr
V for Vendicar
"Bill Penrose" <pen...@iit.edu> wrote
> The personal side of me says, hey, I'll be dead in 10 or 15 years. Why
> should I care? Fill the SUV tank and let's go for a drive before it's
> time to rot. Let the grandkids deal with it.
Impoverishing future generations is what KKKonservatism is all about.
V for Vendicar
V for Vendicar
Benj
<Execute_The_Traitor_In_The_White_Ho...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Why would you find that interesting? Higher temperatures = more
> evaporation = higher H2O vapour levels.
>
> This is exactly what the models predict. Strong H2O feedback due to
> higher amounts of water in the atmosphere.
Well, H2O is a better "greenhouse" gas than CO2, but that doesn't
change the issue. I just LOVE the way all the AGWists simply harp on
CO2 and then when confronted with proof of their lies, they try to
cleverly shift the subject from the total bullshit of the CO2 theories
to the more valid question of "climate change". But then they try to
get everyone arguing as to whether or not "Global Warming" exists so
they'll all stop noticing how bogus the CO2 theories are. Of course
"V" and his minions already knew the CO2 theory was bogus and now that
they've been caught in a lie, they've suddenly invented a new
"feedback" model to cover up the previous lies.
Sorry Vendicar,
You've been caught in major lies and that ended you credibility here.
I don't care if you tell the truth from now on, why would anyone
believe anything you say? The fact that you are cleverly manipulating
topics shows that you really haven't changed your ways anyway.
V for Vendicar
>> Why would you find that interesting? Higher temperatures = more
>> evaporation = higher H2O vapour levels.
>>
>> This is exactly what the models predict. Strong H2O feedback due to
>> higher amounts of water in the atmosphere.
"Benj" <bja...@iwaynet.net> wrote
> Well, H2O is a better "greenhouse" gas than CO2, but that doesn't
> change the issue. I just LOVE the way all the AGWists simply harp on
> CO2 and then when confronted with proof of their lies, they try to
> cleverly shift the subject from the total bullshit of the CO2 theories
> to the more valid question of "climate change".
What are you blathering about Shit Stick?
It has been known since the late 1800's that increases in CO2 level raise
temperaturs, which in turn
raise the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere when greatly enhances the
thermal effects of the original rise
in CO2 level.
What slim covered rock have you been living under?
V for Vendicar
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> It has been known since the late 1800's that increases in CO2 level
>> raise
>> temperaturs, which in turn
>> raise the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere when greatly enhances
>> the
>> thermal effects of the original rise
>> in CO2 level.
"Peter Muehlbauer" <spamt...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote
> This should be framed and nailed to the doors of each AGW institution.
>
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA
> What a huge load of shit in one single sentence.
>
> Not even Roger can to do this.
Svante Arrhenius developed a theory to explain the ice ages, and first
speculated that changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
could substantially alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse
effect ("On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air Upon the Temperature
of the Ground", Philosophical Magazine 1896(41): 237-76). He was influenced
by the work of others, including Joseph Fourier. Arrhenius used the infrared
observations of the moon by Frank Washington Very and Samuel Pierpont
Langley at the Allegheny Observatory in Pittsburgh to calculate the
absorption of CO2 and water vapour. Using 'Stefan's law' (better known as
the Stefan Boltzmann law), he formulated his greenhouse law. In its original
form, Arrhenius' greenhouse law reads as follows:
if the quantity of carbonic acid increases in geometric progression, the
augmentation of the temperature will increase nearly in arithmetic
progression.
Which is still valid in the simplified expression by Myhre et al. (1998).
?F = ? ln(C/C0)
Sam Wormley
> Well, H2O is a better "greenhouse" gas than CO2, but that doesn't
> change the issue. I just LOVE the way all the AGWists simply harp on
> CO2 and then when confronted with proof of their lies, they try to
> cleverly shift the subject from the total bullshit of the CO2 theories
> to the more valid question of "climate change". But then they try to
> get everyone arguing as to whether or not "Global Warming" exists so
> they'll all stop noticing how bogus the CO2 theories are.
The data indicates that CO2 is the gas currently driving the warming.
http://edu-observatory.org/psd/2008/Global_Warming_Workshop.html
z
<spamtrap...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote:
> I'm very curious to see what would become from the other so called "real
> scientists" of AGW, when time passes and GH theory becomes obvious to crash.
yeah, that faith in the correctness of your position and its
predictions is why you set your posts to not be archived.
z
> It was debunked here last week. lol
yes, every mental midget without even a passing knowledge of physics
in general, but with the ability to read a rightwing blog, has
debunked it here.
hanson
Little green idiot #1 "V for Vendicar"
<Execute_The_Traitor...@hotmail.com>
came to the rescue of Little green idiot #3 "Live United"
by posting his phony & ridiculously misleading graph
[snip VD crap]
>
ahahahaha.... AHAHAHAHA... AHAHAHAHA...
>
Little green idiot #3 "Live United" <xavier...@gmail.com>
wrote in message
news:1aafe65b-d521-45a7...@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
"hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/4415985eaafe202a?hl=en
... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... and all the
class 3 enviros, the little green idiots, up to the chief Green
turds like Al Gore, will cry now: "he lies!" because...
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/4415985eaafe202a?hl=en
>
hanson
wrote in in message news:axehk18876$Ec.1...@read2.cgocable.net... .
Read here on hilarious VD Scotty, who can't even fuck right:
http://groups.google.com/group/aus.invest/msg/8a69950c26530584?hl=en
>
hanson wrote:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/4415985eaafe202a?hl=en
>
"Mike Jr." <n00...@comcast.net> wrote
NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center says this,
"Unlike the surface-based temperatures, global temperature
measurements of the Earth's lower atmosphere obtained from satellites
reveal no definitive warming trend over the past two decades. The
slight trend that is in the data actually appears to be downward."
>
"VD for Vendicar" <Execute_The_Traitor_In_The_White_Ho...@hotmail.com>
right, nuddled Scuttled his Nutts, and pasted his ridiculous graph:
z
> ... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... and all the
> class 3 enviros, the little green idiots, up to the chief Green
> turds like Al Gore, will cry now: "he lies!" because...
>
> :: seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions
> :: are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007
> :: the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played
> :: only a minor role and was not the main cause of the
>
yep, because if you can't believe lyndon larouche, who can you believe?
hanson
>
#1 = VD-Scotty who doesn't even know how to fuck right:
http://groups.google.com/group/aus.invest/msg/8a69950c26530584?hl=en
#2 = "marcodbeast" <its@casual>, aka Ouroboro_Rex
the self-cocksucker as seen in here on video
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/dd691b004e0f87ba?hl=en
"retarted C-zero-2" & belched... and now... hahaha....
# 4, Little green idiot, "z" <gzuc...@snail-mail.net>
a disciple of Lydon LaRouche wrote in message
news:8d88a2b5-663b-4786...@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
> ... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... and all the
> class 3 enviros, the little green idiots, up to the chief Green
> turds like Al Gore, will cry now: "he lies!" because...
>
> :: Evans summarized: "Since 1999, new evidence has
> :: seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions
> :: are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007
> :: the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played
> :: only a minor role and was not the main cause of the
>http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24039067-5013868,00.html
>http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/07/021040.php
>http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2008/080717scientist_v_gore.html
>
Little green idiot # 4, "z" <gzuc...@snail-mail.net>
got in line and takes refuge with:
"yep, because if you can't believe lyndon larouche, who can you believe?"
>
But that should have given you an indication that all this
GW/AGW shit is nothing but a money game, which the
green turds and the green shits started some 40 years
ago.... on the backs of the hordes of well meaning and
gullible little green idiots whom they still use as their unpaid
enablers and facilitators of the green bible... of which you
fallen victim to and became the damages goods that you
are now... ahahahahaha... Thanks for the laughs... ahaha..
>
hanson continued in the original post with:
z
oh, you meant the dumbass evans thing. I'm just getting around to
wasting my time with it. i thought you meant "global warming". which
is like an idiot magnet. "Hey, I know! I bet those scientists forgot
about the sun! Stupid scientists. I could do their job."
Lloyd
> Little green idiot #1 "VD for Vendicar" <Execute_The_Traitor_In_The_White_Ho...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:axehk.
>
> 18876$Ec.18...@read2.cgocable.net...
>
> hanson wrote:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/4415985eaafe202a?h...
>
> "Mike Jr." <n00s...@comcast.net> wrote
> NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center says this,
> "Unlike the surface-based temperatures, global temperature
> measurements of the Earth's lower atmosphere obtained from satellites
> reveal no definitive warming trend over the past two decades. The
> slight trend that is in the data actually appears to be downward."
And 10 years ago, that was correct. You know, if that's how you view
science, how's phlogiston these days?
Satellites show warming. Have for years now.
>
> "VD for Vendicar" <Execute_The_Traitor_In_The_White_Ho...@hotmail.com>
> aka VD Scotty, aka Scott Nudds, Scuttled his Nutts, nuddled and wrote:
> Atmospheric temperatures are not surface temperatures.
> URAh MMMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNN
> 1959 14.06 ***************************************************o*****
> [snip]
> 2007 14.57 *******o***************
> :: [snip]
>
> <orangata...@googlemail.com> wrote
> where did you get this data?
