The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > US National Climate Assessment must be denounced > Comments

US National Climate Assessment must be denounced : Comments

By Tom Harris, published 13/5/2014

Doing the

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 10
  7. 11
  8. 12
  9. Page 13
  10. 14
  11. 15
  12. 16
  13. ...
  14. 19
  15. 20
  16. 21
  17. All
The photoluminescence or otherwise of CO2 has no relevance to Steele’s fraud-backing.
Because he has no science to back his situation, he is driven to drag the thread off topic with antics, like stupid questions, rather than admit that his position has no merit. His only gain , so far, by these tactics, is to be referred to as “Witless”.

Bugsy finds him amusing. It would be nice if Bugsy knew somewhere, away from here, where Witless would be appreciated, and persuade him to go there.
Posted by Leo Lane, Sunday, 18 May 2014 10:40:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I took Cohenite's advice and googled photoluminescent Co2 to bring me up to speed on this interesting phenomena.
http://www.google.com.au/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=Gfl3U9-HE8yN8Qfg8oGYBw#q=photoluminescent+co2&start=10
Perhaps this is such a recent discovery it has not yet made it on the Internet or is it really conceivable that Cohenite is wrong!
:-)
Posted by warmair, Sunday, 18 May 2014 10:59:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yeah thanks guys; CO2 absorbs and emits IR not visible light; my bad.

You see, how easy it is to admit a mistake?
Posted by cohenite, Sunday, 18 May 2014 11:08:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Leo, you say climate science is fraud constantly, and occasionally provide a doubtful reference. Yet, thousands of scientists indicate that climate change is happening. You have not produced any proof that climate change is not happening. Climate scientists state that drought, bushfires, and storm surges will occur. It happens that there have been huge floods in Britain, parts of the US, and Serbia/Bosnia. Current floods in Serbia/Bosnia have not been recorded since records have been kept. There are severe droughts in Brasil, Texas and California at present. California has had twice the number bushfires with one sourc calling a particular fire a "firenado".
Recorded temperatures have been higher in Scandinavia,Alaska and Greenland. Several people died in Victoria through heat stroke in January 2014.
Please tell me, and others what causes ice to melt.
We have glacier retreat in the US, Greenland and Western Antarctica.
All of these matters are happening in 2014 and provide a legitimate reason why climate change research should continue. It is fossil fuel corporations that seek to slow down acceptance of climate change. The same strategy that the tobacco industry has used in the past.
Posted by ant, Sunday, 18 May 2014 11:44:30 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
That's right ant, climate change is happening; no one disputes that; the issue is what is causing it; my money's on the Sun, you and a decreasing band are saying it is human CO2 [which doesn't glow in the dark].

As for fraud check the emails and we'll see how the Mann vs Steyn case pans out.
Posted by cohenite, Sunday, 18 May 2014 11:52:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ant asserts that I say climate science is a fraud. I have clearly said that the absence of science to support it makes the assertion of AGW a fraud.
I informed her that if she could reference any science which demonstrated a measurable effect of human emissions on climate I would reconsider.
I have asked her what she means by “climate change”. Is she speaking English or using the fraudulent definition produced by the Climate Criminals, the IPCC?
“Climate change” in English, is happening. “climate change” in criminalese, is not happening. She never answers relevant questions,but produces stupid questions to ask
I referred her to the study which shows that assertion of AGW is baseless, but the obligation is on her, making the assertion of AGW to produce the science which she has failed to do
I posted this yesterday, no doubt ant was careful to avoid reading it:
. Three Australasian researchers have shown that natural forces are the dominant influence on climate, in a study just published in the highly-regarded Journal of Geophysical Research. According to this study little or none of the late 20th century global warming and cooling can be attributed to human activity.
The research, by Chris de Freitas, a climate scientist at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, John McLean (Melbourne) and Bob Carter (James Cook University), finds that the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is a key indicator of global atmospheric temperatures seven months later. As an additional influence, intermittent volcanic activity injects cooling aerosols into the atmosphere and produces significant cooling.”
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=18243
Posted by Leo Lane, Sunday, 18 May 2014 12:50:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 10
  7. 11
  8. 12
  9. Page 13
  10. 14
  11. 15
  12. 16
  13. ...
  14. 19
  15. 20
  16. 21
  17. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy