97% Climate Scientists...

[DiveCon]

polar, just go into either the flame zone of the rep zone and make a couple short posts
LOL
or in the intro forum and welcome other people
you'll have your 15 in no time

 

[DiveCon]

Hey THAAAAANK YOUUUUU! for doing that...just came back here to add a few more of my "picture ghosts"....and noticed what You did here for me!
You know I`m the kind of guy who goes fishing with a shotgun and buckshot, that`s how patient I am!

And thats what You see when You get there in the Summer and look out the window when the Command Pilot says hey guys buckle up we`re gonna touchdown in a few seconds...
The ENTIRE approach is littered like that:

I guess that`s why "climatologists" rather look at Sat-pics in a city down south than go there to see for themselves.
Do polar bears starve when it`s "warm" near the pole?

A stray "climatologist" might well be an easy snack...no they look just as well fed on and off the ice...and that is in the summer too..else it would be dark no matter what the time of day...it`s on the permanent ice pack:


And that is at the exact geographic North Pole...also in the summer:


Only You can`t see the "Pole" You have to bring Your own...is it warm there in Midsummer,...?... Hell no!:



And that what this Base really was and still is:

A listening post...only we have much fancier "gadgets" today...the one at the South Pole is pretty well the same thing...it`s a tid for tad "sister station".
All "Mil-sats '" are on "polar Orbits" They up- and download there with a very tight "footprint".

Was there more "precip" or snow in 1958 than today...No it was then also officially classified as a "desert area"...so where does that leave "global warming"...????...:

Spammers, O.K. I understand now...I guess it was for far too long my job to yell at the ranks...Sorry folks, we`re civilians now,...I`m recently retired and have to learn yet how to adjust to that!

hang in there you only need a few more posts

 

[polarbear]

About the CO2...try this experiment. Get a balloon full of that stuff, maybe from dry-ice or You neighbor-hood pub that serves draft beer...they have it in cylinders.
Then get a bottle of whine and suck it dry in the name of some real science, but save the cork...You`ll have to drill a hole through it so that a drinking straw fits snug and with no leaks through the cork.
But don`t jam the cork + straw into the bottle neck just yet.
First place a few but only a few drops of hot water in the empty whine bottle...are You still sober enough to follow me?...Then connect the balloon with the CO2 to the whine bottle and run cold water over the bottle...it will suck itself full of CO2 if You did it right.
After that jam the cork with the straw into the bottle neck...Most of straw should protrude from the assembly. Now fill a bowl with water and submerge the straw into the water.
Watch the fountain that squirts into the whine bottle....That`s how eagerly CO2 dissolves in water!
7/10 th of our planets surface is water...take a guess what absorbs more CO2, the trees or the oceans..? No, oceans do NOT saturate with CO2 it combines there with Calcium Ions and forms Calcium Carbonate...and that`s how most of the lime stone rock on earth was formed!
And guess what...although that experiment has been shown to school kids all over the world for almost a century, it was only last Year, that "climatologists" made a public statement, that "They underestimated how much CO2 ocean spray from wave tops absorbs"...
Some "science".....eeyh (Canadian slang)
Geee thanks again Divecon....Some day I`ll find You and buy You a beer!

 

[editec]

What on earth is an "earth scientist". There are only 3 sciences
1.)Mathematics
2.)Physics
3.)Chemistry

How on earth did you come to that conclusion?

Biology isn't science?

Geology isn't science?

Astronomy isn't science?

 

[Old Rocks]

Polar is another fruit loop. There is a surplus of them on this board.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Really stupid. Those 77 are the people who are actually actively publishing research in peer reviewed journals at present.

And here are some other numbers.
97% of climatologists say global warming is occurring and caused by humans

A new poll among 3,146 earth scientists found that 90 percent believe global warming is real, while 82 percent agree that human activity been a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures.

The survey, conducted among researchers listed in the American Geological Institute's Directory of Geoscience Departments*, "found that climatologists who are active in research showed the strongest consensus on the causes of global warming, with 97 percent agreeing humans play a role". The biggest doubters were petroleum geologists (47 percent) and meteorologists (64 percent). A recent poll suggests that 58 percent of Americans believe that human activity contributes to climate change.

