I presented this poster at the RMetSoc Conference in Manchester this year. It is related to my latest comments on the "Before the Flood" thread, but I thought it would post in a new thread since the new radiation scheme is not only applicable to climate change.

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...Climate_Change

I am very interested to hear what your reaction to it is, so that I can improve my presentations in the future.

Cheers, Alastair.

On Tuesday, 8 November 2016 12:03:39 UTC, Alastair wrote:
I presented this poster at the RMetSoc Conference in Manchester this year.. It is related to my latest comments on the "Before the Flood" thread, but I thought it would post in a new thread since the new radiation scheme is not only applicable to climate change.

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...Climate_Change

I am very interested to hear what your reaction to it is, so that I can improve my presentations in the future.

Cheers, Alastair.

The best thing I can say is that you are not trying to promote cold radiation, but that fact that your physics and research is so limited as to still encourage your belief in such an impossibility, anything else you propose is thus bollox. Sorry if that offends, but it's the truth.

In article ,
says...
The best thing I can say is that you are not trying to promote cold radiation, but that fact that your physics and research is so limited as to still encourage your belief in such an impossibility, anything else you propose is thus bollox. Sorry if that offends, but it's the truth.


Your wife isn't fat is she? A bit of a psychopath perhaps?

Just wondering.

You do know that that idiot Einstein was a supporter of Earth
Displacement Theory don't you. He seemed very taken with Hapgoods work
and even suggested the polar ice mechanism himself.

"I find your arguments very impressive and have the impression that your
hypothesis is correct. One can hardly doubt that significant shifts of
the crust of the earth have taken place repeatedly and within a short
time."

"In a polar region there is a continual disposition of ice, which is not
symmetrically distributed about the pole. The earth's rotation acts on
these unsymetrically deposited masses, and produces centrifugal momentum
that is transmitted to the rigid crust of the earth. The constantly
increasing centrifugal momentum produced this way will, when it reaches
a certain point, produce a movement of the earth's crust over the rest
of the earth's body, and this will displace the polar regions toward the
equator."

By your reasoning, if you accept that the above is bollox (which it is)
then the Theory of Relativity must also be bollox. Or do you just take
pleasure from the pouring out of derision at every opportunity.

There is a reason no-one likes you.

--
Alan LeHun

On Wednesday, 9 November 2016 00:53:28 UTC, Alan LeHun wrote:
In article ,
says...
The best thing I can say is that you are not trying to promote cold radiation, but that fact that your physics and research is so limited as to still encourage your belief in such an impossibility, anything else you propose is thus bollox. Sorry if that offends, but it's the truth.

In all fairness to Alistair the physics of radiation was largely unknown until the analaysis of data prduced from fusion weaponry. He fixated on a time when IT spectra had not been realised nor had the phenomenon of polarised light.

But pointing to his ******** is only the half of it.
If Dawlish should end up at the fell mongers, virtually all of his fleece from the scrotum to the kidneys would be discarded.

Your wife isn't fat is she? A bit of a psychopath perhaps?

Just wondering.

I am assuming he lives with his sister if his mother is no longer alive but what has any of this to do with the US elections?

You do know that that idiot Einstein was a supporter of Earth
Displacement Theory don't you. He seemed very taken with Hapgoods work
and even suggested the polar ice mechanism himself.

According to historians Paul Hoye and Paul Lunde, while Hapgood's work garnered some enthusiasm and praise for its thoroughness, his revolutionary hypotheses largely met with skepticism and were ignored by most scholars.[7] In the book The Piri Reis Map of 1513 Gregory C. McIntosh examines Hapgood's claims for both maps and states that "they fall short of proving or even strongly suggesting that the Piri Reis map and the Fine map depict the actual outline of Antarctica."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Hapgood

I had never heard of any of this. In all fairness I watched a programme of the discovery of ocean vents and realised that as the vents cooled and took on the magnetism of heir surroundings all it meant was that pole Shiftin was a dead end rather like Paul Garvey's back.

Since Plate Shift was likewise lacking in a viable mechanism other that the closure of volcanic vents as the dikes built and decayed caused tropical island creep, subduction went the same way as its ancestors.

