BS: Where's the Global Warming

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Ringer
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 11:06 AM

"Sawzaw's link above is to a piece by well-known climate change skeptic Zbigniew Jaworowski" (GUEST,TIA, 30 Dec 09 - 02:29 PM)

Is that meant to be an argument? I seem to remember you responsing similarly when I cited Prof Morner to you. I could equally respond that TIA is a "well known warmista" and thereby discount anything you say.

"Global Warming could more accurately be called Global Climate Change." (GUEST,TIA, 11 Jan 10 - 05:28 PM)

That's right: when even the least observant can see that things ain't warming, change the subject of the debate: "Well, ectually, 'Global Warming' is more correctly called climate change, and individual weather events are becoming more extreme." Climate has always changed and always will. Some of it may even be anthropogenic - but not as much as you think.

I live in the UK, whose Met Office (well known warmistas, so much so that their web-site now lists them as "weather and climate change") has predicted that the last two summers would be "barbecue summers" (both were washouts) and that the last two winters would be milder than usual (both were - this one is so far - colder than usual). Their forecasts for six months into the future are laughably inaccurate - but they purport to tell us what the climate will be like in a hundred years and we believe them? How absolutely cretinous is that? If you answer one thing on this post, please answer me this: why should we trust the decadal forecasts of these incompetents when we can't trust their mensal forecasts? If their models didn't predict this decade of non-warming, why should we trust their models?

"Google the 'precautionary principle'" (GUEST,TIA, 13 Jan 10 - 09:58 PM)

But the implications of the "precautions" you warmistas advocate in your patronising manner are beggary. You just love to tell other people what to do. Like Pachauri, jetting round the globe at others' expense, to tell others not to jet round the globe. When the science is settled (and anyone with half an eye can see it's not, even the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit - "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't.") then you may encourage us to take precautions; until then we'll continue to hold you in derision.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Ed T
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 08:12 AM

More Antarctic information, from a credible source:
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/20100108_Is_Antarctica_Melting.html

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 10:06 PM

Will it give me the answer to the question: "How many chimps does it take to screw in a lightbulb?"

My point was, TIA, I bet everyone here is partly off the beam in their firm suppositions about Global Warming, whatever the heck their suppositions are. One thing most people are very loath to ever admit to is how little they really know. (It would scare them to look at that in a realistic manner.)

I KNOW that I don't know for sure about Global Warming, and I don't know for sure what's going on with it. I'm interested in many theories and possibilities. I consider some more likely than others. But I DON'T know. And I don't expect to. I expect I will have to wait and see...if I live long enough...because time has a way of settling all such debates eventually.

And if I don't live long enough? Well, someone else will find out.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 09:58 PM

Google the "precautionary principle"

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 09:52 PM

But....what if you were ALL wrong???????????   ;-)

That would just be deliciously funny to look back on in some future decade.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 09:42 PM

Sawzaw-

I presume you are on this forum because you are musical in some fashion.

Try this analogy:
Weather is to climate as measure is to score.
Of course they are related. And of course the score will affect what happens in each measure. But, do you think you reconstruct or even understand the score from looking at one measure? Or even ten?

Now stop being a silly political contrarian.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Ed T
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 02:11 PM

Good information on tempuratures in the Western Antarctic here (The Palmer Station annual average winter temperature has increased 6 degrees):


http://www.lternet.edu/vignettes/pal.html

http://pal.lternet.edu/sci-research/si_wap/

http://pal.lternet.edu/outreach/projects/picture_of_day/

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Amos
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 01:39 PM

Major Antarctic glacier is 'past its tipping point'

   

A major Antarctic glacier has passed its tipping point, according to a new modelling study. After losing increasing amounts of ice over the past decades, it is poised to collapse in a catastrophe that could raise global sea levels by 24 centimetres.

Pine Island glacier (PIG) is one of many at the fringes of the West Antarctic ice sheet. In 2004, satellite observations showed that it had started to thin, and that ice was flowing into the Amundsen Sea 25 per cent faster than it had 30 years before.

