THE REAL CLIMATE DYNAMIC

1. The atmosphere does NOT have the mass necessary to determine global warming or cooling patterns compared with the mass of the top 50 metres of ocean surfaces.

2. The greenhouse effect is overstated. Since when did a greenhouse spin at 1000 miles per hour. Since when did a greenhouse have an open top that allowed convective heat escape above and beyond any reradiative reheating. And further, unlike Earth, true greenhouse planets like Venus all have one thing in common ... they have very low rotational velocities and thus weak CONVECTION patterns to keep them cool.
SUMMARY Pt 2: The Earth is NOT a greenhouse

3. The biggest mass of human high entropy wastes is NOT emmitted to the atmosphere but into the oceans. A further suupplement of 40% of atmospheric gases like CO2 that are immeditely dissolved in those oceans.
Summary Pt 3: humans ARE affecting climate but through C.R.A.P. (Colloidal Recirculation of At-ocean-surface Pollutants) from over 3 billion people living on global coastlines, plus their attendant mining, industrial and agri waste footprints. The net effect of this C.R.A.P. is to HEAT the entire biosphere, including atmospheric systems, and it is directly proportional to human numbers living in coastal cities.

Continuing..

Continued..

4.The greatest bio-absorbers of heat on the planet are the ecosystems of the ocean surfaces. These ecosystems are being destroyed by human C.R.A.P. That means the capacity of the oceans to emit CO2 is increased, to absorb CO2 is decreased and to HEAT regional AIRSHEDS is increased dramatically. This SEEMS to be CO2 based global warming, however this effect depends on the rate of wastewater C.R.A.P. emission. When increasingly ASPiring Humans destroy each other in internecine competion for energy reserves by about 2025, C.R.A.P. emission rate will fall to pre industrial levels within days, not centuries. Any survivors will truly be left wondering at OUR global warming HOAX.

5. The effect of atmospheric heat on the ice caps is open to research. Because the poles are the lowest entropy (macromolecular crystallized ice) global masses, they DO NOT attract heat by the second Law of thermodynamics. What is observed is a circulation and gradual degradation of heat around polar oceans till it MATCHES quantum mechanical requirements for creating super cooled ice. Despite any incidental surface snow fluctuations, the underlying ice caps will increase under the action of CONVECTIVE heat flows provided no additional radiative sources are applied. Such radiative sources like volcanos or precessional solar exosure are the ONLY way that ice caps can ever melt. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is very specific in action and this possibility ought not be so surprising when all the current climate panic dies down.

**If you dump billions of litres of C.R.A.P. every year (including the brine from 250 megalitre DESALINATION plants) in your coastal oceans and expect low entropy 'ocean-cyclonic' or 'land-desert' based heat formations to ignore it, they will decimate your cities and your populations with storm or flood or drought just the same.

It's all in the second law of thermodynamics.

WEll you are all digging into a subject that is very complicated.

However one simple point;

The IPCC prediction or whatever you want to call it suggested
that the "Global Temperature" exactly what ever that means, will rise
by up to 4 deg C wasn't it ?

However that presumed that the hydrocarbon supply would be as growth
predicted. However that is nonsense, as hydrocarbons will be depleting.

As this is certain then there is absolutely no point in our reducing
CO2 emmissions, they will reduce faster than all the suggested rates
anyway !

That there is a climate change seems fairly certain, but it does not
look like we are to blame or can have any effect on it.

Bazz

You've failed to consider one important factor.

The impacts of the release of today's CO2, will not be evident for some 80 years or a even a century.

In other words, the specific release of that CO2 will remain fairly benign for some 100 years. Then humans will reap what their ancestors have sown - just like we are at present, though it will never be obvious to some!

Mind you, much of the atmospheric CO2 was once another toxic hydrocarbon chemical during the industrial process and most of those chemicals released to the environment are carcinogenic, mutagenic or teratogenic.

So just for the health of humans alone and our already depleted and contaminated eco systems, it is imperative that we immediately reduce CO2 emissions.

KAEP

Please point us to some published papers or particular web sites on your musings about CRAP - seriously.

It was interesting to read Trenberth's letter on the link provided in the comments. He was a lead author of an IPCC Summary,and it was his unprofessional conduct which caused Chris Landsea to dissociate himself from the IPCC, and its misleading and unscientific approach.

Landsea’s letter is here:
http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/landsea.html

Trenberth has not reformed, but in rationalising his situation makes the assertion that the IPCC is not lying, but using weasel words.

Trenberth asserts that the Summary makes all its assertions on the basis of “what if”.

Bob Carter has simply pointed out that this amounts to a retraction of the assertions made by the IPCC in its Summary, which is perfectly correct.

Why the posters of comments on this article consider that there is some obligation on Bob Carter to deal with the rest of Trenberth’s peculiar assertions, defies reason, but it is obvious that reason plays little part in formulation of their criticisms of Carter. The accusations of "cherry picking" are puerile.

We should be grateful to Bob Carter for pointing out another example of where attempts by the IPCC to mislead have rebounded on them, and their apologist, Trenberth, has made the situation worse, by emphasising the situation.