wrote in message
oups.com...
El Guapo wrote:

So, if the planet wasn't getting warmer, would it be getting cooler?
Wouldn't that also make it a "different planet than the one we know?" Or
does Hansen believe that the climate would just stay the same forever, if
we
would just stop adding greenhouse gases? If so, has he not looked at his
own charts?

I think that's what bugs me the most about people like Hansen. If the
global temperature was falling instead of rising, he would still be
crying
about how we were sliding into a new ice age, and the government was
doing
nothing to stop it.

If there was truly no anthropogenic causation, most conservatives would
have no quarrel with the evidence. Only when Man is blamed do we see
their outrage. To them it's an admission that we aren't all-powerful in
this world, and their egos can't handle that. They won't admit that
nature is really in charge and it scares them. If an ice age was
imminent and Man was not causing it, people would probably panic and
head for the equator. People fear cold more than warmth and they don't
understand the significant of "just a few degrees warmer."

P.T.

Not a few degrees, only one degree.

Ever heard of objectivity. Obviously not. For me it is not an emotional
issue, purely science, and science is objective.

What is the margin for error in their vast array of assumptions, which
actually account for only one degree increase in temp?

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:8c56265c04ce88229302253909700954.49644@mygate .mailgate.org...
"Roger Coppock" wrote in message
oups.com

EARTH'S TEMPERATURE AT 12,000-YEAR HIGH!!!!
EARTH'S TEMPERATURE AT HOLOCENE MAXIMUM!!!!
EARTH'S TEMPERATURE WITHIN 1K OF 1,000,000-YEAR
MAXIMUM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So what? It's only going to go all the way, and that's even if all of
humanity left Earth for another planet or moon.

Without us humans, it would have simply taken a few extra centuries, or
possibly a few extra thousands of years, but because of our locally
orbiting mascon and the IR/FIR worth of our moon that has only been with
us since the last ice age, plus our badly failing magnetosphere might
suggest that it doesn't really matter, or does it?

Is there some remaining question that Earth is getting much hotter? (I
don't think so)

Is there any question that our magnetosphere has been failing us? (I
don't think so)

Why not focus our best talents and the few remaining resources on
surviving these ongoing trends, or would you much rather die as is
(dumbfounded)?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Why not focus our best talents and the few remaining resources on
surviving these ongoing trends, or would you much rather die as is
(dumbfounded)?
-
Brad Guth

How about finding another planet?
This plante will be toast, one way or another at some point in the furure,
due to one reason or another. That can not be disputed by anyone in the
scientific community.

SBC Yahoo wrote:
"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:8c56265c04ce88229302253909700954.49644@mygate .mailgate.org...
"Roger Coppock" wrote in message
oups.com

EARTH'S TEMPERATURE AT 12,000-YEAR HIGH!!!!
EARTH'S TEMPERATURE AT HOLOCENE MAXIMUM!!!!
EARTH'S TEMPERATURE WITHIN 1K OF 1,000,000-YEAR
MAXIMUM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So what? It's only going to go all the way, and that's even if all of
humanity left Earth for another planet or moon.

Without us humans, it would have simply taken a few extra centuries, or
possibly a few extra thousands of years, but because of our locally
orbiting mascon and the IR/FIR worth of our moon that has only been with
us since the last ice age, plus our badly failing magnetosphere might
suggest that it doesn't really matter, or does it?

Is there some remaining question that Earth is getting much hotter? (I
don't think so)

Is there any question that our magnetosphere has been failing us? (I
don't think so)

Why not focus our best talents and the few remaining resources on
surviving these ongoing trends, or would you much rather die as is
(dumbfounded)?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Why not focus our best talents and the few remaining resources on
surviving these ongoing trends, or would you much rather die as is
(dumbfounded)?
-
Brad Guth

How about finding another planet?
This plante will be toast, one way or another at some point in the furure,
due to one reason or another. That can not be disputed by anyone in the
scientific community.

How about the moon? It should be being warmed by the earth by this
nutcases "theory". Other advantage: we could eat all we want and still
weigh less.

Tracy P. Hamilton

"Thomas Lee Elifritz" wrote in message
...
El Guapo wrote:
"Roger Coppock" wrote in message
oups.com...
EARTH'S TEMPERATURE AT 12,000-YEAR HIGH!!!!
EARTH'S TEMPERATURE AT HOLOCENE MAXIMUM!!!!
EARTH'S TEMPERATURE WITHIN 1K OF 1,000,000-YEAR
MAXIMUM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Strong El Nin~os to become permanent El Nin~o!!!!!!!!!!!

AP article
http://www.heraldnet.com/stories/06/...5global001.cfm

The actual article in PNAS currently free to the public.
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/0606291103v1

[Note the highly unusual inclusion of political references in
this scientific paper. I haven't exhaustively surveyed the
history of PNAS, but l doubt the the reviewers at PNAS would
have allowed this before. Science has taken the gloves off!]

Global surface temperature has increased

"This evidence implies that we are getting close to dangerous levels of
human-made pollution," Hansen said in a statement. "If further global
warming reaches 2 or 3 degrees Celsius, we will likely see changes that
make Earth a different planet than the one we know. The last time it was
that warm was in the middle Pliocene, about 3 million years ago, when sea
level was estimated to have been about 25 meters (80 feet) higher than
today," Hansen said.

So, if the planet wasn't getting warmer, would it be getting cooler?
Wouldn't that also make it a "different planet than the one we know?" Or
does Hansen believe that the climate would just stay the same forever, if
we would just stop adding greenhouse gases? If so, has he not looked at
his own charts?

You are imagining an ice age that is no longer going to happen. Some of us
like to stick with reality, the hydrocarbon combustion, the warming.

First of all, you obviously missed the point. If we somehow stopped all
sources of anthropogenic greenhouse gases, then would it magically stop the
climate from ever changing? Would the planet never change, as Hansen would
apparently like us to believe?

Secondly, how do you know that an ice age is not going to happen? Perhaps
you can explain to me exactly what causes an ice age in the first place.
Feel free to cite any scientific sources you might have. Also, if you argue
that a drop in greenhouse gases is the cause, then please explain what
caused the drop in greenhouse gases in the first place.

I think that's what bugs me the most about people like Hansen. If the
global temperature was falling instead of rising, he would still be
crying about how we were sliding into a new ice age, and the government
was doing nothing to stop it.

The government and corporations have already stopped the ice age.

That little reality thing, remember? Reality on Earth is like a powered
rocket with no inertial control. Inertial control is clearly possible.

Science is what makes inertial control possible. That's reality.

So, no, are you still having problems with reality?

Wow. Ummm... I'm not, but clearly somebody else is.

"SBC Yahoo" wrote in message
t

How about finding another planet?
This plante will be toast, one way or another at some point in the furure,
due to one reason or another. That can not be disputed by anyone in the
scientific community.

Good point, whereas I totally agree. What we need within the next
thousand years (much sooner if we get ourselves into WW-III and WW-IV)
is a somewhat newish planet with unlimited natural resources, a very
thick and thereby radiation protective atmosphere, and one that's
situated as nearby as possible.

What other planet or moon have you in mind?

Got any idea as to which planet I'm thinking about?
-
Brad Guth




--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

wrote in message
oups.com...
El Guapo wrote:

So, if the planet wasn't getting warmer, would it be getting cooler?
Wouldn't that also make it a "different planet than the one we know?" Or
does Hansen believe that the climate would just stay the same forever, if
we
would just stop adding greenhouse gases? If so, has he not looked at his
own charts?

I think that's what bugs me the most about people like Hansen. If the
global temperature was falling instead of rising, he would still be
crying
about how we were sliding into a new ice age, and the government was
doing
nothing to stop it.