>
> "Steve Thomas" <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote to VD Scotty:
Lloyd
> On Jul 22, 8:51 pm, "V for Vendicar"
>
> <Execute_The_Traitor_In_The_White_Ho...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Why would you find that interesting? Higher temperatures = more
> > evaporation = higher H2O vapour levels.
>
> > This is exactly what the models predict. Strong H2O feedback due to
> > higher amounts of water in the atmosphere.
>
> Well, H2O is a better "greenhouse" gas than CO2, but that doesn't
> change the issue. I just LOVE the way all the AGWists simply harp on
> CO2 and then when confronted with proof of their lies,
Oh, shut up. You know nothing about science.
>they try to
> cleverly shift the subject from the total bullshit of the CO2 theories
> to the more valid question of "climate change". But then they try to
> get everyone arguing as to whether or not "Global Warming" exists so
> they'll all stop noticing how bogus the CO2 theories are.
Yeah, so bogus just about all science believes them. Every scientific
organization in the world too.
>Of course
> "V" and his minions already knew the CO2 theory was bogus and now that
> they've been caught in a lie, they've suddenly invented a new
> "feedback" model to cover up the previous lies.
You are an Indiot.
>
> Sorry Vendicar,
> You've been caught in major lies and that ended you credibility here.
> I don't care if you tell the truth from now on, why would anyone
> believe anything you say? The fact that you are cleverly manipulating
> topics shows that you really haven't changed your ways anyway.
Idiot.
z
> hahaha... and the list of little green idiots gets longer ...AHAHA..
>
> #1 = VD-Scotty who doesn't even know how to fuck right:http://groups.google.com/group/aus.invest/msg/8a69950c26530584?hl=en
> #2 = "marcodbeast" <its@casual>, aka Ouroboro_Rex
> #3 = "Live United" <xavieruni...@gmail.com> came up with
> "retarted C-zero-2" & belched... and now... hahaha....
> a disciple of Lydon LaRouche wrote in messagenews:8d88a2b5-663b-4786...@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
> > ... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... and all the
> > class 3 enviros, the little green idiots, up to the chief Green
> > turds like Al Gore, will cry now: "he lies!" because...
>
> > :: Evans summarized: "Since 1999, new evidence has
> > :: seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions
> > :: are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007
> > :: the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played
> > :: only a minor role and was not the main cause of the
> > :: recent global warming".
> >http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/07/021040.php
> >http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2008/080717scientist_v_gore.html
>
> Little green idiot # 4, "z" <gzuck...@snail-mail.net>
>
> - Show quoted text -
so mr. einstein, there are some questions i have about evans' article.
perhaps you could clarify them for me so that i can join you and
larouche in your vast understanding of climate and also laugh so much.
why is a tropical tropospheric hotspot "the greenhouse signature"?
isn't that just an effect of warming of the earth's surface in
general, and the tropic being the warmest spot on earth (clue: like
we've been taught in college it is?) so isn't the tropical hotspot
actually just a signature of warming in general, for any reason? and
since the troposphere is warming nicely on the average, no doubt about
that, aren't you arguing that although we measure the troposphere as
warming, the fact that we can't find a hotspot means it's not warming?
who're you going to believe, your theory or your lying eyes?
and does this mean that you're arguing with all the folks who say "i
agree that the earth is warming, but it's not greenhouse, or it's the
sun, etc." ?
and doesn't the greenhouse effect in fact predict quite the opposite;
that the heating is preferentially in the cooler areas, e.g. the
poles, so there will be less of a tropical hotspot?
and wouldn't the real signature of the greenhouse effect be a cooling
in the stratosphere, as the radiated heat is trapped lower down in the
troposphere? because there's no way you'd see that from any kind of
thing where the sun is heating up or cosmic rays are making clouds or
anything like that. sort of like we're seeing now, where the
stratosphere is cooling at half a degree per decade?
http://www.atmosphere.mpg.de/media/archive/1385.jpg
http://www.atmosphere.mpg.de/media/archive/1388.jpg how's that
happening if there's no greenhouse effect?
And hasn't the average temperature dropped to this level or below
quite a few times since 1980, yet always rebounded to that same
increasing trend, so that the "chicken littles" are actually the guys
who react to every short term cooling fluctuation as though it were a
major change in direction, long term? http://www.remss.com/msu/msu_data_description.html#figure_7
And if "NASA reports only land-based data" then why do they have
graphs titled "Global Temperature (Land-Ocean Index)"
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/USHCN.2005vs1999.pdf and maps
which show the temperatures over the oceans
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/2008+2005+2007.pdf?
and how is "CO2 rising doesn't cause warming" proved at all by there
being 4200 years of rising CO2 and warming, after 800 years of warming
alone? wouldn't you need to show CO2 rising and NO warming to prove
that? haven't you just proved one side of what could easily be a
positive feedback loop that got triggered?
Isn't "There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions
cause significant global warming. None." just a real dumbass thing to
say, especially since your "evidence" above has been so pathetic?
doesn't this bizarre statement just prove that this whole piece is
actually just a meaningless rallying cry papered over with a lack of
phony baloney easily dismissable psuedoscience, in order to give
idiots like yourself something to clog up the debate with so that
things can be delayed for another week or two while the usual supects
make a few million more each day?
V for Vendicar
V for Vendicar
V for Vendicar
Benj
<Execute_The_Traitor_In_The_White_Ho...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> What are you blathering about Shit Stick?
>
> It has been known since the late 1800's that increases in CO2 level raise
> temperaturs,
Hold on there Prong Horn, That statement above is a TOTAL lie! And
you KNOW it's a total lie! CO2 CANNOT, I repeat, can NOT in any way
have enough of an effect to raise temperature.
Hence if you START with a lie, all that follows is a LIE!
<snip remaining "vendicar" bullshit>
Liar.
PS. How much money to you plan to make on them thar "carbon credits"?
Benj
> The data indicates that CO2 is the gas currently driving the warming.
> http://edu-observatory.org/psd/2008/Global_Warming_Workshop.html
It's really too bad that politics has found it's way into this
science. Sorry, Sam but finding that CO2 levels are "related" to
warming is not the same thing as having it "driving" the warming!
This is the scam that Algore pulled in his Oscar winning movie. Just
reverse cause and effect to try to make a political point. It just
ain't so.
Benj
> Oh, shut up. You know nothing about science.
And everyone here should believe you because you have what credentials
related to the evaluation of my personal knowledge of science?
Ah, as I thought, Your major "credential" is that you won't like us
if we don't accept your word as gospel!
I Hope you noticed that we don't give a rat's ass if you "like" us or
not.
> You are an Indiot.
Ridicule, propaganda tool to fool the ignorant masses.
> Idiot.
I believe you already said that once. Wassamatta? Are you afraid your
propaganda rants aren't having the effects that they should? Maybe
you need to come up with a little more variety in the names you call
people.
hanson
>
= # 5 = Little green idiot, Parki-pooh, "Lloyd" <lpa...@emory.edu>
cranked himself over warm "phlogiston these days"...AHAHAaha
= # 4 = Little green idiot, "z" <gzuc...@snail-mail.net>
a disciple of Lydon LaRouche, cranks himself "while the usual
supects make a few million more each day"... ahahahaha...
= #3 = Little green idiot, "Live United" <xavier...@gmail.com>
came up with "retarted C-zero-2" & belched... hahaha....
= #2 = Little green idiot is "marcodbeast" <its@casual>,
aka "Ouroboro_Rex", the self-cocksucker seen in here on video
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/dd691b004e0f87ba?hl=en
= #1 = Little green idiot, is VD-Scotty who doesn't know how to fuck
http://groups.google.com/group/aus.invest/msg/8a69950c26530584?hl=en
>
>
---------------------- becausse -----------------------------
------- hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote initially ------------
>
... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... and all the
class 3 enviros, the little green idiots, up to the chief Green
turds like Al Gore, will cry now: "he lies!" because...
>
:: Evans summarized: "Since 1999, new evidence has
:: seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions
:: are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007
:: the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played
:: only a minor role and was not the main cause of the
:: recent global warming".
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/07/021040.php
http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2008/080717scientist_v_gore.html
>
hanson
>
#1 = VD-Scotty who doesn't even know how to fuck right:
http://groups.google.com/group/aus.invest/msg/8a69950c26530584?hl=en
#2 = "marcodbeast" <its@casual>, aka Ouroboro_Rex
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/dd691b004e0f87ba?hl=en
"retarted C-zero-2" & belched... and now... hahaha....
news:8d88a2b5-663b-4786...@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
news:747f3ccd-29c4-4d76...@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
"to clog up the debate with so that things can be delayed for
another week or two while the usual supects make a few million
>
hanson wrote:
.... ahahahaha... So, you, zuckier LaGreen, appear to be
very unhappy that you are a penniless pauper who helps
the "Green" sharpies to "make a few million more each day"
while they fuck you over and let you stew in abject poverty .
