Discussion:
Denialism rears it's ugly head
Add Reply
k***@gmail.com
2018-06-09 16:07:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/sci.physics/9HNxQRDUiQ0

I once thought phobia of carbon dioxide was a psychological disease.

I was wrong. Greenies are a pathogenic mutation of the human species, developed as a parasites on the public dole and exist only to threaten and destroy their host, the rest of humanity.
k***@gmail.com
2018-06-09 17:53:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
What's funny is that greenieism comes from acadamia and the sheltered and nurtured middle class.

They demand severe austerity in ths abatement of carbon.

The FIRST layer of fat to be cut in the program of austerity and deprivation for the perceived common benifit, is the waste on the bogus theoretical science and magnificent amount of money spent on research which is only given and only allowed if it supports the bogus pre-conclusions of harm from anthropogenic carbon dioxide.

ESPECIALLY IF ANY FALSE REPRESENTATION,OMISSION, OR FRAUD IS FOUND IN THIS HOLY SCIENCE.

If the science is 'SETTLED', like the CLIMATE MEISTER, Obama says, why the hell do we need to spend billions of more dollars to 'research'.
k***@gmail.com
2018-06-13 14:06:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Ice cores and analysis for 650,000 have been collected.

A simple graph of this entire period shows correlation to temperature and co2. But a closer look and analysis clearly shows the co2, lagging the temperature by about 1000 yrs.

Algore used this large graph to claim evidence of co2 driving the climate. In the propaganda lawsuit against him in Britain, the judge ruled that he was in contradiction to established science in his statements in this part of his movie.

All studies show this lag, including close examination of last 100,000 yrs, the warmup at 18,000 yrs, the marked warm-up of 12000 yrs and the Holocene of 8000 yrs, or the warmest point of this interglacial period, in which tempertures were àbove 2C of the 1950 'mean'. Temperatures are well below this level of Holocene.

That air concentrations of co2 change with changing temperature, is easily explained by basic chemistry of partial pressure between air and ocean, and perhaps effect on circulation of currents. There are MASSSIVE amounts of carbon at the bottom of the ocean, with very little oxygen.

What the lag shows, is that temperature begins rising for some other reason than co2. When the co2 begins to rise, no effect upon temperature graph can be detected.

When temperature begins to fall, co2 continues to rise for 1000 yrs. Clearly in these regions co2 is NOT DRIVING TEMPERATURES. At points then, temperature does an uptick, while co2 is still falling.

The nature and process of greenie science is to hide and exclude studies which show no evidence that co2 is driving climate at all. Damn sure don't see the graph that shows temperatures going off the charts through the 90s and then becoming DEAD FLAT for the past 20 yrs, with a gradient of about 0.15 degC, PER CENTURY.

In law, ommision of perinent fact is fraud.
In law the term 'PROOF' has meaning, although in academic theoretics it has been eliminated.

The academics should be held accountable for every scrap of their submissions, past and present and their pertinent OMISSIONS, and put their name on it.
k***@gmail.com
2018-06-13 14:31:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Doom, despair and agony on me,,,
deep dark depression, excessive misery,,,
If it weren't for bad luck, I'd have no luck at all,,

DOOM, despair, and agony on me,,

If you're looking at the science,,,
And feeling waves of anxiety from what the 'scientists tell us'.
And you need to talk to someone that gives a fuck,,

Dial the global warming hysteria hotlne,

BR-549

Ask for Junior Sales,
He'll be more than happy to hear all your lamentin, moanin and gronanin, and your general hysteria about your CLIMATE NIGHTMARE.
k***@gmail.com
2018-06-13 14:48:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
The year of the ice cores is shifted 30yrs in order to join it with the Keeling curve and to FALSELY REPRESENT human activity to be responsible for atmospheric concentrations.

Of course special studies could be done now to investigate this issue objectively. But the lack of presentation of these studies now, is a glaring proof of the lack of real science and commitment of those claiming that AGW is the most vital threat and emergency of ALL of civilization.

The studies attempting to validate this with direct science have FAILED and are omited from the fraudulent science of climatology.

No one questions this fraudulent graph.

So good luck assholes, in a REAL AND VALID COURTROOM.

When it gets down and dirty, ANY SUBMISSION of this manipulated graph before US law, can and will be prosecuted as a high crime. Of the scientists or lawyers.
k***@gmail.com
2018-06-14 03:14:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
All this mumbo jumbo about Arwheenieass, but no mention of any direct laboratory science, other than the peanut butter jar exibit?

The very high energy infrareds are the critical factor in this. Not the low energy frequncies of wavelength 10-15um that are important at earth's temperatures. Even the 15um band is actually outside the bulk of the distribution centered around 10um. The slope for the distribution is a square to the frequency at these low temperatures where hv is not much greater than kT.

So when did Boltzmaan determine the 'Gas Constant'? This applies uniformly to ALL GASES. There may be deviations in presssure and volume in the perfect gas law, but not the gas constant, R,

This energy of RT for molar value, determines the pressure of a gas.

Dividing the gas constant by Alvagardos's number gives the valaue of , k ,. Boltzman's constant which is the average knetic energy for 1 molecule of gas, at a given temperature.

NO DISTINCTION FOR CO2 OR ANY OTHER GASES

The only basis for defining co2 as polution, is that the words 'carbon dioxide', was includedin a list of products from combustion, in the 1970 Clean Air Act.

Althtough wormed back into science, after having been discarded by valid science and scientists, you stand now with NO SCIENCE to support the particular property of GHGs or anthropogenic global warming.

.........

Hansen' s doctoral thesis of 1967, was that the higher than expected temperature at the surface of Venus, is caused by dust particles which block or trap microwaves.

In this thesis, he states directly that neither water vapor or co2 are important to the complete thermodynamic analysis he has supposedly achieved.

His thesis was not rejected by the theoretical science of the time, because this concept of specific reactivity of some gases to infrared, from pre-science, was rejected because of no supportive empirical science.

Those educated in higher education of any physical science at this time, never heard of greenhouse gases, within or without their field of specialty.

Methane exist at about 1 ppm,
Or about 1,500 parts per BILLION.

Methane oxidizes naturally in the atmosphere in 10-12yrs,
Therefore it does not accumulate.

If changes in methane of parts per 10 million or 100 million can affect atmospheric temperatures, this surely could be demonstrated in the laboratory, WHICH IT CANNOT.
Loading...