"The petroleum geologist response is not too surprising, but the meteorologists' is very interesting," said Peter Doran, University of Illinois at Chicago associate professor of earth and environmental sciences who conducted the survey late last year with former graduate student Maggie Kendall Zimmerman. "Most members of the public think meteorologists know climate, but most of them actually study very short-term phenomenon."

Atta boy, Rocks....holdin' on by the fingernails!

Beats cuttin' out paper dolls.

 

[mdn2000]

This is what makes folks so furious and what threatens the foundation of good science.

And I bet the 3% who answered no were either being sarcastic or were afraid of this kind of misuse being made of the survey.

They were probably Republicans. 97% of scientists believe in "evolution". Only 6% of scientists are Republican. Who wants to bet that HALF of all Republican scientists DON'T believe in evolution?

90% of the scientists we now find out are not scientists at all, that leaves 1% Democrat scientist, 3% Independent, and 6% Republican.

Evolution, that is theory, correct, they are still trying to make it fact but even in the age of computers they have failed to change theory to fact.

 

[mdn2000]

Polar is another fruit loop. There is a surplus of them on this board.

I see your posting, that means your ignoring your stupidity in Energy.

 

[Old Rocks]

This is what makes folks so furious and what threatens the foundation of good science.

And I bet the 3% who answered no were either being sarcastic or were afraid of this kind of misuse being made of the survey.

They were probably Republicans. 97% of scientists believe in "evolution". Only 6% of scientists are Republican. Who wants to bet that HALF of all Republican scientists DON'T believe in evolution?

90% of the scientists we now find out are not scientists at all, that leaves 1% Democrat scientist, 3% Independent, and 6% Republican.

Evolution, that is theory, correct, they are still trying to make it fact but even in the age of computers they have failed to change theory to fact.

Dumb ass. There are no facts in science. Theory is as good as it gets. Look up the definition of theory when it is used in science. For obviously you have no idea of what the meaning of the word is in scientific discussion.

 

[Big Fitz]

Mankind produces less than 0.5% of CO2 which composes 0.04% of the total atmospheric composition. It is a weaker greenhouse gas than water vapor (4%) and yet.... our contribution is concluded to cause MASSIVE GLOBAL changes when our species and it's buildings only covers less than 5% of the whole globe on only 27% of the surface.

And you expect to get me to believe that is going to cause a change in the cliimate of an entire planet?

You still leave a tooth under your pillow for the tooth fairy don't you?

 

[skookerasbil]

Annie's signature quote pretty much says it all............the modern liberal will gladly buy a bag of dog shit for $1,000.00 a pop if it is packaged just right. When there is little meaningful in your life, you'll embrace anything AS LONG AS ITS HYSTERICAL.
They want to belive in man-made global warming becuase they HAVE TO believe in it!!!

 

[Truthmatters]

The Deniers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Three of those profiled by Solomon in his "Deniers" columns disputed his portrayals of their opinions and/or research. Sami Solanki stated on his personal website that Solomon's article was a misleading account of his views and reiterated his belief that manmade greenhouse gases are responsible for global warming and their effects would continue to be felt as concentrations increase. Solanki also stated that he felt that The National Post had similarly misquoted other scientists regarding the topic.[12] Nir Shaviv disputed Solomon's 2007 National Post profile of some of his opinions and research findings. Shaviv stated on his blog that he was never interviewed by Solomon and that there were several inaccuracies in Solomon's article.[13] Nigel Weiss, "rebutted claims that a fall in solar activity could somehow compensate for the man-made causes of global warming"[14] and The National Post retracted the allegation and published an apology.[15] Solanki and Shaviv were included in Solomon's subsequent book; Weiss was not

 

[Oddball]

Oooo!...A Wiki link!

You win.

 

[skookerasbil]

Im kinda concerned these days that with all this cold going on all over the world, Kim might start to develop snowcaps on those deamy mountain peaks..................

 

[Big Fitz]

A convention of climate scientists. Since there are only 3% Who deny global warming, guess which one is that?

