M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
Just received; absolute must read.
bravenewclimate.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/erl-happ_climatechange_wij_23_4.pdf
bravenewclimate.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/erl-happ_climatechange_wij_23_4.pdf
- Status
L
LittleSoldier
Guest
I regret the U.S. government spending $4 Billion with a B per year funding global warming research when that huge amount of money could be put to better use in solving environmental problems that actually exist and are backed up by robust methodology.
L
LittleSoldier
Guest
I forgot to say “thank you” for the correction.
D
Dakota_Roberts
Guest
This is a strawman
The burning of rainforests is a staggeringly large emitter of CO2 in comparison to humans, stopping the massive burnings would be a good idea. Coal mine fires are also a large emitter of CO2! Would stopping either really hurt our quality of life? Carbon dioxide also makes the plants produce less fruit…
L
LittleSoldier
Guest
Do you have any figures on the quantity of CO2 emissions from the burning of rain forests and coal mine fires? Thanks.
D
Dakota_Roberts
Guest
Well in '06 Peatland fires in Indonesia produced 900 million metric tons of CO2. This is more than the total amount of CO2 emitted in Germany in that year, Brazil produces 200 million metric tons from Rain forest burning, 360 million tons of carbon dioxide produced by mine fires, probably adds up to 10% counting other CO2 emissions of that type
L
LittleSoldier
Guest
Thank you.
I’d like to know where you got those figures so that I can read about them, too. It does sound like an awful lot of CO2. 
H
Hastrman
Guest
Somehow I sincerely doubt that the minuscule quantities of CO2 in our atmosphere, fires or no fires, can be preventing that much heat from radiating back to space (that’s what a greenhouse gas is, even though it’s actually preventing convection, not radiation, that keeps greenhouses warm). Especially since Mars is experiencing global warming too.
But if coal fires’ CO2 emissions are so worrisome, why not bite the bullet and invest in a clean energy solution that actually works: nuclear power. There’s vastly less environmental impact from a properly-designed reactor than from building solar cells (out of poisonous substances) or windfarms (which slice birds up like a Cuisinart).
But if coal fires’ CO2 emissions are so worrisome, why not bite the bullet and invest in a clean energy solution that actually works: nuclear power. There’s vastly less environmental impact from a properly-designed reactor than from building solar cells (out of poisonous substances) or windfarms (which slice birds up like a Cuisinart).
J
John21652
Guest
Nuclear Power?!
You can’t say that, the Greens might here you.
The nuclear solution is just too, well, logical.
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
If you want green energy, go to Ft. Lauderdale for the winter and come back when the weather is nice.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1345233/Its-use-waiting-turbines-warm-snow-returns.html
But don’t count on green energy when the weather is inclement.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1345233/Its-use-waiting-turbines-warm-snow-returns.html
But don’t count on green energy when the weather is inclement.
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
The problem with nuclear energy, is that you need to learn math in order to do the calculations. Green people don’t do math.
Green people like wind power and solar power because you can* FEEL* the wind and the sun on your face.
Green people do NOT like hydro power because … of the … you know … the poor little fishies.
But, nuclear power requires you to know math. Actually, the same thing applies to steam generated by coal or gas turbines powered by natural gas.
And don’t even talk to me about magnetohydrodynamics.
H
Hastrman
Guest
It’s always amusing to hear the greenies talk about fusion power—which is basically plasma physics. And plasma physics is a branch of MHD.
They seem to think fusion power would be easy, which it ain’t. Magnetic confinement fusion, for instance, has been described as “attempting to hold Jell-O with rubber bands”. So maybe they just didn’t bother to understand the tech and science issues involved.
I agree. Stop the coal mine fires.
Put the coal to good use elsewhere.
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
This just came in from a friend:
This is from a converted global warming advocate.
Peter
Professor Ian Plimer could not have said it better!
Once I read his book, I had to agree. This is a summary.
Australians showed sense in resisting the govt pressure to agree to a carbon tax before the Copenhagen Conference - which seems years ago now.
Are you sitting down?
Okay, here’s the bombshell. The volcanic eruption in Iceland, since its first spewing of volcanic ash has, in just FOUR DAYS, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet - all of you.
Of course you know about this evil carbon dioxide that we are trying to suppress - it’s that vital chemical compound that every plant requires to live and grow and to synthesize into oxygen for us humans and all animal life.
I know, it’s very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of: driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up till midnight to finish your kid’s “The Green Revolution” science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, vacationing at home instead of Bali, nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your $1 light bulbs with $10 light bulbs …well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just four days.
The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth’s atmosphere in just four days - yes - FOUR DAYS ONLY by that volcano in Iceland, has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon. And there are around 200 active volcanoes on the planet spewing out this crud any one time - EVERY DAY.
I don’t really want to rain on your parade too much, but I should mention that when the volcano Mt Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in its entire YEARS on earth. Yes folks, Mt Pinatubo was active for over one year - think about it.
