Kaep

Air pollution can also suppress rainfall according to this report:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/03/000314065455.htm

Now how would this fit in with your hypothesis?

Al Gore is doing what all failed politicians do, in an attempt to attract power he becomes a doom-sayer.

He is simply saying "Do as I say or disaster will befall you all." It is childish really.

In the nineteenth century the worlds supply of coal was expected to be exhausted within 50 years – Wrong

In the 1970’s some were saying the worlds supply of oil would be exhausted in 20 years –Wrong.

In the 1990’s and now, some doomsayers are saying global warming will bring down civilization as we know it –

The problem is, doomsayers only know what they know.

“They do not know what they do not know” and hence, the innovation and adaptability of mankind is ignored. With humanity's collective knowledge doubling every generation, who knows what we will know in another 20 years time.

One thing I can put money on, a lot of us will still be here and some will not.

Ultimately, all that pent up anxiety over global warming will most certainly cause more heart attacks and ulcers for doomsayers than it will for the more balanced optimists.

KAEP-You're sure backing a winner if "predicted" big fire season is
"reversed" by cleaning up wastewater plumes.Nobody could ever tell if you're right but there's great odds you can claim a win! No wonder you don't have a problem believing in C02GW.
At the risk of sounding like ykw,please explain.

FESTER-your buddy KAEP is a benign dodgy science acolyte.Great to clean
up those plumes,but really-long bow conclusion.A dodgy AND SCARY science
I read this week involved radical greenhousers considering introducing some sulphurous gas into the stratosphere to save the planet.Get me outta here! One day they might have enough resources to do it

I'm hearin' ya Col Rouge.In 1989 the doomsdayers were saying by 2005
average temperatures globally were going to be up by 2 to 5 degree C.By
2030 we were gonna be stewing in our own juice.
Guess their computers can now be blamed-just as today's modellers
will one day blame their primitive 2006 computers.

GARBAGE IN GARBAGE OUT,as they used to say.

Col Rouge,

Just wanted to point out that “They do not know what they do not know” applies equally to those on all sides.

So does the expression, "Having enough knowledge to be dangerous." Thinking that we have all answers and are above answering to the forces of nature is folly. I am the first to admit that I do not have all the answers, but I would prefer to err on the side of caution rather than stuff the environment up and then wonder what to do about it. Prevention is generally much easier than cure.

On the other hand, I am fully aware that the disappearance of human beings from Earth will be of little consequence in the grand scheme of things. However, that doesn't mean we should be complacent about the effect our technology has on the world.

CARBONARI,

1 "Nobody could ever tell if you're right" - There are several years of consistent SHA and SST 'off the NSW coast' data. It never changes .. till now when the stakes are HIGH and the warning, backed by relatively simple THERMODYNAMICS, has been issued. If changes like Brisbane and Grafton persist and the Sydney plume is retracted (It HAS RETRACTED!-29/09/06:http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/trinanes/tmp/sha1159504204.gif)
it will stick out like a sore thumb. If the bushfire season fizzles then I have proved my hypothesis.

2. "No wonder you don't have a problem believing C02GW" I DO NOT believe CO2GW. Your comprehension is challenged. Or you have been too lazy to read the maps and assertions.

3. "FESTER-KAEP is a benign dodgy science acolyte"
Thermodynamics is not dodgy. There is a flow of heat from the Equator to poles and the ultimate conclusions have IPCC based scientists in a tizz. It challenges overselective bottom-up data sets which have taken lifetimes to collect.

The Thermodynamic reality:

* Heat moves from tropics to poles (eg US Gulf of Mexico), or from mid latitude deserts to poles (eg Australia drought). Unless diverted by some high entropy concentrations on the WAY to the poles it will take a direct path.

*Since the heat capacity of oceans is 1000:1 of air and since ocean surfaces induce atmospheric microclimates, the gravitas for these entropy diversions is in COASTAL OCEANS. not air masses. This is why Fester's article on Rosefeldian pollution plumes is largely irrelevant. At best these plumes can only ever achieve localised 1-10% thermodynamic gravitas.

* Since heat flows to the poles, we know that it must also flow outward from the poles. There are several reasons. I note you have provided one. This is why sea levels will NEVER rise external to some cosmic(meteor etc) input of energy. In physics this 'Steady state divergence' is well understood. In climate science its a bugaboo because it threatens careers based on lifetime data collections.