On Tue, 08 Mar 2011 23:52:12 -0800, Catoni wrote:

On Mar 8, 8:05Â*pm, Roger Coppock wrote:
In their "Young Scientist Special," TV's Mythbusters test global
warming theory. Â*They ask, "Does CO2 warm air?" Â*Please see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5...eature=related

This demonstration no longer competitive at San Diego's Science Fair.
It's been done so many times, it's no longer original.

Jamie Hyneman:
He earned a degree in Russian linguistics from
Indiana University. A variety of careers fill his resume, including
scuba diver, wilderness survival expert, boat captain, linguist, pet
shop owner, animal wrangler, machinist, concrete inspector, and chef.

- Not a Climatologist. not even a scientist.

Adam Savage:
Adam Savage began acting as a child, and has had five
years of acting school. His early credits include voicing animated
characters that his father produced for Sesame Street, Mr. Whipple's
stock boy "Jimmy" in a Charmin commercial, a helper in the special
effects of Star Wars, and a drowning young man saved by a lifeguard in
the 1985 Billy Joel music video "You're Only Human (Second Wind)." He
attended New York University's Tisch School of the Arts for acting for 6
months before dropping out.

Describing the early abandonment of his acting career, Savage said
"...by the time I was, I guess probably nineteen, I had passed on that
in favor of doing stuff with my hands – graphic design, assistant
animation in New York, and then eventually working in theater in San
Francisco, and film special effects.

- Not a Climatologist.... not even a scientist.

Tori Belecci:
Tory Belleci has a long history of working with fire and
explosives. At an early age, his dad showed him how to make a Molotov
cocktail. He later built what was essentially a homemade flamethrower.
The device caused a dangerous incident, when he accidentally lit part of
his house on fire. When he was 19, he was nearly arrested for setting
off a home made pipe bomb near his parents' home in Seaside, California.
The officer encouraged young Belleci to find a way of expressing his
love for explosions and special effects that did not involve getting
arrested.
Belleci has been quoted saying he became interested in the special
effects industry after doing a report on movie special effects, while in
high school. In 1994, after graduating from San Francisco State
University's film school, he started working with Jamie Hyneman, at a
small production company. Tory worked as a stage manager, running
errands and cleaning the shop, but quickly moved up the ranks.

- Not a Climatologist...... not even a scientist.

Kari Byron:
Byron graduated from Los Gatos High School in Los
Gatos, California and studied film and sculpture at San Francisco State
University, graduating magna cum laude in May 1998 with a B.A. degree in
film and sculpture. Byron spent the following year backpacking,
primarily in South Asia, including the Himalayas, and was also involved
in a number of art projects.
Art and sculpting are important aspects of her life, and she has
claimed that she creates some form of art every day, stating, "I would
go crazy if I didn't". Some of her preferred sculpting materials are
polymer clay, various found objects, acrylic gouache, wood and metals.

- Not a Climatologist.,.... not even a scientist

Grant Imahara:
Imahara is a graduate of the University of
Southern California, with a B.S. degree in electrical engineering. For a
time, he seriously considered switching majors, with the intention of
becoming a screenwriter; he decided to stay on the engineering track
after assisting Tomlinson Holman, a professor at the USC School of
Cinematic Arts and creator of the Lucasfilm THX sound system.

After graduation, Imahara was hired as an engineer for Lucasfilm's Home
THX division; he then moved to the visual effects company Industrial
Light and Magic (ILM), where he worked for nine years.

- Not a Climatologist...... and I don't know... only
having a B.S. in electrical engineering might be stretching it to call
him a scientist.

But hey.... Al Gore is not a scientist either....

Why wait ? ? You too can be an expert on Climate Change....no
need to be a scientist.... just write a paper that supports Global
Warming Alarmism and people like Roger Coppock will welcome you with
oppen arms.

( Info on Mythbusters cast from Wikipedia.)

