Re: 'Climate Witnesses' Testify About Warming

From: Carsten Troelsgaard (carsten.troelsgaard_at_mail.dk)
Date: 12/11/04 

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:39:32 +0100

"Alastair McDonald" <alastair@abmcdonald.leavethisout.freeserve.co.uk> skrev
i en meddelelse news:cpf088$vas$1@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> "Carsten Troelsgaard" <carsten.troelsgaard@mail.dk> wrote in message
> news:41bad6af$0$141$edfadb0f@dread11.news.tele.dk...
> >
> > "Eric Swanson" <swanson@notspam.net> skrev i en meddelelse
> > news:cpdbgr$f9md$1@news3.infoave.net...
> > > Will the real John Christy please stand up??
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------

snip

> > Can someone explain to me why "greenhouse gas" is not an artefact of
> > scientific intimidation: As far as I know, any gass in the atmosphere
acts
> > as a "greenhouse gas" with it's particular range of low-wave frequencies
> > through which heat radiates off from the ground.
>
> No! Nitrogen and Oxygen do not act as greenhouse gases. Only t
> riatomic and greater gases oscillate at the appropriate frequencies to
> trap the out going infrared radiation. None of the atmospheric gases
> trap the incoming solar radiation to any extent, and it is this
> unidirectional trapping which is the problem. It is the basis of the
> rather unappropriate name for the effect.
>
> Increasing greenhouse gases will not cause the world to come to an
> end in geological terms, but it could make the world far less habitable
> for 6,000,000,000 on the planet today. The world survived the last
> ice age, but if it recurred do you really think that the financial
> penalties imposed by Kyoto would not have seemed small beer to
> have prevented it?

What guarantee can you give, that the investment are not put better in other
environtal problems or global benefits, when you know that climatechanges
has happened before in recorded history - without the aid of human.

Cheers, Carsten

> Alternatively, the climate could return to the hothouse
> world of the Cretaceous with lush jungles in Alaska and New Zealand.
> But this would come with a rise of sea level of at least 80m (250 feet).
> That means much agricultural land would be lost, along with most
> property in ports throught the world. These includes many of the largest
> cities such as Melbourne, Sydney, New York, Boston, Seatle. Los Angeles,
> Miami, St Louis, Amsterdam, London, Rome, Athens, Calcutta, Shanghai,
> Hong Kong, Bankok, ...
>
> Cheers, Alastair.
>
>

Relevant Pages