You need VALID theory to express what your 'problem' is however Ken, so as to be able to produce remediations that have SOME existent correlation to the system you take action within.

So far there is no such validity for the 'greenhouse concepts' and no validated correlation in SCIENCE, or existent effect, of any 'unnatural greenhouse warming' being existent.

What IS being observed is the 'end game' of the warming process that began ~15,000 years ago, and modenr Humanities alterations to the surface producing weather patterning alterations in both 'severity' and 'location/time'.
See slide for link to median surface temperature and human population.

See:
 http://www.climateimc.org/?q=node/348
and
 http://www.climateimc.org/?q=node/312
for more details.

Your's
Peter K Anderson aka Hartlod(tm)
 hartlod@bigpond.com

Just to add comment for those who follow the 'anti hartlod' threads began that are leading to this discussion.

You do indeed need valid theory if you would indicate that your remediations CAN be helpful. Apart from much opinion expressed, there is little to support the 'greenhouse concepts' that is consistent with the actualities seen in the environment about us.
The warming we see is the 'end play' of a process that began ~15,000 years ago.
The alterations to weather patterning is due to the redistribution of kinetic energy induction by the surface, seen in the small rise in media surface temperature.
This is directly evident in notice of the plots seen at:-
 http://www.climateimc.org/?q=node/348

Your's
Peter K Anderson aka Hartlod(tm)
 hartlod@bigpond.com

What is needed to be distinguished is the difference tween PERMANENCE and PERSISTENCE.

Climate presents persistence only, NOT permanence, and as such Humanity needs to CEASE listening to those platforming 'change is doom' as all that we need do is MOVE away from the ' rising water'. There is no 'catastrophe' to be seen; Humanity IS mobile, so moving is NOT an issue, is it. Such has been done for millennia and will NOT cease.

Humanity will ebb and flow as does all of 'nature', there is no need to 'cry doom' if a 'city' is the only concern, perhaps they should be build with differing needs and concerns to begin with NOW that Humanity is 'smarter'. I can still 'see' those 'Merchant Princes' bemoaning '5000 years ago' the need to move those 'Port Facilities' to 'higher ground', along with other related structures. The 'Princes' moved, and the Mediterranean coast is littered with submerged "Port Facilities".

The situation that WE ALL observe NOW is the 'end play' of the warming process that began showing obvious indications about 15,000 years ago. From that point of time, the snow and ice began to retreat (from just North of what is now Texas), and in general away from the equatorial regions to NOW be seen in the Polar Regions and some 'high places'.

This 'warming process' was, and still is, NATURAL and ongoing, with the Polar Regions reacting IN TURN and LAST within this NATURAL warming process.

The ONLY ISSUE of UNIQUNESS needing to be realised is that all this is happening NOW.

The RISE in median SURFACE TEMEPRATURE is DIRECTLY correlated to the rise in Human Population, and the SPRAWL of habitat linked to that population rise.

*Please refer to:-
 http://www.climateimc.org/?q=node/348
and
 http://www.climateimc.org/?q=node/312
for more detail.

The PRESENT Primary Trough is only 2 to 3 MILLION years 'old'. The BEHAVIOR we are observing is particular to THIS 'oscillatory mode'. The behavior exhibited is in recurring glaciations (again over the past 2 MILLION years) and this occurs in an IRREGULARLY periodic manner.

At times within the overall climate of 20 t0 70 MILLION years past, it was that a DIFFERENT 'climate mode' was being exhibited, no longer in a 'PRIMARY TROUGH' but in a 'PRIMARY CREST'.

Within these periods (20 to 70 MILLION years ago, and in a PRIMARY CREST mode of the overall Climate oscillation) the SECONDARY oscillations would still occur, however would NOT lead into 'Dips' contaning 'glaciation' events.

This is observable in the slide showing the 'glaciation periods' in the articles here in linked. The Primary Crest is seen as the long blank periods tween the 'blocks' of the periods containing recurring glaciations (the Primary Troughs).

You would see in geological record of "Primary Crest" periods (more likely) division of Secondary PEAK and DIP by SEA LEVEL alterations, as TURBULENCE leaves few traces otherwise that would survive till NOW.

What is being seen is the 'endplay' of a 15000 year warming period. What will happen is that a small rebalancing of FRESH water will occur. Generally about 1% of water is 'fresh & liquid', 2% is 'fresh and trapped' (in atmosphere, as ice/snow or in frozen earth).

