I was interviewed by Doug Wagner at WMT in Cedar Rapids. Interview starts at minute 41. Doug did an excellent job and asked good questions.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Ellen Flees To The UK
- HUD Climate Advisor
- Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Scientist Kamala Harris
- The End Of Polar Bears
- Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- New BBC Climate Expert
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
Recent Comments
- Walter on Ellen Flees To The UK
- conrad ziefle on Causes Of Increased Storminess
- conrad ziefle on Scientist Kamala Harris
- conrad ziefle on Ellen Flees To The UK
- William on Ellen Flees To The UK
- William on Ellen Flees To The UK
- arn on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Greg in NZ on Ellen Flees To The UK
- arn on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Disillusioned on Ellen Flees To The UK
Glad you’re getting more press. I wish I understood why the minority (it seems) are skeptical of climate science and the majority trust the scientists when the evidence blares worthiness of skepticism. I consider myself average intelligence so I would figure 1/2 the people in the world would smell something fishy.
I often wonder the same. It would seem that more and more people are unwilling to question things these days.
It’s always been that way. That’s why people have always used politics and religion to manipulate others. Not that all religion or political causes are bad or wrong. Some are in fact among the best things. They’re like guns I think, in that they can be used for good or evil….
I see its 53 minutes. Will listen tonight. Glad you had the opportunity.
BTW– Reading WUWT and Judy at Climate etc a while ago they were starting to give credence to your reporting station temp foolishness and were indicating more should be coming from other sources. I have not seen anything since. I do not suppose anyone has contacted you!?
It’s actually less than 10 minutes. Starts at 41ish minutes in…
Thanks for the heads-up. (If you were a real climate scientist you would have said it starts at the 40.998 minute mark 😉
Could someone detail to me how CO2 causes any global warming? Besides creating more green stuff which in turn absorbs more heat from the sun….
Yeah Mat, I think Tony was tired. (I don’t see how he does all that he does!)
His interview at the ICCC 2014 was MUCH better.
Huh? I thought it was a great interview.
So did I, not long enough though. But to accept the premise of CO2 as a greenhouse gas falls into the degree trap IMO. As in he who has the highest accolades must be right.
But as stated in great detail below (and thank you all for that), of course it is. But so is every molecule in the universe. I think what we need is a comparison list of things that have a greater greenhouse effect than CO2. Solar powered batteries come to mind…..
btw, I’ve got your whole foods beat as a long anticipated Taco Bell just opened here today in my little rural town in NC….
Mat. only certain molecules, H2O, CO2, O3 (ozone) have the same internal vibrations as the frequencies of IR radiation involved. They must be the same for a molecule to absorb the energy
Ever see the advertisement with Ella Fitzgerald and a glass? When she sings with the same frequency as the internal vibration of the glass particles (they really are not molecules) the amplitude of the particles keeps getting greater untill the glass breaks.
Or a simpler analogy, if you are pushing someone on a swing, you must push once each time the swing swings and then the swing goes higher. Anything else and you cannot impart kinetic energy to the swing and you may get a bloody nose.
And that’s the $64,000 question…isn’t it?
The ‘Team’ says it does so by trappng heat, like a greenhouse…there’s lots of assumptions that go into coming to that conclusion that start with a paper written in the late 1800s by Arrhenius. Then there are lots of models and convoluted math to support that hypothesis, which are not supported by observational data. Followed by huge sums of grant money to study the problem and create better models and adjust the obviously ‘flawed’ observations, to fit it to the models.
So, basically, it boils down to it’s because ‘we are paid to say man-released CO2 causes warmng, because we say it does’.
1800’s huh… Perhaps they just measured the amount of caloric a CO2 molecule could hold… ;p
Short Version Mat
Without the greenhouse effect, life would not be good on this planet.
1) The sun radiates a spectrum of electromagnetic waves. Visible light is a small part of the spectrum. Infrared (IR) rays are another. They all differ in that they all have different frequencies.
2) The earth absorbs heat and readmits it in the IR range of electromagnetic waves.
3) Certain gases first H2O vapor and secondly others including CO2 can absorb certain specific IR waves and then radiate them in all directions, so some goes back to the earth, therefore some are held for a while before going back into space. This radiation from the atmosphere can be detected at night with a simple hand held device. Without this effect, we would have a cold planet like the moon.
On the moon,temps are extremely hot during the day and extremely cold at night.
4) Like anything else when there is enough heat in it, it will start to radiate more and then more will go into space, but the system will be at a higher temp. Kind of like keeping hot water on a stove at a certain temp.
5) It was known 100 years ago the CO2 was saturated with respect to the IR waves it can absorb in the atmosphere. That is, all the frequencies were already being absorbed..
However, that was before something called quantum mechanics was understood, and I am not going into that here.
6) A BTW comment, theoretically the lower atmosphere should be warmer and upper colder, therefore there should be a larger temperature gradient between the top and bottom, This temp gradient, is what causes air to move vertically and this causes weather. Without it we would simply have no atmospheric movement, no weather, no life. a dead planet.
7) The thing is, it so complicate that models are simply way off and there really is not too much observed effect of any kind. There were way too many assumptions and unknowns and unknown unknowns.
There have been two recent comments by physicists that have shed a glaring light on the subject of CO2 back-radiation. To me it was a real EUREKA moment that drives a stake through the heart of CAGW.