Now, the first study to model changes in the ice sheet in three dimensions shows that PIG has probably passed a critical "tipping point" and is irreversibly on track to lose 50 per cent of its ice in as little as 100 years, significantly raising global sea levels.

The team that carried out the study admits their model can represent only a simplified version of the physics that govern changes in glaciers, but say that if anything, the model is optimistic and PIG will disappear faster than it projects.

Richard Katz of the University of Oxford and colleagues developed the model to explore whether the retreat of the "grounding line" – the undersea junction at which a floating ice shelf becomes an ice sheet grounded on the sea bed – could cause ice sheets to collapse.
Warm seas

Climate change is warming the Amundsen Sea, which is at the southern margin of the Pacific Ocean. As rising sea levels push the warm water beneath the ice shelves, it melts them from below, pushing the grounding line higher up the continental shelf.

By raising sea levels, and therefore the grounding line, in their model, Katz's team were able to find the point of no return beyond which the glacier would be unable to recover. That's because the Antarctic sea bed has a small lip in it: it rises slowly up the continental shelf, then makes a slight dip before rising again to the shoreline. The researchers found that as long as the grounding line is on the outer rise of the sea bed, before the lip, small changes in climate lead to correspondingly small changes in the glacier's ice volume.

But as soon as the grounding line moves over the lip and starts to move down into the dip in the sea bed, the situation changes critically. "Once the grounding line passes the crest, a small change in the climate causes a rapid and irreversible loss of ice," says Katz.
Past the point of no return

According to Katz's model, the grounding line probably passed over the crest in 1996 and is now poised to enter a period of accelerated shrinking.

The model suggests that within 100 years, PIG's grounding line could have retreated over 200 kilometres. "Before the retreating grounding line comes to a rest at some unknown point on the inner slope, PIG will have lost 50 per cent of its ice, contributing 24 centimetres to global sea levels," says Richard Hindmarsh of the British Antarctic Survey, who did not participate in the study.

This assumes that the grounding line does eventually stabilise, after much of PIG is gone. In reality, PIG could disappear entirely, says Hindmarsh. "If Thwaite's glacier, which sits alongside PIG, also retreats, PIG's grounding line could retreat even further back to a second crest, causing sea levels to rise by 52 centimetres." The model suggests Thwaite's glacier has also passed its tipping point.

Observations already show that the model severely underestimates the rate at which PIG's grounding line is retreating, says Katz. "Ours is a simple model of an ice sheet that neglects some important physics," says Katz. "The take-home message is that we should be concerned about tipping points in West Antarctica and we should do a lot more work to investigate," he says.

Journal reference: Proceedings of the Royal Society A, DOI: 10.1098/rspa.2009.0434

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 10:07 AM

"If you add all 79 temperature readings in that map they average out to -4.5 degrees which proves my point."

That is the stupidest mis-use of statistics I have seen in months.

You are uneducable on this issue.
Politics dictates your position, and you will find a semi-clever but silly answer to anything.
You (and I) will probably be dead by the time we get to say I told you so, and there will be no joy anyhow.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Sawzaw
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 01:08 AM

Gee, This shows below normal temperatures below the equator for some strange reason.

I thought it was hotter than normal in the southern hemisphere.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Sawzaw
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 11:57 PM

Dear Tia:

That Video shows a larger cold area with a larger departure from the norms in the east compared to the west. It says 10 to 20 degrees when the numbers are far from that. If you believe that is proves your point, you need an enema.

If you add all 79 temperature readings in that map they average out to -4.5 degrees which proves my point.

And Siiiiiigggghhhhh, The weather does reflect the climate. Quit being a denier.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Ed T
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 06:50 PM

Maybe its's GWIMBY syndrom....Global Warming's in my back yerd.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Rumncoke
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 06:11 PM

My daughter reported that her flight to Chicago from Heathrow last week landed one hour ahead of schedule, due to the weakness of the jet stream.

Apparently the alteration in the atmosphere has allowed cold air to move down to lower latitudes in some parts of the world, but in other places the temperatures are unseasonally high.

Whilst most of the UK is under snow, we have had very little around my house, on the South coast close to the Isle of Wight, it was too cold to snow.

The temperature has risen today though, so we might get some coming in fron the south west, rather than the north east, which is where most of the snow had blown in from over the last few weeks.

I have quite enjoyed the bright sunshine and icy temperatures, not having to travel in them, but feel a bit deprived having seen the rest of the country playing in the snow.

I think that we would do well to remember that the global climate is a series of currents, streams and flows performing an intricate dance around eachother and the planet - and just because they have been performing one set of figures for some time, once changes are made the old figures might never be danced again.

Anne Croucher

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Paul Burke
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 03:48 PM

And for the last three years my backyard has been getting colder.

Global back yard?

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 05:34 PM

This is especially for you Sawz...

youtube

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 05:28 PM

Sigggghhhh again.

Global Warming could more accurately be called Global Climate Change.
Along with the overall, globally-averaged warming come more extremes in weather.

Come on. You know this stuff. You have adopted a politically-motivated contrarian position, and are just enjoying being a pain.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Amos
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 03:51 PM

You are getting special treatment, Sawz, as a result of your earnest diligence in defending us all against liberal bleeding-heart socialist welath-stealers. I thank you as well.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Sawzaw
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 03:35 PM

So global warming only affects the climate and not the weather?

"Would you accept as evidence of global warming a parade of links talking about how hot it is in various places today?"

Yes if they were record breakers.

And for the last three years my backyard has been getting colder. The summers have been getting cooler with more rain.

"the worst snowstorm on record in Tibet" I'd say that must cover more than a 10-15-20 year trend.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 12:57 PM

Yes, some unusual weather around the world currently. Keep an eye on it for us, Sawzaw, and do let us know about the warming trends also.

It's been cool right here in my back yard the last couple of weeks, but for 10 years, it's been NOT so cold. I pay attention to those 10-15-20 years trends, not so much to several weeks.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 12:56 PM

Siggghhhhh.
For the umpteenth time, "climate" is not the same thing as "weather".
Would you accept as evidence of global warming a parade of links talking about how hot it is in various places today?
Of course not, as well you shouldn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Sawzaw
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 12:38 PM

Pachauri in a spot as climategate hits TERI

Ajmer Singh
New Delhi, January 10, 2010

Rajendra K. Pachauri, chairman of UN's Nobel Peace Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), had advocated emission reductions at the recently concluded Copenhagen Climate Summit.

But back home in India, he seems to be failing to uphold standards of propriety in his professional dealings.

During his tenure, first as director from 1982, and then as director-general of The Energy Research Institute (TERI) since 2001, Pachauri was a member of the boards of the Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC), Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) and National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC), three of India's biggest public sector energy companies, all of whom by the very nature of their business contribute heavily to greenhouse gas emissions. These emissions, according to the IPCC, are adding to the country's growing carbon footprint and hastening climate change.

TERI, in fact, entered into business dealings with these companies and allegedly benefitted from Pachauri's association with them. Pachauri's dealings have also been noticed by the international media. Recently, the Sunday Telegraph of London had accused him of amassing a fortune using his links with carbon trading companies. Pachauri dismisses the report as "a pack of lies".

The climate change hero was an independent director on ONGC's board for three years between June 2006 and June 2009, during which he was entitled to first-class air travel when he attended meetings, five-star hotel stays and an allowance of Rs 25,000 for each meeting attended. This was in addition to having a say in the PSU's decision-making process. It was during this period that TERI had secured business contracts from ONGC.

This practice is against ONGC's official code of conduct which says: "The directors and management shall act within the authority conferred upon them in the best interests of the company and will use their prudent judgment to avoid all situations, decisions or relationships which give or could give rise to conflict of interest or appear to conflict with their responsibilities within the company."

Pachauri says he is now not on the board of any public sector undertaking. "What is stated applies only for short periods in the past," he replied to a questionnaire sent by Mail Today. "TERI is a not-for-profit organisation working for the welfare of society and its revenues cover costs and provide no private benefit to any party."

Pachauri's position is untenable, as ONGC and TERI launched a joint business venture in March 2008 called ONGC-TERI Biotech Ltd (OTBL); this was while the TERI director-general was on its board. This entity's objective was the "large-scale application of microbial product oil zapper for clean-up of oil spills in farmers' fields and around oil installations and treatment of oily sludge hazardous hydrocarbon waste".

TERI had a 47 per cent share in OTBL; ONGC held 49 per cent and the rest was picked up by financial institutions. The OTBL official website says ONGC and TERI reserve the rights of patents and the use of technology and patents exclusively. When asked about this, Pachauri said: "The joint venture (OTBL) was established largely at the insistence of ONGC. A decision to set up OTBL was taken only on October 31, 2006, at a board meeting that I did not even attend." Does that mean he wasn't even aware of the decision to set up OTBL? OTBL was set up in 2008, and ONGC insiders told this correspondent all the work awarded to TERI was done on a nomination basis and not through tenders, as is the accepted practice.

Pachauri for his part claims that "TERI has not even charged OTBL any royalty for the technology provided to ONGC and other oil companies in India, as is the case with most IITs and CSIR labs. Any funds provided to TERI are purely to cover costs of activities carried out and performed successfully." Another senior ONGC official confirmed to Mail Today that close to Rs 30 crore was paid directly and indirectly to TERI over a period of time for the execution of projects, which included bio-remediation, pipeline corrosion inhibitors and microbial enhanced oil recovery (MEOR).

OTBL was also involved in these transactions, he said. Pachauri denied this as well......

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/78466/India/Pachauri+in+a+spot+as+climategate+hits+TERI.html

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Sawzaw
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 12:20 PM

According to the Rutgers University Global Snow Lab, last month had the second greatest December Northern Hemisphere snow cover since records were started in 1966. Snow extent was measured at 45.86 million sq. km, topped only by 1985 at 45.99 million sq. km. North America set a record December extent at 15.98 million sq. km, and the US also set a December record at 4.16 million sq. km.

---

Plymouth, MA Patriot-Ledger: Until this year, the last report of a fully mature ivory gull in Massachusetts was in the 1800s.

PLYMOUTH â€" Jan 28th, 2009

The temperatures were in the single digits, but not low enough to keep the gawkers away. A celebrity was in town, behind the East Bay Grille, a visitor not seen in these parts in decades, if not longer.

But these weren’t paparazzi, and this wasn’t a Hollywood star. Rather, they were avid birdwatchers â€" about 20 in all â€" braving the frigid air as they scanned the bay and the edges of the breakwater with binoculars and spotting scopes.

And they would be rewarded, catching a glimpse of a glimpse of a rare, fully mature ivory gull. A birdwatcher reported seeing one in Plymouth last week, and another was spotted at Eastern Point Lighthouse in Gloucester. From Sunday through Tuesday, the avian visitor was a regular in Plymouth, much to the delight of birdwatchers, who came from near and far in hopes of adding the extremely rare bird to their life list.

Ivory gulls normally stay well above Newfoundland, living on Arctic ice where they follow whales and polar bears to feed on the scraps and carcasses they leave behind after making a kill.

Until this year, the last report of a fully mature ivory gull in Massachusetts was in the 1800s. Three immature birds were seen in the 1940s. In 1976, another immature bird had been spotted in Rockport.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Sawzaw
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 12:14 PM

LHASA, Oct. 30 (Xinhua) â€" The death toll has risen to seven, and one person remains missing, as a result of the worst snowstorm on record in Tibet, local authorities said Thursday.

The seven people killed either frozen to death or were crushed by collapsing buildings. About 144,400 heads of livestock died in the storm, which also knocked out telecommunications and traffic in parts of Shannan prefecture.

In Lhunze County, 1,348 people stranded by damaged buildings or blocked roads had been rescued, the county government said. Rescue operation for the remaining 289 trapped was still underway.

The worst-hit county had 36 consecutive hours of snowfall from Sunday, with an average snow coverage of 1.5 meters. Four people died and one remained missing in the snowstorm.

The rescued people have been moved to other villages, sleeping in schools or government buildings.

A road linking Lhunze to Cuona County reopened on Thursday after 63 hours of snow clearing efforts of armed policemen and transportation staff.

Cuona had been isolated from the outside for three days due to the road blockage.