The Secondary 'Peak' climate is heading for would see this balance alter to represent more 'fresh water' in the atmosphere, as well as liquid. HOWEVER that is NOT to say the shift will place more water into the ocean, as increases in verdant land surface will take up that fresh water into natural water courses growing around the sub-artic regions.

The alterations to weather patterning are being affected in an UNNATURAL manner, but NOT by 'greenhouse warming'. By rematerialing the surface, what Humanity IS doing is producing variation in WEATHER PATTERNING by altering the distribution across the surface of Surface produced Kinetic Energy induction (in both regional location and amount/rate).

Your's, Peter K. Anderson a.k.a. Hartlod(tm)
From the PC of Peter K Anderson
E-Mail:  Hartlod@bigpond.com

What is needed to be distinguished is the difference tween PERMANENCE and PERSISTENCE.

Climate presents persistence only, NOT permanence, and as such Humanity needs to CEASE listening to those platforming 'change is doom' as all that we need do is MOVE away from the ' rising water'. There is no 'catastrophe' to be seen; Humanity IS mobile, so moving is NOT an issue, is it. Such has been done for millennia and will NOT cease.

Humanity will ebb and flow as does all of 'nature', there is no need to 'cry doom' if a 'city' is the only concern, perhaps they should be build with differing needs and concerns to begin with NOW that Humanity is 'smarter'.

There is a situation in regard to the environs of the State of Florida (which includes the City and region of New Orleans) in regard to this present 'climate mode' that has seen ancient channels (many now built over) open under the influence of storm systems particular in occurrence to within this present 'climate mode'. I was infact attempting to discuss this situation months before the storm Katrina did open just ONE sea channel (that had been built over) from the many that 'dot' the coast of the 'Florida environs'.

Alas the distribution of such discussion was too slow to be of great preemptive aid in readying for Katrina, but there are still several decades (if not a few centuries) still in which such 'storm events' can remain to be seen. Florida State (and its environs) has been in the past a large 'lake land'.

The situation that WE ALL observe NOW is the 'end play' of the warming process that began showing obvious indications about 15,000 years ago.

From that point of time, the snow and ice began to retreat (from just North of what is now Texas), and in general away from the equatorial regions to NOW be seen in the Polar Regions and some 'high places'.

This 'warming process' was, and still is, NATURAL and ongoing, with the Polar Regions reacting IN TURN and LAST within this NATURAL warming process.

The ONLY ISSUE needing to be realised is that all this is happening NOW, in its turn, not in an greatly unnatural manner.

The RISE in median SURFACE TEMEPRATURE is DIRECTLY correlated to the rise in Human Population, and the SPRAWL of habitat linked to that population rise with its associated rematerialing of the surface.

*Please refer to:-
 http://www.climateimc.org/?q=node/348
and
 http://www.climateimc.org/?q=node/312
for more detail.

The PRESENT Primary Trough is only 2 to 3 MILLION years 'old'. The BEHAVIOR we are observing is particular to THIS 'oscillatory mode'. The behavior exhibited is in recurring glaciations (again over the past 2 MILLION years) and this occurs in an IRREGULARLY periodic manner.

At times within the overall climate of 20 t0 70 MILLION years past, it was that a DIFFERENT 'climate mode' was being exhibited, no longer in a 'PRIMARY TROUGH' but in a 'PRIMARY CREST'.

Within these periods (20 to 70 MILLION years ago and in a PRIMARY CREST mode of the overall Climate oscillation) the SECONDARY oscillations would still occur however, but would NOT dip into 'glaciations'.

This is observable in the slide showing the 'glaciation periods' in the articles here in linked. The Primary Crest is seen as the long blank periods tween the 'blocks' of the periods containing recurring glaciations.

You would see in geological record of "Primary Crest" periods (more likely) division of Secondary PEAK and DIP by SEA LEVEL alterations, as TURBULENCE leaves few traces otherwise that would survive till NOW.

It is NOT VALID to 'cross boundaries' UNNOTICED, so further 'rise' in sea levels will be very unlikely to display any patterning of behavior OUTSIDE of the past 2 MILLION years.

What is being seen is the 'endplay' of a 15000 year warming period. What will happen is that a small rebalancing of FRESH water will occur. Generally about 1% of water is 'fresh & liquid', 2% is 'fresh and trapped' (in atmosphere, as ice/snow or in frozen earth).

