JF Aus

I came across iron filings being used a few years ago as a means to produce alga. which in turn, is meant to take up carbon. The suggestion would not have arisen if algae creates warmth.
As has been suggested, you say that you have written an article to Huffington Post, get it published in a Science Journal.
I grew up in an area where we literally had a small rivulet in our backyard, warmth and a receding of water flow proceeded the growth of algal blooms. Farmers took water from the rivulet for irrigation. Algal blooms were a feature of summer.

Big-mouth says:” and still I know nothing “.
That sums it up. You know nothing, you certainly do not know how to shut your big mouth.
The reason I asked the question was to have you faced with the fact that there is no science to show any measurable human effect on climate. The human effect is trivial and not measurable.
An ignoramus cannot accept this fact, so you throw around irrelevant links, and proclaim the lie that you have supplied a reference to science demonstrating the unproven measurable human effect.
You could not be as stupid as you pretend to be, big-mouth, so your nonsense stems from your dishonesty.

When the head fraud-promoter the IPCC first announced, some years ago, “with “95% certainty” the unsupported “science” that global warming was human caused, They stated that the science would show a “hotspot” in the troposphere, which would be the “human signature”
Since then, of course, no “hot spot”, no human “signature, and no apology from the IPCC for its baseless lies. John Cook, the unqualified failed cartoonist who runs the deceptively named climate fraud promotion site “Skeptical Science”, attempted a support of the non-existent “hot spot”

Jo Nova said, reporting on Cook’s failure:
“Inasmuch as anyone can tell, the hot spot is created (in the models that is, not in real life) by several mechanisms, but one of the main ones is the extra water vapor that is supposed to be “thickening the blanket” 10km above the tropics. The models assume relative humidity stays constant, and if it did, that would mean an increase in the greenhouse effect due to water vapor. Note that the same radiosondes that record no rising temperatures in the upper troposphere also record that relative humidity fell(Paltridge 2009), which is what you’d expect if there was negative feedback, but not what you expect if you trust computer models. “
http://joannenova.com.au/2010/06/how-john-cook-unskeptically-believes-in-a-hotspot-that-thermometers-cant-find/
There is no science to show any measurable human effect on climate.

JF Aus,

I wish we could quickly INCREASE the amount of algae!

Check this headline!
"120 tons of iron sulphate of fertilization into the ocean boosted fish catch by over 100,000 tons - We get a lot of fish and solve the CO2 climate problem"
http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2014/06/120-tons-of-iron-sulphate-dumped-into.html

When they die, they fall to the bottom of the ocean where they trap the carbon for millions of years. That would reduce the KNOWN, DEMONSTRABLE, peer-reviewed fact of CO2's 4 Hiroshima bombs per second!

As Thomas said, it's all about the sun, and known thermodynamic laws. Your body produces heat which is a result of the food chain, which itself is a result of the amount of energy coming from the sun. The food chain is just juggling the pieces on the board: the sun determines how many 'pieces there are in the first place. Suggesting anything else breaks the laws of thermodynamics.

Sunlight hits the earth, and creates the potential for different kinds of heat energy.

ALBEDO measures how much light is reflected back into space as light.

Some of that light is turned into HEAT energy, depending on the ALBEDO.

Life responds to the above equation in a variety of different ways: juggling pieces on the board around depending on the story in different locations.

Although some of that 'juggling' of pieces on the board may not be conducive to what we call civilisation today. It's not a co-incidence that *most* previous ELE's have mostly been caused by extreme climate changes!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event

4 HIROSHIMA BOMBS PER SECOND!

@Leo Lane: "The reason I asked the question was to have you faced with the fact that there is no science to show any measurable human effect on climate."

Oh really, how nice. You failed Leo.

Your opinionated ad hominem spiel can't make me un-know what I have done and know. It makes zero difference to climate science or to scientists or to reality.

re: "The human effect is trivial and not measurable."

Really? Go prove it Leo. Show me and all the readers here the evidence you got.

re: "ignoramus, irrelevant links, the lie, unproven measurable human effect, stupid, big-mouth, nonsense, dishonesty, blah blah blah!"

Was it something I said Leo?

<snipping the sniping> Cry me a river?

Living in Leo's Land where an ex-journalist (JoNova who can't use her right name or get a job at a newspaper for a decade plus) is the scientific expert. Impressive.

That and Marohasy? Monckton's Lies? WUWT? Or a Heller who can't use his right name either? Roberts and his Galileo group spin?

Plus ad hominem verbal abuse, unscientific swill, with poor self-control and all backed up with no knowledge? Impressive!

Some would recognise the anger here is the second stage of Grief.

"The five stages, DENIAL, ANGER, bargaining, depression and acceptance are a part of the framework that makes up our learning to live with the [CHERISHED BELIEFS] we lost [are losing]."
http://grief.com/the-five-stages-of-grief/

On father's day we can all celebrate the humour found in 3yo temper tantrums. :-)

Let me share a secret. Thanks for your responses Leo but know that my replies are not actually directed at you personally: my comments are meant for the 'readers' of this here OLO, now and into the future.

I'm like a Nurseryman who loves planting seeds. Like Jesus I too know the difference between good soil and rocky ground.

I'm also teaching others how to handle responses like yours. :-)

Believe what you want Leo. Nothing to do with me.

AGW/CC Denial has already lost the War of Words.

It's all over Red Rover. :-)

Refs: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect

http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/cognitive_dissonance.htm -

Max Green, the juvenile delinquent who backs climate fraud. He has no science to support his position, so he resorts to childish slogans, like “Hiroshima bombs”:, which emanates from the failed cartoonist, John Cook, who runs a website promoting climate fraud.
Jo Nova comments on Cook’s nonsense.“ John Cook’s figure sounded like a marvelous marketing gimmick, scientifically it was meaningless. For starters, the Sun blasts 1,950 Hiroshima’s worth of energy over the Earth every second (h.t to Wellerstein). So we got four more? Did Cook forget to mention that, or was he just trying to scare people?”
Jo explains that Cook’s units are a parody of science: “The atomic-bomb delivered all the energy in one spot, but the sun spreads it out. Science becomes mindless if you mash up things like volume and area. A million square miles is not like two square feet. McDonalds sells a Hiroshima Bomb worth of Big-Macs every 8.6 days. It’s like a bomb in the same sense that black is like white, 1 is like 2, being alive is like being dead. Things can be equated-to-inanity. Cook has achieved that.”
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/06/climate-scientists-move-to-atom-bomb-number-system-give-up-on-exponentials/
It is easy to see why Max is the school dunce.

Leo,
please abide by the forum rules regarding name calling etc. It's not only polite, it will help you appear less rabid in your tinfoil hat sales.
Regards,