If there was truly no anthropogenic causation, most conservatives would
have no quarrel with the evidence. Only when Man is blamed do we see
their outrage. To them it's an admission that we aren't all-powerful in
this world, and their egos can't handle that. They won't admit that
nature is really in charge and it scares them.

You are contradicting yourself. If man is causing global warming, then how
is that an admission that man is not all-powerful, and that nature is in
charge? Looks like evidence to the contrary to me.

If an ice age was
imminent and Man was not causing it, people would probably panic and
head for the equator. People fear cold more than warmth and they don't
understand the significant of "just a few degrees warmer."

I doubt it. I don't see people who are utterly convinced that global
warming will raise sea levels moving away from the coast, or rushing to move
up north to get away from the rapidly rising temperatures. (Quite the
opposite is happening, in fact.)

"Tracy P. Hamilton" wrote in message
ups.com

How about the moon? It should be being warmed by the earth by this
nutcases "theory". Other advantage: we could eat all we want and still
weigh less.

If the moon were rotating other than being tidal locked, you'd be
correct about the gravitational forces at play.

Since the moon isn't rotating itself so as to obtaining any significant
gravitational tidal/friction energy advantages from the 2e20 joule
mascon worth of Earth, whereas instead it's just the darker polluted
albedo of our pillaged and raped mother Earth that'll keep the
earthshine as offering a better resource of secondary IF/FIR energy
that'll benefit the lunar nighttime, though unfortunately making lunar
daytime somewhat worse off.

Unfortunately, the rather **** poor gravity and of the rather physically
dark albedo worth of that somewhat salty and otherwise mineral rich
sooty moon is going to remain as a rather tough option upon the task of
our artificially obtaining and sustaining any significant amount of an
atmosphere (at best would most likely have to remain as comprised of
those somewhat heavy and thus toxic elements). Therefore life deep
underground or within large geode pockets and hollow rilles, as well as
onboard the massive CM/ISS, is about the best we're ever going to
accomplish with our naked and thus unavoidably anticathode moon.

I'm thinking at best a few million folks might be accommodated within
our moon, and perhaps a few hundred thousand could be nicely
accommodated within the 1e9 m3 interior of what the CM/ISS abode and
do-everything LL-1 space station depot that's tethered to the moon, as
representing the lunar space elevator's top floor or penthouse (plus
there'd be that nifty dipole element that's tagged onto the remote
platform which might reach to within 4r of mother Earth, which could
accommodate a few thousand other brave souls).

Otherwise it's going to have to be the likes of our nearby Venus for all
the less fortunate remainders of our dumbfounded humanity that can some
how manage to stop their bigotry motivated collateral damage and
fighting long enough to board the fleet of "tomcat fat waverider"
spaceplanes, that'll make those relatively safe trips to/from Venus
doable, as otherwise you're all pretty much screwed, and especially of
those insisting upon Mars as their one and only salvation, as they'd be
a whole lot better off on Titan or some other atmospherically protected
though otherwise godforsaken moon.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Lloyd Parker" wrote in message


That freon of R-12 is a mere drop in our global warming bucket that's
not exactly helping, but it's not the primary cause by any long shot
(there's not exactly a big soot factor with R-12). Actually the
conversion from R-12 to the alternatives was much worse for our
environment,

No it wasn't, but you're loco anyway.

We see that you utilize the proven Arthur Andersen and those ENRON
formulas of geophysics book keeping, that which doesn't have to include
any such honest birth to grave accounting, and we also see that you
haven't taken any steps to answer my questions because you're nothing
but another wuss of a status quo or bust liar.

It takes a great deal of energy to create the likes of R-12 or even more
of such energy in order to create those other freon altertnatives.
Besides, what do we suppose actually happens to the surplus of replaced
R-12 that has become so frealing artificially valuable to a global
market?

I also totally agree with the regular laws of physics, in that a dark
and wavy zones of ice free water is always going to absorb and retain
one heck of a lot more solar energy than snow and ice as taken at the
same angle. I do believe the ratio is a good 10:1, if not greater.