The Secondary 'Peak' climate is heading for would see this balance alter to represent more 'fresh water' in the atmosphere, as well as liquid. HOWEVER that is NOT to say the shift will place more water into the ocean, as increases in verdant land surface will take up that fresh water into natural water courses growing around the sub-artic regions.

The alterations to weather patterning are being affected in an UNNATURAL manner, but NOT by 'greenhouse warming'. By rematerialing the surface, what Humanity IS doing is producing variation in WEATHER PATTERNING by altering the distribution across the surface of Surface produced Kinetic Energy induction (in both regional location and amount/rate).

Your's, Peter K. Anderson a.k.a. Hartlod(tm)
From the PC of Peter K Anderson
E-Mail:  Hartlod@bigpond.com

Simply as Humanity like to 'reserve' some 'space' on the surface does NOT mean that the natural oscillations of climate will 'notice'.

The contrivance of an 'imposing names', exampled with the phrase "Polar Amplification", seems to be made with little regard to indications from pre-existing processes (the 'Polar Regions' are NOT 'reacting first', but are in FACT acting in turn and are LAST) to show the effects of warming that began ~15,000 years ago when the snow cover began to move back from the edge of what is now just north of the State of Texas.

The Ice and Snow are gone from that region, but the warming cycle still continues. It is that on the scale of 'periodicity' observed for 'climate', it is NOT POSSIBLE to VALIDLY produce a trend from only a few decades of data. Thus it is that those charts of 'temperature', and the NUMBERS incorporated, are only showing a 'tide returning', NOT 'unnatural warming'. There is NO valid reason to run from the 'sight' calling "Doom and Woe' is upon you all!" One million data points in the last 30 years is only defining a statistically insignificant time-frame of the overall climate oscillation, 100 Million data points in 50, 100 or 200 years, are of no more help in validating either model or opinion.

It is very simply really, with relation to global climate alterations, there is no trend viable from only '15 years' of 'time', there is no trend viable from the past 150 years or 400 years, and no matter how many data points you place into that period, you will still not get a trend. This is known of statistical process, often ignored within the opinion and inference proffered in regard to 'greenhouse climate change'.

The trend of Human Population redistribution will continue to see sprawl over presently existing 'green' regions, like the Amazonian basin. Sprawl will continue into those presently less densely occupied regions, taking the ‘best places first. Then population growth will ‘fill in’ the gaps to produce a ‘unified human sprawl surface material’.

This ‘sprawl’ trend, along with its linked interactions with turbulence and weather patterning, is produced from Surface kinetic energy induction rate and distribution alterations. These alterations, these redistributions, produced by ‘sprawl’ surface rematerialing will be producing further changes to weather and regional 'climates'.

It is important to notice this as it is the REDISTRIBUTION and ALTERATION of kinetic energy induction by the planetary surface that is producing alterations to weather patterning seen in events associated with, rainfall, floods, snow, etc. All these events are driven by turbulence produced by Conduction and Convection of kinetic energy.

There is again, to restate what needs to be realised rapidly, no possibility in SCIENCE for a 'greenhouse effect' to even be produced by the materials involved.

Observations are not so much of ‘climate change’ but of ‘redistribution of turbulence’ induced by alterations to the planetary surface. Humanity IS making these alterations and is doing so unheeding of the effect our constructions are having on the distribution and rate of kinetic energy inductions CONDUCTED to the atmosphere/ocean and transported as CONVECTION.

Climate alteration is a process of thousands of years, not tens or even hundreds. Notice the irregular periodicity of those Periods that contain multiple glacial events (see links given), where ice and snow recedes back to the Polar Regions, and then returns across the surface.

These total periods are within the 'troughs' of a very LONG and IRREGULAR oscillation. So the 'blocks of time' (in figure of glaciation periods) represent the placement of 'troughs' within the overall Planetary Climate oscillation.

Within these 'troughs' occurs an EVIDENCED secondary set of oscillations, producing the fall and rise, the ebb and flow' of ICE & SNOW across the surface.

ALL of this activity is WITHIN the OVERALL 'trough' of the LONG term irregularly periodic oscillation.

Within these 'short and ice prone' Periods, Million of years are encompassed; the present PERIOD is only TWO MILLION years into its progression.

The 'sea level' of periods 20 to 80 Million years ago was in a differing 'mode' of climate, a 'Primary Crest', where the Secondary 'Dip' did not result in "Glaciations" and the evidenced alterations tween Secondary 'Peak and Dip' was in terms of Sea Level alterations, Turbulence not otherwise leaving geological 'traces'.