I like the show, even though they often get things wrong. I view what
they're doing as art - entertainment - with the goal of showing kids how
interesting science can be. They don't claim to be scientists, as they
usually seek advice from "experts", with varying degrees of success.

I particularly liked the swing set episode where their expert advised
them to connect their synchronized rocket system igniters in series.

We may see a bump in science and engineering enrollment from the show as
we did from the original "Star Trek". They seem to try to be honest,
showing their failures as well as their successes. Anyone who's worked
in the field knows that if your experiments are always successful, you're
doing production, not R&D.

I wish them well, even if they did get taken in by a bogus GHG
"experiment". Their hearts are in the right place.

On Mar 8, 7:05*pm, Roger Coppock wrote:
In their "Young Scientist Special," TV's Mythbusters test global
warming theory. *They ask, "Does CO2 warm air?" *Please see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5...eature=related

This demonstration no longer competitive at San Diego's Science Fair.
It's been done so many times, it's no longer original.

Oh well.... if the Mythbusters says it is so, it must be. But was it
peer reviewed? Did other mythbusters review their "science" before it
was approved to go on air?

****ing idiot.

On 3/8/2011 5:05 PM, Roger Coppock wrote:
In their "Young Scientist Special," TV's Mythbusters test global
warming theory. They ask, "Does CO2 warm air?" Please see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5...eature=related

This demonstration no longer competitive at San Diego's Science Fair.
It's been done so many times, it's no longer original.

Wasn't original in the first place, nor is it representative of the
environment, nor is it science.

It must suck to live in San Diego with so much propaganda!

On Mar 8, 7:05*pm, Roger Coppock wrote:
In their "Young Scientist Special," TV's Mythbusters test global
warming theory. *They ask, "Does CO2 warm air?" *Please see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5...eature=related

This demonstration no longer competitive at San Diego's Science Fair.
It's been done so many times, it's no longer original.

Is the CO2 purified.?

In order to purify it from CO, you should expose it to high energy
infrareds for a length of time. Eventually, the CO will oxidize, but
in the meantime, you must consider the energy released from exothermic
reaction of the oxidation of the CO.

The CO oxidizes with the absorption of the high energy infrareds,
which are also produced by the immediate absoprtion of visible
frequencies. This oxidation is not in a chain reaction, but the
individual absorption of infrared photons produces oxidation of
individual molecules, and determines the rate of the oxidation.

Otherwise, the Tyndell parlor tricks show no evidence of the claim of
greenhouse gases, or inordinate absorption of IR.

Proper application of science proves this and the academic community
is liable for their failure at basic science in regard to this FRAUD.

The EPA is in jeopardy of losing any scientific credibility, since
their ratings for GHGs are remarkably indentical to Tyndells
assertions according to his parlor tricks with water and methane, in
which oxidation of molecules is also causing the release of energy
causing the higher temperatures.

The global warming kooks think they will not face retribution when the
public finds out they have no scientific laboratory evidence for their
superstition other than this fraudulent, non scientific experiment?

KD

On Tue, 8 Mar 2011 17:05:16 -0800 (PST), Roger Coppock
wrote:

In their "Young Scientist Special," TV's Mythbusters test global
warming theory. They ask, "Does CO2 warm air?" Please see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5...eature=related

This demonstration no longer competitive at San Diego's Science Fair.
It's been done so many times, it's no longer original.

It was done in my high school 32 years ago. It was old-hat then.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas, demonstrated more than 130 years ago.


--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz

On 3/8/2011 5:05 PM, Roger Coppock wrote:
In their "Young Scientist Special," TV's Mythbusters test global
warming theory. They ask, "Does CO2 warm air?" Please see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5...eature=related

This demonstration no longer competitive at San Diego's Science Fair.
It's been done so many times, it's no longer original.

Roger, does CO2 really warm air?

On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 09:22:44 -0800, Peter Franks
wrote:

On 3/8/2011 5:05 PM, Roger Coppock wrote:
In their "Young Scientist Special," TV's Mythbusters test global
warming theory. They ask, "Does CO2 warm air?" Please see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5...eature=related

This demonstration no longer competitive at San Diego's Science Fair.
It's been done so many times, it's no longer original.

Wasn't original in the first place, nor is it representative of the
environment, nor is it science.

More than 130 years of science. Stings, doesn't it?

It must suck to live in San Diego with so much propaganda!

You're being hysterical. Camn down, take a deep breath.

--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz

On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 12:55:16 -0800, Peter Franks
wrote:

On 3/8/2011 5:05 PM, Roger Coppock wrote:
In their "Young Scientist Special," TV's Mythbusters test global
warming theory. They ask, "Does CO2 warm air?" Please see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5...eature=related

This demonstration no longer competitive at San Diego's Science Fair.
It's been done so many times, it's no longer original.

Roger, does CO2 really warm air?

http://www.jstor.org/pss/108724?cookieSet=1
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/abstra...osa-43-11-1037
http://www-ramanathan.ucsd.edu/RamAmbio.pdf
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/abstra...URI=ao-1-6-759
http://www.stormingmedia.us/49/4989/0498907.html
http://agwobserver.wordpress.com/200...on-properties/
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal.../410355a0.html
http://spiedl.aip.org/getabs/servlet...ifs=yes&ref=no
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirchho...rmal_radiation
http://www.sundogpublishing.com/AtmosRad/index.html
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/metad...core-2419.html
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/lawdome.html
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/overview_2006.html
http://www.bgc.mpg.de/service/iso_ga...PG_WB_IJMS.pdf
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Pub_Ch02.pdf
http://www.eumetsat.int/Home/Main/Pu..._harries_v.pdf
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/200...JD011800.shtml
http://landshape.org/enm/wp-content/...-radiation.pdf
http://ams.confex.com/ams/Annual2006...per_100737.htm

Scientific Evidence - Increasing Temperatures & Greenhouse Gases
http://www.whrc.org/resources/primer_fundamentals.html

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm

http://www.iac.ethz.ch/people/knutti...ti08natgeo.pdf
http://globalchange.mit.edu/pubs/abs...ication_id=990
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/200...GL039628.shtml
http://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/bibliograph...regory0201.pdf
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lrg.gif
http://www.jamstec.go.jp/frsgc/resea...robrevised.pdf
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/201...GL042314.shtml
http://www.amath.washington.edu/rese.../solar-jgr.pdf
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v...s/ngeo578.html
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/200...JD005557.shtml
http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/%7E...regory2006.pdf
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/201...GL042911.shtml
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2008/...ansen_etal.pdf
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/201...GL043051.shtml
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-re...1-chapter2.pdf
http://www.pik-potsdam.de/%7Estefan/...dillo_2008.pdf
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_... is_report.htm

Human "fingerprints" showing humans caused the current global
temperature anomaly:

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming...in-santer.html
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/fea...01003 22.html
http://www.skepticalscience.com/10-I...te-Change.html
http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documen...ntshighres.pdf
http://e360.yale.edu/feature/climate... reaks_/2371/
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0210172225.htm

"Attribution of the present-day total greenhouse effect"
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2010/...idt_etal_1.pdf

"Infrared radiation and planetary temperature"
http://ptonline.aip.org/journals/doc...s_1/33_1.shtml
http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/pap...odayRT2011.pdf

You're welcome.


--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz

On Mar 10, 2:55*pm, Peter Franks wrote:

This demonstration no longer competitive at San Diego's Science Fair.
It's been done so many times, it's no longer original.

Roger, does CO2 really warm air?

Only if it has carbon monoxide which still combusts. The CO2 itself
has absolutely no property of inordinate retention or absorption of
infrared radiation as all scientific investigations reveal and can be
shown by actual science to have absolutely no effect upon the
temperature of air.

However, science is not the basis of the psychological disease of the
global warming kooks. It is their freaky little desire to control
other peoples lives, and to satiate this obsession, they are willing
to ignore, pervert, distort and falsify anything related to science.

Global warming is a for-profit industry. Scarmongering is good for
profits. Realistic science would suggest that funding be entirely
dropped for this superstition and folk lore science based upon the
fraudulent interpretation of absorption of IR which is really only the
temporal effect of oxidation and the release of heat.

The EPA is a joke and is in commission of severe crimes against the US
for their incorporation of Tyndell's ratings for GHGs which he derived
from the false interpretations from his parlor tricks.

Now these worms have gotten Mythbusters to make statements that no
valid scientists would dare.

Where the hell is the formal write up of a valid scientific analysis
of this Tyndell hoax with proper definition of the controls by which
facts can be determined?

That may inhibit the movement to strangle society according to the
false threat of anthropogenic global warming. Such scientists wishing
to apply proper science must be suppressed and intimidated since they
are surely just the shills of those who sell us our lifeblood carbon
fuels.

KD

On Sat, 12 Mar 2011 04:53:07 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Mar 10, 2:55*pm, Peter Franks wrote:

This demonstration no longer competitive at San Diego's Science Fair.
It's been done so many times, it's no longer original.

Roger, does CO2 really warm air?

Only if it has carbon monoxide which still combusts.

Nut.

The CO2 itself
has absolutely no property of inordinate retention or absorption of
infrared radiation as all scientific investigations reveal and can be
shown by actual science to have absolutely no effect upon the
temperature of air.

Peer-reviewed science papers that show atmospheric CO2 has warmed
and is warming the Earth's oceans and surface:

http://www.jstor.org/pss/108724?cookieSet=1
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/abstra...osa-43-11-1037
http://www-ramanathan.ucsd.edu/RamAmbio.pdf
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/abstra...URI=ao-1-6-759
http://www.stormingmedia.us/49/4989/0498907.html
http://agwobserver.wordpress.com/200...on-properties/
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal.../410355a0.html
http://spiedl.aip.org/getabs/servlet...ifs=yes&ref=no
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirchho...rmal_radiation
http://www.sundogpublishing.com/AtmosRad/index.html
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/metad...core-2419.html
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/lawdome.html
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/overview_2006.html
http://www.bgc.mpg.de/service/iso_ga...PG_WB_IJMS.pdf
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Pub_Ch02.pdf
http://www.eumetsat.int/Home/Main/Pu..._harries_v.pdf
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/200...JD011800.shtml
http://landshape.org/enm/wp-content/...-radiation.pdf
http://ams.confex.com/ams/Annual2006...per_100737.htm

Scientific Evidence - Increasing Temperatures & Greenhouse Gases
http://www.whrc.org/resources/primer_fundamentals.html

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm

A few of the peer-reviewed science papers showing sea level rise
due to human activity:

http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/1996/96JC00922.shtml
http://www.whoi.edu/science/po/arcti...level-rise.pdf
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/documents.php
http://gcmd.gsfc.nasa.gov/
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retri...21818106000877
http://www.usgcrp.gov/
http://www.astepback.com/GEP/Nature%...LR%20rates.pdf
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture07080.html
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/tidegauges.php
http://www.nsf.gov/geo/egch/
http://www.unep.org/
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conten.../317/5841/1064
http://www.wmo.ch/web/wcrp/wcrp-home.html
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/vi...t=usgsstaffpub
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/links_alt.php
http://www.igbp.kva.se/
http://geology.gsapubs.org/content/23/1/4.full.pdf
http://www.ipcc.ch/
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/intro/gornitz_01/
http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/SEAGRANT.../gcenseal.html
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/results.php
http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/cli.../sealevel.html
http://www.whoi.edu/science/po/arcti...level-rise.pdf


--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz