The US Government has known for 75 years that added CO2 has little effect on climate. That was the year Bernie Sanders was born.
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
- Gamecock on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on The End Of Polar Bears
- Richard E Fritz on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Richard E Fritz on HUD Climate Advisor
- Richard E Fritz on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Robertvd on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Robertvd on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Bob G on Ellen Flees To The UK
U. S. Senate Minority Report:
More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over
Man-Made Global Warming Claims
Scientists Continue to Debunk “Consensus” in 2008
http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/83947f5d-d84a-4a84-ad5d-6e2d71db52d9/senateminorityreport2.pdf
Oh dear oh dear! How Inconvenient!
Ah yes, the good old days before the invention, er… I mean discovery of positive feedback loops.
“No probable increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide could materially affect either the amount of insolation reaching the surface or the amount of terrestrial radiation lost to space.”
Three points:
Probable needs to be defined.
Interesting that that CO2’s effect on insolation is a matter of interest. That never comes up in the current discussion.
Doesn’t matter though, methane is being groomed as the boogeyman when the CO2 scam runs its course along with ocean “acidification”.
The basic errors are indeed old!
Eighty years ago in 1936 Kuroda noted a physicist could NOT understand the definition of Aston’s nuclear packing fraction!
If they understood that simple concept, first defined by Aston himself ninety-four years ago in 1922, Carl von Weizacker’s flawed concept of nuclear binding energy would be removed from physics textbooks and the the public might understand the forces that actually rule their lives today.
40 years ago, I was told by a friend at the University of Maryland Department of Fluid Dynamics that the CO2 connection to global warming was fundamentally flawed, that the more you added, the less effect the additional CO2 would have.
Reblogged this on TheFlippinTruth.
Reblogged this on Climate Collections.
Ninty-nine years ago in 1917 wet chemical analysis of hundreds of ordinary meteorites revealed that seven elements of even atomic numbers – #26 iron (Fe), # 8 oxygen (O), #14 silicon (Si), # 28 nickle (Ni), # 16 sulfur (S), # 12 magnesium (Mg) & # 20 calcium (Ca) – compromise >99% of the elements in ordinary meteorites.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0410569.pdf
These same seven elements compromise >99% of the elements in rocky planets near the Sun, and isotopic analysis of noble gases implanted in lunar dirt revealed in 1983 that these same seven elements compromise >99% of elements in the Sun itself.
FEAR of nuclear annihilation in AUG-SEPT 1945 frightened world leaders into uniting nations and national academies of sciences on 24 OCT 1945 in a geo-engineering experiment to “save the world” by hiding the source of energy in atomic bombs – the same source of energy that made the more stable elements (iron, oxygen, silicon, nickle, sulfur, magnesium, calcium) more abundantly in ordinary stars like the Sun.
Since 2010, I have been explaining why the temperature effects of CO2 through absorption of the Earth’s thermal radiation emissions are small and comparable to the cooling effects on the surface temperature due to increased absorption of solar insolation in the atmosphere.
Hey Tony! Great find! The warmists never seem to realize that you cannot measure the radiative properties of CO2 in dry air and them extrapolate those properties out to find what CO2 will do in moist air. (More accurately, I should say that you can’t do that IF you want to get a correct answer.) Of course the CAGW folk will probably say, “But that book was written by old, dead males of European descent; now we know better!”
Anyway, good find!