... ahahahaha... Serves you right... Your Green chicken are
coming home to roost, you Dreidel... Thanks for the laughs,
ahahaha.... ahahanson
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote before ------------
>
... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... and all the
class 3 enviros, the little green idiots, up to the chief Green
turds like Al Gore, will cry now: "he lies!" because...
>
:: Evans summarized: "Since 1999, new evidence has
:: seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions
:: are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007
:: the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played
:: only a minor role and was not the main cause of the
:: recent global warming".
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/07/021040.php
http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2008/080717scientist_v_gore.html
>
Little green idiot # 4, "z" <gzuc...@snail-mail.net>
Puppet_Sock
Sam, you've been told about this before. Since you know the
truth here, this is now a lie. A lie that you have repeated
several times.
CO2 lags temperature in the graphs you have on that page.
By 800 years or so. Temps rise and then 800 years later
the CO2 rises. Temps fall and then 800 years later CO2 falls.
CO2 may be contributing to temperature changes, but the
data you are showing don't show that. They show quite
the opposite. Glaciation epochs are not terminated by
rising CO2, but CO2 is driven upwards by the end of
glaciation epochs. And warm epochs are not ended by
the lowering of CO2, but CO2 is driven down by the ending
of warm epochs.
Some other mechanism is predominant in the temperature
changes in those graphs.
In addition, the data you are showing has absolutely nothing
to do with current warming. The current warming began about
1850, and any component due to CO2 can only reasonably be
expected to have been from round about the middle of the
20th century. These dates are not resovlable on the graphs
you have presented.
What did Jefferson say about people who lie?
Socks
Mike
> Mike Jr. wrote:
> > On Jul 21, 11:22 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote:
> >> Mike Jr. wrote:
> >>> NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center says this,
> >>> "Unlike the surface-based temperatures, global temperature
> >>> measurements of the Earth's lower atmosphere obtained from satellites
> >>> reveal no definitive warming trend over the past two decades. The
> >>> slight trend that is in the data actually appears to be downward."
> >> Dang ice is melting anyway.
>
> > Yes. But it seems to have recovered.
>
> Recovered?
I thought the word appropriate.
BTW, we will know the extent of this year's melt by mid September.
>
>
>
> >http://www.globalwarmingskeptics.info/modules.php?name=News&file=arti...
>
> > We did have a big oscillation. I understand that the ice is newer and
> > thinner. I would like to understand what drives that variation. One
> > problem is that the records only go back to 1970s. We don't
> > understand what the natural variation is.
>
> > --Mike Jr
Sam Wormley
<laughing>
Mike
>
> > Take a look at
> >http://www.remss.com/rss_research/climate_change_in_the_tropics.html
>
> No problem.....
>
> Average Tropical Temperature anomolys in the 1980's were around -0.1 In
> the 2000's it's +0.2
>
> Approximate change +0.3
>
> We have seen more than twice this much warming in the higher latitutdes.
>
> "Mike" <n00s...@comcast.net> wrote
>
> > If you take out the peaks attributable to the three El Niños it
> > doesn't look so bad. I also find it interesting how total atmospheric
> > water vapor tracks with sea-surface temperature (SST) and lower
> > tropospheric temperature (LTT).
>
> Why would you find that interesting? Higher temperatures = more
> evaporation = higher H2O vapour levels.
You got it backwards. The H2O vapor levels control the temperature.
It is a negative feedback loop.
See Lord Monckton's paper in the July 2008 APS newsletter. The
greenies in the APS were not amused but science is science.
>
> This is exactly what the models predict. Strong H2O feedback due to
> higher amounts of water in the atmosphere.
Which violates both the energy conservation and the energy minimum
principles. See Dr. Ferenc M. Miskolczi's peer reviewed paper
"Greenhouse effect in semi-transparent planetary atmospheres".
Warning: you have to understand quite a bit of physics to have a hope
of getting through this paper.
>
> --Mike Jr
hanson
>
= # 5 = Little green idiot, Parki-pooh, "Lloyd" <lpa...@emory.edu>
cranked himself over warm "phlogiston these days"...AHAHAaha
a disciple of Lydon LaRouche, cranks himself "while the usual
supects make a few million more each day"... ahahahaha...
= # 3 = Little green idiot, "Live United" <xavier...@gmail.com>
came up with "retarted C-zero-2" & belched... hahaha....
= # 2 = Little green idiot is "marcodbeast" <its@casual>,
aka "Ouroboro_Rex", the self-cocksucker seen in here on video
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/dd691b004e0f87ba?hl=en
= # 1 = Little green idiot is VD-Scotty aka Scott Nudds who
doesn't even know how to fuck properly because his phony list
makes him Scuttle his Nutts as is reported here by Naomi Gold:
http://groups.google.com/group/aus.invest/msg/8a69950c26530584?hl=en>
>
hanson wrote:
.... ahahahaha... listen, you pinko green paupers, GW makes
only you alone warmer... So, get a bigger Air conditioner and
stop being one of "Chuck Grassley's Whiners".... and AFA
your phony AGW... Get with the program and make money off it
like Al Gore and his Green Turds are doing. Don't be poor fools!
>
-------------------------------------------------
------- hanson wrote initially ------------
-------------------------------------------------
>
:: Evans summarized: "Since 1999, new evidence has
:: seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions
:: are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007
:: the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played
:: only a minor role and was not the main cause of the
:: recent global warming".
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24039067-5013868,00.html
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/07/021040.php
http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2008/080717scientist_v_gore.html
>
hanson
>
= # 5 = Little green idiot, Parki-pooh, "Lloyd" <lpa...@emory.edu>
cranked himself over warm "phlogiston these days"...AHAHAaha
= # 4 = Little green idiot, "z" <gzuc...@snail-mail.net>
a disciple of Lydon LaRouche, cranks himself "while the usual
supects make a few million more each day"... ahahahaha...
= # 3 = Little green idiot, "Live United" <xavier...@gmail.com>
came up with "retarted C-zero-2" & belched... hahaha....
aka "Ouroboro_Rex", the self-cocksucker seen in here on video
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/dd691b004e0f87ba?hl=en
= # 1 = Little green idiot is VD-Scotty aka Scott Nudds who
doesn't even know how to fuck properly because his phony list
makes him Scuttle his Nutts as is reported here by Naomi Gold:
http://groups.google.com/group/aus.invest/msg/8a69950c26530584?hl=en>
>
hanson wrote:
.... ahahahaha... listen, you pinko green paupers, GW makes
only you alone warmer... So, get a bigger Air conditioner and
stop being one of "Chuck Grassley's Whiners".... and AFA
your phony AGW... Get with the program and make money off it
like Al Gore and his Green Turds are doing. Don't be poor fools!
>
-------------------------------------------------
------- hanson wrote initially ------------
-------------------------------------------------
>
class 3 enviros, the little green idiots, up to the chief Green
turds like Al Gore, will cry now: "he lies!" because...
>
:: Evans summarized: "Since 1999, new evidence has
:: seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions
:: are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007
:: the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played
:: only a minor role and was not the main cause of the
:: recent global warming".
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24039067-5013868,00.html
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/07/021040.php
http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2008/080717scientist_v_gore.html
>
V for Vendicar
V for Vendicar
V for Vendicar
V for Vendicar
V for Vendicar
"Peter Muehlbauer" <spamt...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote
> His "Idiot" is only a replacement of has "Liar", which,
> after is day, becomes really lie, when he says "Liar".
Only from the mind of an infant could anything like that be generated.
V for Vendicar
"Mike" <n00...@comcast.net> wrote
> BTW, we will know the extent of this year's melt by mid September.
:Looks like the pole will probably be ice free.
V for Vendicar
>> Satellites show warming.
"Peter Muehlbauer" <spamt...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote
> Lie.
"The overall trend in the lower tropospheric data is approximately steady,
at about +0.047oC per decade."
http://spacescience.spaceref.com/newhome/essd/essd_strat_temp.htm NASA
Once again Muehlbaure is caught
LLLLLLYYYYYYYYYIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
Ahahahahahahahaha... What a fucking Loser.
V for Vendicar
"Mike" <n00...@comcast.net> wrote
> You got it backwards. The H2O vapor levels control the temperature.
> It is a negative feedback loop.
Hahahahahahahahahaahah..... You KKKonservatives just pull mindless crap
out of their ass.
"Mike" <n00...@comcast.net> wrote
> See Lord Monckton's paper in the July 2008 APS newsletter. The
> greenies in the APS were not amused but science is science.
Ahahahaha Monckton who claims to be a Lord but isn't?
The funniest part of that Incompetent's letter to the APS is where he
divides the feedback factor by three for no reason.
He just pulls the three out of his Fat, Incompetent, ass.
Later he confuses the rate at which CO2 is removed from the atmosphere,
with the rate at which the laps rate changes. Aahhahahahaha
And then later he uses some nonsense excuse to divide his partial result
by two, and then after doing that he uses the same excuse to divide the
final result - which already contains the division) by 2 again.
Oh man. What a fucking Incompetent.
And you fell for it. Just like the
MMMMMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOONNNNNNN
You are.
Oh the Public Humiliation of it all.
V for Vendicar
"Benj" <bja...@iwaynet.net> wrote
> Hold on there Prong Horn, That statement above is a TOTAL lie! And
> you KNOW it's a total lie! CO2 CANNOT, I repeat, can NOT in any way
> have enough of an effect to raise temperature.