The Tibet regional civil affairs department has allocated relief materials such as clothes and tents to the affected areas.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Ed T
Date: 31 Dec 09 - 09:56 AM

Don't quite know where to put this....but this thread seems somewhat related: It links to an underwater video of an exploding deep sea volcano.

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20091217_volcano2.html

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 30 Dec 09 - 11:51 PM

See - scientists *aren't* stupid!   :)

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Little Hawk
Date: 30 Dec 09 - 07:26 PM

"you'll get nothing, and like it"

Ha! ;-D   Perfect answer, TIA. That's what I always wanted to tell Ron Davies when he would start demanding proof, documentation, etc for whatever I have an opinion about....he apparently expects me to devote hours and hours of my time to documenting everything I say in such a way as to make him happy... Heh! I know better than to consume vast amounts of my own time at someone else's behest in a completely futile effort to meet their expectations that would yield no useful results for me OR them. I'm glad to see that you know better too.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 30 Dec 09 - 02:29 PM

Sawzaw's link above is to a piece by well-known climate change skeptic Zbigniew Jaworowski (actually, he is not a climate change skeptic - more of a global warming skeptic since he has predicted a new ice age on the way).

His complaint about the CO2 record is that inclusions in the Siple (Antarctica) ice cores (and ice cores in general) are not valid indicators of past atmospheric chemistry because depth-of-burial effects the chemistry of the air in the inclusions.

However, there are many, many ice cores from far-flung locations that are in very good agreement. This is important because the cores have different lengths (depths) representing the same (or significantly overlapping) time periods. For instance, the EPICA core goes back 800,000 years, but is relatively short, while the Vostok core represents only about half that time, but is much deeper. For the period of overlap, they show nearly identical variations in atmospheric chemistry across four glacial-interglacial cycles - so depth cannot be introducing a very strong signature.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 30 Dec 09 - 01:49 PM

LH - you'll get nothing, and like it.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: pdq
Date: 30 Dec 09 - 01:37 PM

"scientists are not stupid"

Well, then you could say...

"lawyers are not stupid"

...even though lawyers have done more to screw-up this country than all other people combined.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Dec 09 - 10:53 AM

Anyone here read this book? It seems interesting:

http://www.rorotoko.com/index.php/article/ann_keller_book_interview_science_environment_policymaking_politics_advice/

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Little Hawk
Date: 30 Dec 09 - 10:22 AM

"scientists are not stupid"

What? How can you be sure? How can you make such a sweeping statement? I bet some scientists ARE stupid. ;-) Or at least they are dogmatic and pigheaded. Prove your highly questionable proposition that scientists are not stupid. I want facts, statistical analyses, documentation, and approved studies from authoritative sources that fully back up your statement "scientists are not stupid".

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: TIA
Date: 30 Dec 09 - 10:12 AM

Yes, Mauna Loa is a volcano, and yes, volcanos do outgas – including CO2. But scientists are not stupid. They know this. The records for Mauna Loa show a clear annual cycle superimposed on an overall rise with time. There are no random spikes of the type that would indicate contamination from outgassing. And, okay, let's throw out Mauna Loa. A station in the Antarctic far from volcanos, SUVs and coal-fired power plants shows the same pattern (albeit with a slight lag because most of the anthropogenic sources are in the northern hemisphere). In fact, there are dozens of stations around the globe that all show the same trend. Mauna Loa gets the attention because its record is the longest. But, where the other stations overlap in time, they show the same trend.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: TIA
Date: 30 Dec 09 - 10:04 AM

In the ocean, over half the carbonate rock is created as coral reef. Coral reefs are definitely not a net carbon sink. Even though they do remove carbon from the ocean, their growth actually releases carbon to the atmosphere. The chemistry of this is well known to carbonate petrologists, but it is a source of a persistent popular myth.

The ocean is a pH buffered system. Conservation of electrical charge dictates that for every molecule of bicarbonate in seawater that is converted to carbonate upon conversion to reef rock, another molecule of bicarbonate decomposes to carbonic acid (ocean acidification!), but then must be released to the atmosphere as CO2 to balance the charge of the reaction. The balanced equation says that for every atom of carbon that is sequestered in carbonate rock, one is released to the atmosphere, and the ocean is incrementally acidified.

Note that this natural source of atmospheric carbon is fifty times smaller than fossil fuel inputs for a unit time in the modern era.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Sawzaw
Date: 30 Dec 09 - 01:12 AM

I was thinking about the fact that "they" measure the CO2 at Mauna Loa. an active volcano.

What does an active volcano emit???

Do I see any hands up?

Then I found this:

Climate Change: Incorrect information on pre-industrial CO2

Statement written for the Hearing before the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation:

....In a crushing criticism, two independent groups of scientists from disciplines other than climatology (i.e. not supported from the annual pool of many billion "climatic" dollars), convincingly blamed the Mann et al. paper for the improper manipulation and arbitrary rejections of data. The question arises, how such methodically poor paper, contradicting hundreds of excellent studies that demonstrated existence of global range Medieval Warming and Little Ice Age, could pass peer review for NATURE? And how could it pass the reviewing process at the IPCC? The apparent scientific weaknesses of IPCC and its lack of impartiality, was diagnosed and criticized in the early 1990s in NATURE editorials. The disease, seems to be persistent.

Conclusion

The basis of most of the IPCC conclusions on anthropogenic causes and on projections of climatic change is the assumption of low level of CO2 in the pre-industrial atmosphere. This assumption, based on glaciological studies, is false. Therefore IPCC projections should not be used for national and global economic planning.....

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 06:24 PM

You got a point there chaz brewer . Thanks for speaking up for lone Cryil's plight.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: TheSnail
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 06:24 PM

Sadly, Cyril's brothers Cedric, Cuthbert and Chad were not so lucky. Instead of falling on nice friendly silicate rocks, they fell in the ocean which is, after all 70% of the planets surface, and stayed being carbonic acid leading to acidification of the sea.

http://oceanacidification.wordpress.com/2009/12/18/acid-oceans-the-evil-twin-of-climate-change/

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: GUEST,chaz brewer
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 05:58 PM

Now here is the story of one little carbon atom (trying to keep it simple here, let's not get into chickens and eggs please!!!!) He got ingested by Spock. Later Spock did a poo and then somewhere midst the biological confusion the little carbon atom (lets call him Cyril) got himself combined with some oxygen (Orville). Cyril and Orville and Oswald (now CO2) slowly escaped through the window and drifted haplessly towards the clouds. Just then it started to rain and Cyril, Oswald and Orville got a bit wet. Both Cyril, Oswald and Orville started to feel ill and very acidic because Henry and Olivia (H2O) had come along and changed them into carbonic acid! Bored with that now…. Anyway the carbonic acid fell as rain in the droplets and reacted with some silicate rocks in the mountains. The resulting chemical reaction caused the same little carbon atom to be drawn from the atmosphere into the dripping water from the rocks. This water ran into the stream, which ran into the river, which ran into the sea, that got buried in the estuary, which sank slowly into the abyss and there it stayed for 100 million years! That is the last we saw of Cyril.

This is a prime example of carbon drawdown. It is a negative feedback balancing a positive one. It is happening now. Especially on the Tibetan Plateau.... See More... See More

Cyril's demise is never mentioned again by emotive "global warmists". They forgot all about him. Poor Cyril!
Deep sea carbon atoms need love too

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 05:58 PM

Thank you, Donuel, I needed this insight....Seems like even the girls, and remants of the unreal are part of the old boys club....a first for a world that tends to be sexually isolated.....(except in times of need, of course).

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Donuel
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 04:57 PM

Ed if you really tried to break on through to the ol boys threads like Mother of of all Mudcat, don't feel bad.

#1 to see the real thread you have to pay extra
#2 you need to know the 12 passwords, secret handshakes and be able to repeat from memory the entire history of Jacques Loussier.
#3 their codicom alone is enough to baffle a math genius.
#4 their claims of knowing the secrets of the multiverse are highly exagerrated. Its just a bunch of verse.
#5 I have to admit that the reports of their initiation ceremony are one full goose bonkers drunken sexual blowout of a lifetime. But who needs that?

