On Mar 14, 8:22Â am, Paul Hyett <
vidcap...@invalid83261.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 at 05:55:05, Col <
reddwar...@btinternet.com> wrote
> in uk.sci.weather :
>
>
>
> >"Alastair" <
a...@abmcdonald.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:43f2409e-1e78-404d...@l14g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
> >>I am not posting this to cause controversy, but because I feel it is
> >> important that practically the only scientist, who is willing to speak
> >> out about the dangers that we face from climate change, should be
> >> heard.
>
> >>
http://planet3.org/2012/03/11/hansen-why-i-must-speak-out-about-climate
> >>-change/
>
> >The vast majority of scientists are warning about the dangers of climate
> >change!
>
> And yet there's *still* no definitive proof that it's anything more than
> a natural change...
Adam and Martin are referring to Geo-Physics and perhaps evolution
when they say there is no proof in "science".
Science of course demands proof. And controlled experiment is the
Scientific Method".
Like evolution, glowballs is not a science.
It is a philosophy. As such its beliefs are those of religion more
than science.
Anyone of any religion can believe in scientific facts.
Belief in scientific fancies are more limited.
It would be nice to get the text from that speech as it contains quite
a few unjustified quantum leaps, not of faith but of facts.
He relates the radiation from Venus to its atmospheric content without
for example discussing the nearness of Venus to the sun and the effect
of soalr radiation on the upper atmosphere.
Another one was the snippet about buoys measuring ocean temperatures.
It's fairly obvious from the global temperature charts of oceans that
these are related to over-fishing not carbon dioxide.
Yet he uses the melt of glaciers and etc., to emphasise this heat
build up without explaining how the enormous latent heat absorbtion of
the melting ice has not managed to keep temperatures down.
Or is the tiny increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide likely to have
has an as yet unreprorted immense effect?
The increased carbon dioxide is supposed to raise sea levels without
increasing cloud levels and in fact atmosphere water content all
round.
Is it?
In which case, how is the earth going to stop getting colder whilst it
is heating due to the carbon dioxide?
Water in the sky carries heat to the outer limits.
And
Water in the sky reflects sunlight away from the earth.
I am not a climate change denier.
I am not a glowballs denier.
I am just wondering what some people are actually saying.
And why.