"I find your arguments very impressive and have the impression that your
hypothesis is correct. One can hardly doubt that significant shifts of
the crust of the earth have taken place repeatedly and within a short
time."

Dawlish has a scientific theory?
When did that happen?
Or is this some plot to get me to read the rest of this thread. (It isn't going to work.)

"In a polar region there is a continual disposition of ice, which is not
symmetrically distributed about the pole. The earth's rotation acts on
these unsymetrically deposited masses, and produces centrifugal momentum
that is transmitted to the rigid crust of the earth. The constantly

Oh ****! I am being led by lost sheep. All you end up with is find a cloud of sheep**** stuck on the end of a source of protein you are never going to eat.

increasing centrifugal momentum produced this way will, when it reaches
a certain point, produce a movement of the earth's crust over the rest
of the earth's body, and this will displace the polar regions toward the
equator."

By your reasoning, if you accept that the above is bollox (which it is)
then the Theory of Relativity must also be bollox. Or do you just take
pleasure from the pouring out of derision at every opportunity.

There is a reason no-one likes you.

--
Alan LeHun

On Wednesday, 9 November 2016 08:04:30 UTC, Weatherlawyer wrote:

... on a time when IT spectra ...

I meant infrared. I should have known better than get involved first thing in the morning (or in this lifetime.)

Ah well I think it is time to ponder the viability of relating rainfall data to volcano reports, with a view to estimating volcanic ash emissions. Or should I just go back to watching the US election....
Decisions, decisions...

I think I will go back to bed and wait to hear Trump's acceptance speech. Or not bother. He can't do anything until the last gang leaves.
And it is too wet to go for a walk.

So much to do and so little time; the problems of retirement.....

"Weeeed!"
Good bye Bill! Goodbye Ben!

On Wednesday, 9 November 2016 00:53:28 UTC, Alan LeHun wrote:

Your wife isn't fat is she? A bit of a psychopath perhaps?

Wonder all you wish. Your dislike of me is hardly going to worry me, dixon. Branch, fly?

In article ,
says...
Your wife isn't fat is she? A bit of a psychopath perhaps?

Wonder all you wish. Your dislike of me is hardly going to worry me, dixon. Branch, fly?



Completely ignoring the meat of the message. Again.

Are you of the opinion that because Alistair did his cold radiation
thing, anything else he says can not be taken seriously?

Do you apply the same reasoning to Albert Einstein who gave great merit,
and contributed, to the theory of Earth Crust Displacement?



--
Alan LeHun

On Wednesday, 9 November 2016 13:18:51 UTC+3, wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 November 2016 00:53:28 UTC, Alan LeHun wrote:

Your wife isn't fat is she? A bit of a psychopath perhaps?

Wonder all you wish. Your dislike of me is hardly going to worry me, dixon. Branch, fly?

Wrong bird.

Col

On Wednesday, 9 November 2016 17:55:08 UTC, wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 November 2016 13:18:51 UTC+3, wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 November 2016 00:53:28 UTC, Alan LeHun wrote:

Your wife isn't fat is she? A bit of a psychopath perhaps?

Wonder all you wish. Your dislike of me is hardly going to worry me, dixon. Branch, fly?

Wrong bird.

Col

True. Got it right this time. They do tend to merge together when they perform these dead-sheep-savagery attempts at whatever they think they are doing. Amazing that this one tries to obliquely defend the proposer of cold radiation, but hey ho! People do the same with racists on here. attacking their attacker, instead of the racist. It's a form of implicit support. hughes is a perfect example of exactly that.

On Wednesday, 9 November 2016 17:49:17 UTC, Alan LeHun wrote:
In article ,
says...
Your wife isn't fat is she? A bit of a psychopath perhaps?

Wonder all you wish. Your dislike of me is hardly going to worry me, dixon. Branch, fly?



Completely ignoring the meat of the message. Again.

Are you of the opinion that because Alistair did his cold radiation
thing, anything else he says can not be taken seriously?

Do you apply the same reasoning to Albert Einstein who gave great merit,
and contributed, to the theory of Earth Crust Displacement?



--
Alan LeHun

You are not Einstein and neither is Alastair. Your branch calls, lehun.