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 12:02 PM

LH...as to BS

There are those heated posts, that I do not venture into....I agree, mostly opinions with little opportunity for knowledge transfer.

There are the zero heated fun posts....like ccaptions, odd collestions of knowledge to be shared that I enjoy. and visit frequently. (I like the wacky, which are hard to come by)

There are a few longer running old boy's posts, that seem like the one directly abvive, but is mostly for the long timers that I once tried and could never seem to break through in.

There are posts like this one that seems to be less heated, at times somewhat opinionated, but mostly a good opportunity to share (give and receive) knowledge about something important....While opinions are just that, to me sharing knowledge and perspectives is what makes a society work.

Anyway, back to the hot air....so to speak.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 11:44 AM

Say...I just got the 700th post! Wow. And I wasn't even trying.

I may be verging upon an epiphany of some sort.

On the other hand, maybe it was just dumb luck. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 11:43 AM

Oh! Telling points, guys. ;-) You may be getting to know me too well.

I look at it this way. Why should I spend my day fighting verbal battles with people and getting all aggravated and raising my blood pressure, when after all that it changes no one's opinion anyway?

I mean, just think....I could go today and get involved in some of the vicious infighting that's now occuring on some thread about an execution in China...get all caught up in some really nasty accusations flying back and forth...insult a few people...rage and fume...ruin a couple of old online friendships fighting about whether or not the Chinese judges have committed murder or not....

Naw...I think I'll find something else to do instead. Like drumming up support for Chongo's 2012 campaign.

Bill, your comment "You might as well ask why an alcoholic drinks..." simply could not BE more apt. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 11:00 AM

Bill D
Sorry, my real purpose comment was for Little Hawk, (known as LH to some).

Little Hawk, your last posted purpose sounds more like "just saying stuff for effect sometimes" then my posts....ummmm? ;)

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 10:50 AM

"What is my real purpose? ;-)"

You might as well ask why an alcoholic drinks... ;>)

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 10:37 AM

What is my real purpose? ;-) I dare not reveal that, Ed. It could cause severe social disruptions. It might even lead to the end of this world "as we know it".

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 10:21 AM

Bill D.

But, a check of your post....does indicate you went much farther than you say "(He (Gore) is about a close to being a 'scientist' as one can be without actually getting degrees in something". To me this is disrespectful to the thousands of highly educated, skilled and dedicated scientists who contribute much CC knowledge to all of us. I know some of these scientists that contribute knowledge....and can vouch for the honesty professioinalism and committment of those folks directly.

I accept that what you seem to have meant (and did not say so well) is Gore is a smart, committed man for the CC cause. I certainl;y accept that....I suspect he has to be smart to be VP and almost USA President. That also puts him in an influential position.

Gore's contribution to public awareness of CC is significant.... He has been a strong public advocate and took complex information and got it out to the public. He possibly made a difference in climate change politics (it's too soon to tell). He influenced change in behaviour in many peoples lives....moving many towards greener living...all great accomplishments.

That in the past, it's back to logical discussion.

But, the essence of my point is Gore is also a good target for Climate Change doubters....some attack Gore, since they see him representing the weakest point in CC science (until the recent email case) to the public. Discrediting Gore works (with some) since many see Gore as the first person who raised CC in a documentary movie on the topic...one that represented CC science at the time. I suspect some of these folks actually believe Gore is a working scientist.

Dis credit Gore, his documentary (which is entertainment...based on science at the time...his politics and business interests and you shoot down CC science.   To me, this is illogical....but works with many who are on the fence... cerebral or less so. So, it is best to put Gore to the side....since that is actually where he is when it comes to discussing the merits of CC science.

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 09:36 AM

Oh...I forgot the :) in my last post:)

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 09:35 AM

What's your real purpose in posting in this thread LH?

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 09:32 AM

:)

Good try LH

Subject: RE: BS: Where's the Global Warming
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Dec 09 - 11:24 PM

I also think, Bill, tbat you're much more cerebral than the average person is.

On the downside, Shane says you need to go for "a cooler look", but I wouldn't take that to heart. He tends to just say stuff for effect sometimes.