Here on Steve’s blog gallopingcamel (Peter Morcombe) wrote a comment on the subject on May 26, 2014 at 7:00 pm
Thank You Gail, I must have gone somewhere an completely missed this.
CLIMASTROLOGISTS!!!
My main area of study is physics and I tend to think quantitatively first, and yet I never even considered time of molecule travel between collisions vs time for photon emission.
A Eureka moment for me too.
BTW- I have for a long time considered long time energy storage (fossil fuels) vs so called current clean energy and the quantities of energy we use.
I do not see how eventually we will have anything other than nuclear energy as our main source. The greens are so foolish.
I should proof read before I hit the post button!
I agree about nuclear power. I would like to see Thorium developed.
I can see a nuclear plant from my window if I stand up and look, so I am not a NIMBY as so many Warmists are.
My degree is in electrical engineering, so I do luv the details. But they make for a hard sell to the low info crowd. I would think that a simple alchemist level experiment could easily show the increase, such that there is, relative to other gases, a long with oxygen it’s self…
I should add, no skeptical scientist doubts any of what I wrote.
I am very skeptical of any significant human caused warming,
However, I think a sad part of this is that we are overlooking humans causing problems
due to land and water use and more.
The huge aquifer under seven (at least) states in the U.S. is gradually being depleted.
There is so much crap about global warming that something like this never gets mentioned.
And part of that depletion can be blamed on the global warming craze…because it’s being used to irrigate ‘biofuels’. There are millions of acres that are now being used for biofuel production that require water…
Not to mention corn is a heavy feeder and planted relatively far apart so you get a lot of erosion and fertilizer pollution especially since farmers have torn up the grass filter strips and tree wind breaks to plant more corn.
If we have another mega-drought the US will be in a world of hurt because the methods to prevent massive erosion (grass filter strips and tree wind breaks) have been abandoned.
Gail, honestly not totally here. Corn is planted very close together now and at least locally we are trying to do some things (and losing money). to prevent soil erosion.
Negative things were done two to four decades ago.
In Minnesota, it involves trying to remake some marsh lands. and riparian strips.
I do not like taking marginal land with the idea of making gasahol or whatever.
darrylb,
I was talking in the midwest flatlands. For the distance between rows, at least here in N.C. it is 8 inches to a foot of bare ground.
Hall County having to police farmers who plant in the road rights of way
Quiet, I have a few acres of farmland and the corn and bean prices skyrocketed
Sorry about food prices being higher!
I have a hundred acres and have several neighboring farmers asking if they can plant corn and soybeans – The answer is NO!
I only have about 20 acres of farm land and a little more to walk through. Congrats on your firm stance on the land.
darrylb, my land was rented tobacco land and lost all of its top soil (over two feet in 50 years.) It needs to stay pasture for another twenty years to fully recover.
That is the maddening part. Real conservation and solving actual problems taking back seat to this idiocy.
You are so correct. It makes me see red. It is why on some issues I side with the liberals, if they are true conservationists.
Gail, noticed your comment on your pastures. If you desire, you can easily rebuild your soils in only a few years using various mob/rotational grazing techniques. Greg Judy at Green Pastures Farm has written a few books speaking about mob grazing, and there are many others that have been promoting these concepts over the past 20 years.
Makes for interesting reading, and there are some good videos available online. Good Luck and certainly don’t wait 20 years, you can rebuild your soils quickly and your pastures can be useful and productive immediately!!!
John M,
Thanks for the information. I do use intense grazing and rotation but unfortunately I am in the south on a hill where the thunderstorms can dump up to an inch of rain in an hour or less.
Up north (N.H.) I could york rake a seed bed plant grass and the soil would stay put even on a slope. Down here the first storm took all the seed plus 2 inches of composted manure and dump it down the hill headed towards the river. My next try was disking the land leaving it very rough and tossing seed out. That worked and it only took a year for the field to go from ankle breaking to smooth.
Unfortunately I have horses (as well as my sheep and goats) and they are not very good for building an even layer of top soil without harrowing and spreading the fresh manure can cause more of a worm burden. — Decisions, decisions
Hi Gail:
Just saw your reply; don’t know if you’ll receive this but, in reading your comments, I’d highly recommend perusing Greg Judy’s site and purchasing his books. And no, I don’t know him nor have any connection to him.
His books and methods are proven and easily understood, and don’t hurt the wallet too much. These methods involve cattle, of course. Tight, managed mobs equals great soil. And worms are your friend! Best of luck.
John M
This site? http://www.greenpasturesfarm.net/aboutus.php
Gail:
Yes that’s the site. Great stuff. And check online for various videos discussing the same. Lots of hands-on documented trials and research. Nothing like the climate crapola, of course!! Real people actually experimenting and adjusting-what a concept!
“Researching the researchers.” I like that.
Great interview. I was surprised although that SG (as almost 100% agrees), that human Co2 would cause any atmospheric warming. As I understand during some ice ages the earth had atmospheric(ice core data) levels >1000’s ppm Co2. I probably at this stage am the only person on earth that believes that excess Co2 actually produces cooling as a negative feedback so much for that.LOL In the lab, Co2 does cause warming but the Earth is not a lab its probably a living organism when it comes to atmospheric gas feedbacks. At least I disagree on one point with SG at last! LOL