 

[Big Fitz]

The Deniers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Three of those profiled by Solomon in his "Deniers" columns disputed his portrayals of their opinions and/or research. Sami Solanki stated on his personal website that Solomon's article was a misleading account of his views and reiterated his belief that manmade greenhouse gases are responsible for global warming and their effects would continue to be felt as concentrations increase. Solanki also stated that he felt that The National Post had similarly misquoted other scientists regarding the topic.[12] Nir Shaviv disputed Solomon's 2007 National Post profile of some of his opinions and research findings. Shaviv stated on his blog that he was never interviewed by Solomon and that there were several inaccuracies in Solomon's article.[13] Nigel Weiss, "rebutted claims that a fall in solar activity could somehow compensate for the man-made causes of global warming"[14] and The National Post retracted the allegation and published an apology.[15] Solanki and Shaviv were included in Solomon's subsequent book; Weiss was not

 

[Truthmatters]

So the guy lies about what sceintists have said and you just believe him instead because??????

Oh yeah you are a political hack

 

[Big Fitz]

So the guy lies about what sceintists have said and you just believe him instead because??????

Oh yeah you are a political hack

The essence of the econazi's argument:

 

[DiveCon]

Polar is another fruit loop. There is a surplus of them on this board.

yeah, your here

 

[polarbear]

Mankind produces less than 0.5% of CO2 which composes 0.04% of the total atmospheric composition. It is a weaker greenhouse gas than water vapor (4%) and yet.... our contribution is concluded to cause MASSIVE GLOBAL changes when our species and it's buildings only covers less than 5% of the whole globe on only 27% of the surface.

And you expect to get me to believe that is going to cause a change in the climate of an entire planet?

You still leave a tooth under your pillow for the tooth fairy don't you?

Thanks for trying, but none of these "scientists" have ever actually done some IR Spectroscopy. To date IR is used mostly for qualitative Analysis rather than quantitative.
Quantitative IR might work better if we were living on a planet without humidity. I wish I`d have saved a few IR scans that cover the spectral region where the only bands are where the molecular stretching and scissoring molecular bond vibrations are...superimposed with a scan of normal air with a trace of humidity...and all these "experts" would have to shut their faces for good.
The person You responded to has not even grasped that CO2 is because of that measured using Gaschromathography with F.I.D. or E.C.Detectors instead of IR.

Even if You were to use air from which every trace of moisture had been removed You would be hard pressed to detect CO2 at these low concentrations at extreme path length unless you crank the photomultiplier up to the limit...and then the noise level is more than double the signal level and You are just "measuring" bullshit.
IR works fine if You want to follow a chemical reaction and want to monitor if You detect Aldehyde, Carboxyl Groups etc etc, but God forbid there is even a trace of water in Your sample, forget about seeing these absorption bands.
The whole thing is a joke. It originated in the former East Germany, the DDR. They came up with all kinds of Propaganda schemes to show what criminals we were in the west.
With the CO2 they tried the "acid rain" scenario first. All forests are going to die, and then all the animals etc etc...because rainwater had a pH of ~6.
Only Problem was, that the best and purest de-ionized or distilled water also has a pH of ~6, because pH 7 is only a theoretical value form the square root of the H2O "p.K.a" 10 ^(-14)...and all it takes is somebody breathing in the same building then you have "acid water"...because the negative decade logarithm of the hydrogen g-atoms per liter was
the square root of 10 to the minus twelth power of 10 "acid" hydrogen g- ions in one liter of water...
F@@< do that one in parts per "Quazzillon" yourselv, I dont have the patience to sit here and type out all these zeros behind the comma how little "acid" Hydrogen was in that "acid rain"
My God it took years to explain that to the public and what the difference is between (acid)-neutralization value and the pH. The public still does not know the difference but the trees and animals did not die, so the CO2/acid rain doomsday scenario fizzed out...and out of the same former DDR Propaganda science came the CO2 "global warming /greenhouse gas" doomsday scenario.
They have it a little easier today, because most of the frormer Communist Party "Apparatschiks" have usurped their way to power, like Angela Merkel...and in the EU goes largely what Germany says. So now You have Your "Greenhouse gas disaster".
Anything that can destroy free enterprise will do...and science has nothing to do with it.