Re: Another blow to global warming doomsayers

On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 04:44:38 GMT, jsavard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(John Savard) wrote:

On 14 Apr 2006 20:20:41 -0700, "Rich" <rander3127@xxxxxxxxx> wrote, in
part:

In research they published last year in the journal Geophysical
Research Letters, a team led by Beate Liepert at the Lamont-Doherty
Earth Observatory reported that they found a measurable decline between
1950 and 1990 in the amount of sun reaching the Earth's surface. The
team concluded that solar radiation is being reduced by growing
quantities of man-made particles in the atmosphere-in particular
those produced by burning fossil fuels.

Until recently, however, climate models hadn't factored in the massive
amounts of methane, a greenhouse gas more effective than carbon dioxide,
being released into the atmosphere by peat bogs in Russia. Peat bogs
that are thawing. Thawing because temperatures *really are* going up,
worldwide.

Not all particulate matter released by burning fossil fuels helps to
increase Earth's albedo. Soot, for example, is black. So the sunlight it
blocks from reaching the Earth's surface still warms the atmosphere.
Doubtless, being competent scientists, the authors of that paper have
considered this. Also, as the research was published _last year_,
presumably the scientific community is aware of their research, and has
taken it under consideration. If, therefore, scientists are still
warning us about global warming, presumably there is still a problem.

We can deal with the problem without going back to the stone age. There
happens to be such a thing as nuclear power.

Don't use that word around the enviro-wackos. Even though evidence
(such as France being 77% nuclear and having cleaner air than most
modern countries) points them away from paranoid theories about it.
In Canada, I'm looking forward to $500/m energy bills now they are
closing all the coal plants, buying expensive natural gas ones and
importing energy from places like New York State at 10x the price
we would be paying.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Climate documentary broke rules
    ... atmosphere, where radiative transfers and non-radiative transports, as ... It is not hard to see how the scientists could produce an immaculate ... Since 8 per cent of atmospheric CO2 is absorbed by the planet's ... His observation leaves the "climate scientists" models as immaculate ...
    (uk.sci.weather)
  • Re: Radiocarbon dating part II
    ... >> We saw lots of quotes directing to the radiocarbon wiki page.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_datingSolet 's start there ... >> Radiocarbon dating is a ... >> level of this isotope in the atmosphere ... It's a sign of supreme egotism for someone with no scientific background or training to imagine that he has suddenly stumbled on a scientific issue that virtually all the world's scientists have missed for the better part of a hundred years. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Dissecting the dirt on Titan (Forwarded)
    ... Dissecting the dirt on Titan ... Aerosols are small, solid particles that float in the air. ... are often the result of pollutants in the atmosphere. ... The GCMS results effectively give scientists a list of chemical components ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: A "Little Ice Age" coming?
    ... is not being injected into the atmosphere from fossil sources. ... Scientists beg to differ with you, ... degrees Celsius over a few decades, ... "There have been instances in Earth history when average temperatures ...
    (sci.military.naval)
  • Global Cooling
    ... Earth's upper atmosphere shrinking, scientists say ... ..WASHINGTON - The upper reaches of Earth's atmosphere are unexpectedly shrinking and cooling due to lower ultraviolet radiation from the sun, US scientists said Thursday. ... "Our work demonstrates that the solar cycle not only varies on the typical 11-year time scale, but also can vary from one solar minimum to another," said study lead author Stanley Solomon. ...
    (misc.survivalism)