Are we to listen to the book selling ‘climate prophets’ for more MILLIONS of years yet?
Are we to fund ‘climate prophets’ in their continuance with BILLIONS of dollars for the MILLIONS of years left in this cycle?
I do not hope so!

See
 http://www.climateimc.org/?q=node/312
 http://www.climateimc.org/?q=node/348
for more detail.

What is it exactly the 'few' expect Humanity to do? Link arms, march to the nearest beach and force back the waters? It is that Humanity will need to drop its obstinate views of permanence, and move with the persistence of Climate, and its alterations both across the planetary surface.

Your's, Peter K. Anderson a.k.a. Hartlod(tm)
From the PC of Peter K Anderson
E-Mail:  Hartlod@bigpond.com

You do indeed need valid theory if you would indicate that your remediations CAN be helpful. Apart from much opinion expressed, there is little to support the 'greenhouse concepts' that is consistent with the actualities seen in the environment about us.
The warming we see is the 'end play' of a process that began ~15,000 years ago.
The alterations to weather patterning are due to the redistribution of kinetic energy induction by the surface, seen in the small rise in media surface temperature.

You will find more detailed discussion(s) at:-
 http://www.climateimc.org/?q=node/348
and
 http://www.climateimc.org/?q=node/312

Your's
Peter K Anderson aka Hartlod(tm)

To continue relating some of the issues of 'fault' within the 'greenhouse climate models', apart from the obvious discrepancies of the included materials behavior to those actually presented, there is the further exasperations from the realisation of the 'double' inclusion of kinetic energy within the calculations'.

It is easily seen in the slide ' glob_jan-dec_pg' in:-
 http://www.climateimc.org/?q=node/348
(along with the comparative version of a displayed trend to Human Population)
, that the rise in median temperature of the surface ocean waters runs in a trend similar to that of the land surface, but with a delay, and in a muted manner.

The delay is due to the direct Conduction processes transferring the kinetic energy from the land to water surface within the actions of Convection. It would appear to have been ~15 years in 1930, for example.

The dampening of the trend is due to the ability of the liquids of the ocean being able to produce Turbulence in reaction to these gains of kinetic energy. As such these processes of Turbulence lower the residual energy that is recordable as 'temperature'.

So the water surface will show a lagging trend of lower and more moderate increases whilst the dry land surface continues to be rematerialed and present a generally rising median temperature from altering interactions with incident radiation produced by the altering of the materials OF the surface made within the sprawl of Human Habitat.

The atmosphere being a gas is able to display much more readily the effects induced by Turbulence, hence the observed weather patterning alterations.

The combined 'land/ocean' plot is however presenting a 'double count' of much of the kinetic energy. This is WHY the 'models' are NOT preemptive AND give scenarios of such 'alarming fantasies' as they include TOO MUCH energy (as well as NOT handling the 'energy calculations' in a valid manner). Certainly much MORE 'energy' is included than is actually present.

(This situation I have been attempting to indicate for a few years, and is seen in many differing portions of 'calculation conceptualisations' including the remittance behaviors of molecules being presented as 'blackbody' radiation linked to 'atmospheric temperature' when the reverse is the reality, these photons present the energy NOT retained as a 'kinetic gain', thus have no link to 'atmospheric' molecular temperature.)

This (and other) 'misnomer(s)' is(/are) reason for WHY there are still some attempting to platform 'greenhouse concepts', as the claim is made of a need to 'account' for the 'energy observed'. It is just that the energy is not actually present in the amounts 'inferred'.

Again I mention this to play the difference of OBSERVATION to INFERENCE.

You need to avoid PREDETERMINATION as this psychological behavioralism 'taints' inferences of even the most reliable observations.

Too often we all see INFERENCE (especially as platformed 'opinions') being given precedence over OBSERVATION in relation to 'greenhouse (and related) concepts'.

Your's, Peter K. Anderson a.k.a. Hartlod(tm)
From the PC of Peter K Anderson
E-Mail:  Hartlod@bigpond.com

To save more typing:-

 http://www.ucimc.org/newswire/display/113579/index.php#comments

The justifications for maintaining any attention to the 'greenhouse effect' are becoming rapiudly more trivial, and still ignore the actual inability of the involved materials to produce even a 'greenhouse behavior' within their knwn properties, let alone a 'greenhouse effect' and there is no need for 'complexity' to attempt to hide this fact, and so (I) have not needed to produce such 'complexity'.

Peter K Anderson aka Hartlod(tm)