Where's the truth in Usenet? All I ever see is another variation of a
Third Reich status quo that's 100% Skull and Bones, or bust. Obviously
there are a few too many tonnes of Usenet bad guys for every gram of us
good guys. What we good guys need is a serious cash of WMDs that we can
deploy against those (mostly Jewish) controlling rusemasters and of
their born-again resident LLPOF warlords that have not shown a speck of
remorse for their past or ongoing actions.

As per ususal, my warm and fuzzy though honest topics about Venus or
that of our nearby orbiting mascon of a physically dark and somewhat
salty moon that's offering secondary IR/FIR and via tidal friction
that's roasting us to death, as well as having been radiating us with
extra gamma and hard-X-rays, though oddly as an honest topic isn't
hardly going anywhere because, obviously others and myself are more than
sufficiently right. As such, here's another related sub-topic that's
worth tossing into this Usenet naysay ring of fire.

What's all this I'm hearing from our Roger Coppock? The hell you folks
are saying that our own government and those nifty energy corporations
are liars. My God and Christ almighty on another stick, what is this
pagan global warming world of your's coming to?

Obviously some of us snookered village idiots have been thinking outside
the status quo box, that it's already too late, as they tend to perceive
we're remaining as too addictive to the sorts of energy that's being
extracted and otherwise produced via some of the dirtiest known and
otherwise soot, NOx plus many other toxin producing methods. I
personally think we're just downright greedy little perverted *******s
that don't have a stitch of remorse, and as such really don't give a
tinkers damn about others or that of our failing environment, that's
only about to get yet another slap of extra cosmic and solar radiation
in the face from our badly failing magnetosphere. Too bad our DNA isn't
sufficiently evolving towards getting rad-hard at the same rate that
some of our Republican offshore tax avoidance bank accounts are getting
fat.

The birth to grave cycle of global fossil energy exploitation (including
yellowcake) is basically taking us into that very same grave along with
our past, current and future ways that don't seem to be changing soon
enough to make a difference. Instead of having been honestly investing
in the future of cleaner and abundant energy, we're still investing in
the dirty past that's killing us and stressing out most every other
living thing on Earth. At least thus fare there's little if any
evidence that we've made any improvement in the quality of life for
other than whatever's on behalf of the wealthiest species of human life.

I do believe this one even has our supposed environmental avenger Roger
Coppock dumbfounded past the point of no return, thinking that it's all
the fault of humanity, rather than primarily the matter of our somewhat
recently obtained moon as having caused most of the last thaw via
gravity/tidal forces plus having contributed a little extra IR/FIR to
boot. Too bad so many folks like Roger can't quite manage to think
inside or much less outside the cozy little box that has been
orchestrated as though carefully constructed around our dumb and dumber
mindsets, in that we have to believe in anything that's GOOGLE/NOVA or
MI/NSA~NASA certified, and nothing else matters.

"Exxon Stockholders Liable for Global Warming Damages"
wrote in message

HUGE MELTED LAKE IN BEAUFORT SEA!

http://mygate.mailgate.org/mynews/sc...ma ilgate.org

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...4eeb1ff70466f1

: This freshwater lake of melted ice is a thermal battery. That is, it
: has absorbed 96,126,250,000 Megajoules of HEAT in the act of meting.
: In order to refreeze it must emit that heat to the atmosphere. The
: battery has been charged.
The freshwater has a depth of 3 meters, which is too shallow not to have
mixed with the brine beneath. Therefore the freezing temperature has been
lowered and additional energy must be extracted from the battery before
refreezing could occur.

The differential is 17.7 degrees C times the volume 2.88e14 grams for an
additional discharge of 5.0976e15 calories of heat energy must be emitted
to the air before the lost ice is fully refrozen.

The net total is 5.0976e15 plus 2.295936e16 calories = 2.805696e16
calories of heat energy released to the air.

2.805696e16 calories = 1.175066e11 MegaJoules = 117,606,600,000 MJ.

2.805696e16 calories = 1.175066e17 Joules

In terms of Nukes the Fat Man and Little Boy atomic bombs (15.08e13
Joules)...

... 779 pairs of atomic bombs like Hiroshima and Nagasaki going of this
winter in the Arctic. One should reasonably prepare for some energetic
kinetics as a result.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaton
A megaton of TNT is 4.184e15 joules = 4.184 petajoules (PJ).
" This is 28 million tons of TNT set to blast. "

I say that's absolutely impressive, and I'd also have to totally agree
that it's all about to explode big-time in our highly bigoted, arrogant
and greedy little fossil fuel burning and soot producing faces, and
that's not to mention the discarded Radium from yellowcake, coal and
other deep geophysical energy resources that's now extensively into our
surface environment along with all of the megatonnes/year worth of NOx
from hell.

It's so bad off that even fish are drowning (leaving lots more room for
jellyfish), yet the mainstream status quo is absolutely hell bent upon
staying the course of those thousand soot and NOx producing lights.

Too bad we're all too dumb and dumber, along with having been so easily
snookered and subsequently dumbfounded by those folks having "the right
stuff", as to even so much as realize how totally snookered and
summarily dumfounded into denial we all are, and how soon some of us are
going to become prematurely dead and/or seriously broke as a direct
result.

The likes of ExxonMobile should be damn proud of themselves, just like
all of those lethal tobacco drug pushers of internal soot and of
numerous carsonagenics that are currently licensed to kill, and there's
absolutely no doubt that as such they're each doing just that while
turning out a hefty and essentially tax-free offshore profit at the
ongoing demise of others.

There's next to nothing going into R&D of He3/fusion energy, or much
less the worth of what the nearby moon L1 of unlimited clean energy has
to offer. Even the superior terrestrial worth of wind derived energy
isn't but hardly a prototype of what a serious wind turbine application
has to offer, and of solar PV plus the thermal dynamic Stirling
alternatives that could easily share the base/foundation of those very
same wind turbine towers is apparently taboo/nondisclosure because,
apparently it's all too squeaky clean and too much 100% renewable
without hardly a stitch of repercussions.

Basalt insulation of R-1024/m that's potentially as structural as you'd
care to make it and essentially fire-proof is apparently yet another
taboo/nondisclosure little tidbit of what humanity and that of our
failing environment is never going to see, much less of extremely
compact hybrid batteries operating on hydrogen peroxide and aluminum, or
by way of better internal combustion via h2o2/c12h26 or damn near any
viable combination (including h2o2/biofuels) you'd care to mix that'll
represent a near zero soot factor as well as zilch worth if any NOx
because, the mostly nitrogen atmosphere itself isn't getting consumed.

God forbid that we should ever have a surplus of such environmentally
clean energy for putting into the makings, storage and distributions of
such nifty products as LH2 or h2o2, and of subsequently making the
consumption of damn near everything else under the sun so much more
efficient and so much cleaner, not to mention biologically and
environmentally so much end-user friendly.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

TheDisgustingGuffy wrote:
The DisgustingGuffy would prefer no data instead of proxy data, or he
would hop into his time machine and go get the actual data rather than
infer anthing from proxy data.

You mean scientists can't gather proxy data from current samples and
compare them to older proxy data?

You sound like Hamilton!

wrote:
TheDisgustingGuffy wrote:
The DisgustingGuffy would prefer no data instead of proxy data, or he
would hop into his time machine and go get the actual data rather than
infer anthing from proxy data.

You mean scientists can't gather proxy data from current samples and
compare them to older proxy data?

You sound like Hamilton!

Neither I nor this poster are the ones who deny that proxy data will
work just fine. As a matter of fact you just dismissed the graph that
used the proxy data, and refused to discuss the ideas at all.

Tracy P. Hamilton