global warming: worse than we think
schmoo | 18.11.2006 23:09 | Climate Chaos | Health | World
The causes of Climate Change became a real debate today rather than just a slinging match between the vested interests in the 'green' and oil lobbies.
Piers Corbyn, a leading British weather expert, and brother of Jeremy Corbyn the left wing Labour MP, is no paid for oil lobbyist.
However, he has a excellent letter in today's Guardian titled "Basic physics supports solar activity as cause of global warming".
In a few short sentences Piers Corbyn throws a very large spanner in the works. His argument is simple and obvious; global warming is caused by the sun.
As the inventor of an extremely successful weather forecasting method based on his knowledge of the sun, Piers Corybyn has the right to be taken seriously.
At the very least environmentalists and all those concerned with climate change should consider what he has to say.
At the moment the environmental movement is based on a huge error in thinking - global warming cannot be stoped.
The truth is that global warming and it's effects will be far worse than we are being told. If we accept the truth, and start to prepare now for the inevitable, we can maybe save a lot of lives.
More, plus full text of letter + further links at:
http://schmoontherun.blogspot.com/2006/11/basic-physics-supports-solar-activity.html
However, he has a excellent letter in today's Guardian titled "Basic physics supports solar activity as cause of global warming".
In a few short sentences Piers Corbyn throws a very large spanner in the works. His argument is simple and obvious; global warming is caused by the sun.
As the inventor of an extremely successful weather forecasting method based on his knowledge of the sun, Piers Corybyn has the right to be taken seriously.
At the very least environmentalists and all those concerned with climate change should consider what he has to say.
At the moment the environmental movement is based on a huge error in thinking - global warming cannot be stoped.
The truth is that global warming and it's effects will be far worse than we are being told. If we accept the truth, and start to prepare now for the inevitable, we can maybe save a lot of lives.
More, plus full text of letter + further links at:
http://schmoontherun.blogspot.com/2006/11/basic-physics-supports-solar-activity.html
schmoo
Homepage:
http://www.schmoontherun.blogspot.com
Additions
schmooze
19.11.2006 02:03
Okay,
1. You are a blogger promoting your own blog by saying something controversial. This could be construed as trolling.
2. The argument on climate change is long over and your man lost. He may claim that the current and perfectly obvious climate change is caused by something other than the carbon we have poured into the atmosphere and he may just be right, but you are implying that we shouldn't worry about the increasing amounts of carbon, methane etc we are pouring into the atmosphere. That is an obvious fallacy. Even if the climate hasn't been heated, perhaps beyond rectification, by our silly and greedy over-consumption, no one can deny we should avoid adding to the over-heating.
3. Anyway, he is wrong. Don't take my word for it, it is the position that independent scientists have forced upon the moneyed establishment through rigorous and obvious proof in the face of one of the most sustained and dangerous corporate smear campaigns in the history of , well, of corporatism. And your bias shows - Jeremy Corbyn is a left-wing labour MP ???!!!- there are no left wing people left in labour and Corbyn is to the right of most of them. Any brother of his is an enemy of all of us.
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change
Read it and weep !!
1. You are a blogger promoting your own blog by saying something controversial. This could be construed as trolling.
2. The argument on climate change is long over and your man lost. He may claim that the current and perfectly obvious climate change is caused by something other than the carbon we have poured into the atmosphere and he may just be right, but you are implying that we shouldn't worry about the increasing amounts of carbon, methane etc we are pouring into the atmosphere. That is an obvious fallacy. Even if the climate hasn't been heated, perhaps beyond rectification, by our silly and greedy over-consumption, no one can deny we should avoid adding to the over-heating.
3. Anyway, he is wrong. Don't take my word for it, it is the position that independent scientists have forced upon the moneyed establishment through rigorous and obvious proof in the face of one of the most sustained and dangerous corporate smear campaigns in the history of , well, of corporatism. And your bias shows - Jeremy Corbyn is a left-wing labour MP ???!!!- there are no left wing people left in labour and Corbyn is to the right of most of them. Any brother of his is an enemy of all of us.
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change Read it and weep !!
hubble
cranks
19.11.2006 12:09
google piers corbyn and crank and you get 150 hits, corbyn has variously been described as heretic, an unscientific crank, perhaps even a fraud by 'real' meteorologists
corbyn has yet to publish a peer reviewed paper explaining his claims on solar activity and the weather
whilst he may not have ties to the oil industry he certainly has a reason for stoking up this controversy and getting his companies name in the papers
"The London-based Corbyn earns the bulk of his income from a multi-million dollar business forecasting for such clients as Britain's Coca-Cola bottler, Yorkshire Electricity Group, and Monsanto, along with filmmakers who depend on his long-term forecasts to set shooting schedules. Corbyn's Weather Action company, founded in 1995, commands annual fees as high as $40,000 for continually updated forecasts and analyses of climate trends; for a couple of hundred dollars, Weather Action will fax you short-, middle-, and long-range forecasts tailored to your region."