>
> Hence if you START with a lie, all that follows is a LIE!
Svante Arrhenius developed a theory to explain the ice ages, and first
speculated that changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
could substantially alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse
effect ("On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air Upon the Temperature
of the Ground", Philosophical Magazine 1896(41): 237-76). He was influenced
by the work of others, including Joseph Fourier. Arrhenius used the infrared
observations of the moon by Frank Washington Very and Samuel Pierpont
Langley at the Allegheny Observatory in Pittsburgh to calculate the
absorption of CO2 and water vapour. Using 'Stefan's law' (better known as
the Stefan Boltzmann law), he formulated his greenhouse law. In its original
form, Arrhenius' greenhouse law reads as follows:
if the quantity of carbonic acid increases in geometric progression, the
augmentation of the temperature will increase nearly in arithmetic
progression.
Which is still valid in the simplified expression by Myhre et al. (1998).
?F = ? ln(C/C0)
V for Vendicar
"Benj" <bja...@iwaynet.net> wrote
> It's really too bad that politics has found it's way into this
> science.
Blame AmeriKKKan KKKonservatives.
They are not only Traitors to their own nation, but Traitors to Humanity.
Many will be publicly executed in the coming years.
Lists have already been made.
V for Vendicar
"Benj" <bja...@iwaynet.net> wrote
> Ah, as I thought, Your major "credential" is that you won't like us
> if we don't accept your word as gospel!
Ultimately the major credential used will be a rope around the neck of
KKKonservative AmeriKKKan Traitors.
Watch that your name is not on the list Benj.
z
> hahaha... ......AHAHA..
>
> .... ahahahaha...
> ... ahahahaha...
> ahahaha.... ahahanson
> ... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha...
> ... ahahahahaha... Thanks for the laughs... ahaha..
>
>
ahahahaha...
> ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA...
>
> green shits... ahahahaha...
hanson
> ... ahahahaha...
> ... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha...
> ... ahahahahaha... Thanks for the laughs... ahaha..
>
Little green idiot, = # 4 = "z" <gzuc...@snail-mail.net>
a disciple of Lydon LaRouche, cranks himself AGAIN
becauseahahahaha...
> ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA...
> *** green shits ***... ahahahaha...
> Thanks for the laughs... ahahaha... AHAHAHAHA....
> AHAHAHAHA.... ahahahaha... ahahahanson
and Little green idiot, = # 4 ="z" <gzuc...@snail-mail.net>
a disciple of Lydon LaRouche, forgot to read the
****** "FAQ aboout ahahaha... AHAHAHA" ********
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.chem/msg/f232cf15901ce7ba
wherein it says
>
" Whenever you see someone commenting about "ahaha...
AHAHAHA" you know right off the bat that you've got a real
stupid fool & uptight mooch on your hands worth having big
time fun with".
>
So, "zuckier", you are truly a "real stupid fool & uptight mooch"
now, for having landed on my sticky flypaper & you buzzing and
"zucking" because of my post shown here to you again for your
benefit.... ahahahaha.... Thanks for the laughs, mooch!...ahaha..
>
>
----- and the list of little Green idiots for zuckier's benefit ----
>
= # 5 = Little green idiot, Parki-pooh, "Lloyd" <lpa...@emory.edu>
cranked himself over warm "phlogiston these days"...AHAHAaha
a disciple of Lydon LaRouche, cranks himself "while the usual
supects make a few million more each day"... ahahahaha...
came up with "retarted C-zero-2" & belched... hahaha....
= #2 = Little green idiot is "marcodbeast" <its@casual>,
aka "Ouroboro_Rex", the self-cocksucker seen in here on video
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/dd691b004e0f87ba?hl=en
= #1 = LiGre idiot is VD-Scotty who doesn't even know how to fuck
http://groups.google.com/group/aus.invest/msg/8a69950c26530584?hl=en
>
>
---------------------- because -----------------------------
------- hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote initially ------------
>
... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... and all the
class 3 enviros, the little green idiots, up to the chief Green
turds like Al Gore, will cry now: "he lies!" because...
>
:: Evans summarized: "Since 1999, new evidence has
:: seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions
:: are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007
:: the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played
:: only a minor role and was not the main cause of the
:: recent global warming".
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24039067-5013868,00.html
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/07/021040.php
http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2008/080717scientist_v_gore.html
>
Poetic Justice
z
> > .... ahahahaha...
> > ... ahahahaha...
> > ... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha...
> > ... ahahahahaha... Thanks for the laughs... ahaha..
>
> ahahahaha...ahahaha.... ahahanson
>
> a disciple of Lydon LaRouche, cranks himself AGAIN
> because
>
> On Jul 23, 4:17 pm, "hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:> hahaha... ......AHAHA..
> ahahahaha...
> > ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA...
> > *** green shits ***... ahahahaha...
> > Thanks for the laughs... ahahaha... AHAHAHAHA....
> > AHAHAHAHA.... ahahahaha... ahahahanson
>
> ...
> a disciple of Lydon LaRouche, forgot to read the
> wherein it says
>
> " Whenever you see someone commenting about "ahaha...
> AHAHAHA" you know right off the bat that you've got a real
> stupid fool & uptight mooch on your hands worth having big
> time fun with".
>
> So, "zuckier", you are truly a "real stupid fool & uptight mooch"
> now, for having landed on my sticky flypaper & you buzzing and
> "zucking" because of my post shown here to you again for your
> benefit.... ahahahaha.... Thanks for the laughs, mooch!...ahaha..
>
> ----- and the list of little Green idiots for zuckier's benefit ----
>
> cranked himself over warm "phlogiston these days"...AHAHAaha
> a disciple of Lydon LaRouche, cranks himself "while the usual
> supects make a few million more each day"... ahahahaha...
> came up with "retarted C-zero-2" & belched... hahaha....
> = #2 = Little green idiot is "marcodbeast" <its@casual>,
> = #1 = LiGre idiot is VD-Scotty who doesn't even know how to fuckhttp://groups.google.com/group/aus.invest/msg/8a69950c26530584?hl=en
>
> ---------------------- because -----------------------------
> ------- hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote initially ------------
>
> ... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... and all the
> class 3 enviros, the little green idiots, up to the chief Green
> turds like Al Gore, will cry now: "he lies!" because...
>
> :: Evans summarized: "Since 1999, new evidence has
> :: seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions
> :: are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007
> :: the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played
> :: only a minor role and was not the main cause of the
you might want to put a note in your sig that you're crazy
and people shouldn't bother replying. or even reading.
V for Vendicar
hanson
Little green idiot, = # 4 = "z" <gzuck...@snail-mail.net>
a disciple of Lydon LaRouche, cranked himself over this
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/e3d7392104e945d1?hl=en
Thanks for the laugs.... ahahahaha.... ahahahanson
V for Vendicar
hanson
"V for Vendicar" <Execute_The_Traitor...@hotmail.com> wrote
in message news:jisik.138$in...@read1.cgocable.net...
>
> Here are the global average temperatures
>
V for Vendicar
Steve Thomas
You got these numbers from the liar at NASA?
V for Vendicar
"Poetic Justice" <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote
> GREAT... Now I can buy a condo up there.
I have news for you Shit Sucker. You are hated in Canada.
V for Vendicar
"Steve Thomas" <misled...@aol.com> wrote
> You got these numbers from the liar at NASA?
Do you have any peer reviewed evidence that NASA is involved in some
KKKonervative KKKospiracy to lie to you?
If so, post it here.
References to KKKonservative Whacko sites will not be accepted.
V for Vendicar
"Steve Thomas" <misled...@aol.com> wrote Nothing but Stupidity.
Meanwhile....
Hadley Center to deniers: We are STILL warming
The top climate scientists at the UK's Hadley Center for Climate Prediction
get no respect. No matter how many times they try to explain that their data
clearly shows the world is warming (see "Hadley Center to delayers: We're
warming, not cooling"), people, including those commenting on this very
blog, keep insisting their data shows otherwise (see here).
As I wrote before, the 8 warmest years in the 150 global temperature record
are, according to the Hadley Center, in order, 1998, 2005, 2003, 2002, 2004,
2006, and 2007. After the Hadley folk wrote a bunch of essays debunking
standard denier myths (see here and below), they actually felt compelled to
publish another piece on April 29 (here), pointing out again:
The global climate is currently being influenced by the cold phase of this
oscillation, known as La Niña (see Expert speaks on La Niña). The current La
Niña began to develop in early 2007, having a significant cooling effect on
the global average temperature. Despite this, 2007 was one of the ten
warmest years since global records began in 1850 with a temperature some 0.4
°C above average. Indeed, the years 2001-2007 recorded an average of 0.44 °C
above the 1961-90 average, which is 0.21 °C warmer than corresponding values
for the years 1991-2000.
Another way of looking at the warming trend is that 1999 was a similar
year to 2007 as far as the cooling effects of La Niña are concerned. The
global temperature in 1999 was 0.26 °C above the 1961-90 average, whereas
2007 was 0.37 °C above this average - 0.11 °C warmer than 1999.