Of course I shouldn’t spoil this touchy-feely tree-hugging moment and mention the effect of solar and cosmic activity and the well-recognized 800-year global heating and cooling cycle, which keep happening, despite our completely insignificant efforts to affect climate change.
And I do wish I had a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud but the fact of the matter is that the bush fire season across the western USA and Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two to three years. And it happens every year.
Just remember that your government just tried to impose a whopping carbon tax on you on the basis of the bogus “human-caused” climate change scenario.
Hey, isn’t it interesting how they don’t mention “Global Warming” any more, but just “Climate Change” - you know why? It’s because the planet has COOLED by 0.7 degrees in the past century and these global warming bull artists got caught with their pants down.
And just keep in mind that you might yet have an Emissions Trading Scheme - that whopping new tax - imposed on you, that will achieve absolutely nothing except make you poorer. It won’t stop any volcanoes from erupting, that’s for sure.
But hey, relax, give the world a hug and have a nice day!
PS: I wonder if Iceland is buying carbon offsets?
This is from a converted global warming advocate.
Peter
Professor Ian Plimer could not have said it better!
Once I read his book, I had to agree. This is a summary.
Australians showed sense in resisting the govt pressure to agree to a carbon tax before the Copenhagen Conference - which seems years ago now.
Are you sitting down?
Okay, here’s the bombshell. The volcanic eruption in Iceland, since its first spewing of volcanic ash has, in just FOUR DAYS, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet - all of you.
Of course you know about this evil carbon dioxide that we are trying to suppress - it’s that vital chemical compound that every plant requires to live and grow and to synthesize into oxygen for us humans and all animal life.
I know, it’s very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of: driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up till midnight to finish your kid’s “The Green Revolution” science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, vacationing at home instead of Bali, nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your $1 light bulbs with $10 light bulbs …well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just four days.
The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth’s atmosphere in just four days - yes - FOUR DAYS ONLY by that volcano in Iceland, has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon. And there are around 200 active volcanoes on the planet spewing out this crud any one time - EVERY DAY.
I don’t really want to rain on your parade too much, but I should mention that when the volcano Mt Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in its entire YEARS on earth. Yes folks, Mt Pinatubo was active for over one year - think about it.
Of course I shouldn’t spoil this touchy-feely tree-hugging moment and mention the effect of solar and cosmic activity and the well-recognized 800-year global heating and cooling cycle, which keep happening, despite our completely insignificant efforts to affect climate change.
And I do wish I had a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud but the fact of the matter is that the bush fire season across the western USA and Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two to three years. And it happens every year.
Just remember that your government just tried to impose a whopping carbon tax on you on the basis of the bogus “human-caused” climate change scenario.
Hey, isn’t it interesting how they don’t mention “Global Warming” any more, but just “Climate Change” - you know why? It’s because the planet has COOLED by 0.7 degrees in the past century and these global warming bull artists got caught with their pants down.
And just keep in mind that you might yet have an Emissions Trading Scheme - that whopping new tax - imposed on you, that will achieve absolutely nothing except make you poorer. It won’t stop any volcanoes from erupting, that’s for sure.
But hey, relax, give the world a hug and have a nice day!
PS: I wonder if Iceland is buying carbon offsets?
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
The thing is … it’s all about the math.
And Secretary of the Treasury Geithner knows so little math, he can’t even do the additions on his tax return.
Much less fuss with the calculus of various heat transfer equations.
J
JRPO
Guest
I don’t get the talk about CO2. It has been well established that CO2 is not a pollutant.
According to 31,487 scientists on this web site ( petitionproject.org/index.php ) CO2 helps plant growth.
There are not 31,500 scientists telling us otherwise.
The only people telling us otherwise are people with a leftist agenda.
J
JRPO
Guest
Guess what? They’ve changed it again. They are now calling it Global Climate Disruption.
Why are they try so hard to re-invent themselves?
I hate to use such base language, but in this case…
That is a stupid name.
Anyone with an ounce of logic is going to understand that you cannot perceive disruption unless you know fully what is supposed to be.
J
JRPO
Guest
Yes well the term Global Climate Disruption seems to be coming from people like Professor John P Holdren at The White House in the USA.
As you can see from this link globalclimatedisruption.com/ he is also talking about CO2 being a pollutant, he obviously has no idea really.
How can these people be taken seriously?
T
TheRealJuliane
Guest
Nuclear energy also reminds them of nuclear (atom) bombs, which have been used in war and have killed millions of people, therefore nuclear power must also be very dangerous and it might also kill millions of people. I guess they just ignore France, which has been using nuclear power to its great benefit for decades (no Three Mile Island - type accidents). Nuclear is safe, would take care of a lot of our energy problems (not carbon-burning engines though), and is truly the “green” energy the enviros are desperate for, but they are too stupidly blind to understand that.
- Status