http://www.weathernotebook.org/transcripts/1999/09/22.html
perhaps a bit of research next time you troll imc might be in order, only offering one side of the story is pretty shoddy journalism
corbyn has yet to publish a peer reviewed paper explaining his claims on solar activity and the weather
whilst he may not have ties to the oil industry he certainly has a reason for stoking up this controversy and getting his companies name in the papers
"The London-based Corbyn earns the bulk of his income from a multi-million dollar business forecasting for such clients as Britain's Coca-Cola bottler, Yorkshire Electricity Group, and Monsanto, along with filmmakers who depend on his long-term forecasts to set shooting schedules. Corbyn's Weather Action company, founded in 1995, commands annual fees as high as $40,000 for continually updated forecasts and analyses of climate trends; for a couple of hundred dollars, Weather Action will fax you short-, middle-, and long-range forecasts tailored to your region."
http://www.weathernotebook.org/transcripts/1999/09/22.html perhaps a bit of research next time you troll imc might be in order, only offering one side of the story is pretty shoddy journalism
climate sceptic sceptic
Comments
Hide the following 4 comments
If we accept the truth, and start to prepare now for the inevitable....
19.11.2006 13:55
Come gather 'round People
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You'll be drenched to the bone.
If your time to you
Is worth savin'
Then you better start swimmin'
Or you'll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin'.
The Times They are a-changin'.
Bob Dylan
Swimmers
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
19.11.2006 14:34
Charles Schultz
Paul
Corbyn is wrong, anyway
21.11.2006 15:21
"The global warmers' claim that current extra CO2 causes warming which gets dangerously magnified through the greenhouse effect of extra water vapour in the atmosphere, consequent to the temperature rise, also fails. The sea absorbs extra CO2. Furthermore, increased transpiration-cooling by enhanced growth of plants, which is caused by extra CO2, cancels out the extra greenhouse warming of that same CO2. Increased greenhouse heating due to doubling CO2 is 3.7 watts per sq metre. This is negated by about the same amount of enhanced transpiration-cooling of plants, all of which grow faster in extra CO2. Therefore there is no CO2 driven net heat flow and surface temperature rise. Temperature and climate change in our epoch is therefore driven by other factors, especially solar particle and magnetic effects."
Transpiration-cooling is caused by the use of energy by transpiration of water from a plant through its leaves.
The above process of enhanced transpiration cooling is only true to a point - where there is adequate water supplies for the plant. If transpiration increases beyond that point a plant will close its stomata or take other measures to limit water loss by transpiration, and beyond that point the plant will start to wilt, and die - and certainly will not have increased growth.
In water-stressed areas, increased air temperatures will NOT lead to increased transpiration or increased plant growth (even if there is increased CO2) but will lead to increased plant death.
This is why we have deserts in areas of the world where air temperatures and water availability is lower than adequate for plants...
And that's the reality of the situation at the moment - many areas are water stressed and rather than increased plant growth there will be increased plant death...
Somebody
I can only hope I’m wrong.
23.11.2006 02:24
Huaneng Yuhuan Power Plant's number one electricity generating unit has produced a load of 1 million kilowatts, with all parameters working normally. The power plant has now reached the expected production volume and will soon be put into commercial use.
The Huaneng Yuhuan Power Plant is a major national project, and is the first domestic power plant to have a 1-million kilowatt generating unit. It intends to build a group of four coal power units, each with 1 million kilowatt installed capacity.
Does this kind of article really surprise anyone?.
The global warming argument is behind us and should have been long ago.
We knew that prehistoric volcanic activity created carbon dioxide which fed prehistoric forests, plankton in oceans absorbed carbon dioxide all through the same processes that nature follows today.
There has been no change.
Except.
Volcanic activity has continued just as desertification is greater than before. Deforestation has caused enormous bio loss and to top it all off humans have already burnt 40% of all prehistoric carbon, a carbon that was in safe storage. Today less than 35% of ancient forests survive
The planet is no longer able to trap the carbon dioxide that is in the atmosphere, there are insufficient carbon sinks, few swamps and fewer forests than ever in the earths history. While the sea is so acidic and its currents slowed that life can no longer survive in the abundance that was once normal. A level of biodiversity that ensured that nature could replenish carbon storage within the oceanic crust.
The wake up call will be accompanied by a world audit of present day carbon sinks and present day fossil fuel burning.
If a rise in global temperature was not enough to convince the skeptics, perhaps by comparing these earth changes will make them silent.
However would reducing green house gas now make any long term difference?
If pollution were reduced the air would be clean and clear allowing the sun to heat the surface by 4% more. This in turn would increase evaporation as indicated by global; dimming experts which they say would in turn create more atmospheric water vapor which is far more insulating than carbon dioxide.
As the temperature of the ocean heats up frozen methane at 24 times more damaging than co2 will bubble up from the ocean as methane released from the permafrost’s adds to the atmospheric mix.
Cutting industrial pollution is a rapid pull back, its not an answer it’s a disaster..
A nuclear war might do the trick.
It is one of the very few things that humans can actually achieve that will cool the planet and offer a solution to the problems humans cause,.
The possibility is that widespread nuclear war will send survivers back to the stone age, an ice age and for many thousands of years humans will have to develop an alternate society.
However one based upon god the creator and economic development will put us on track to repeat the same mistakes.
Simon
e-mail:
simonwillace@hotmail.com