Man-Made Global Warming: The Hoax Unravels

[Meister]

Gore and the United Nations are the roots of this "man made global warming religion" of yours. What else is there to be discussed?

Another member of the clueless Amen Choir that insists we must have "faith" that we can't possibly be doing anything bad to something as large as Earth, but WE'RE the ones that are supposed to be part of a religion?!?!

You're not very good at this are you..... so sad.

No he's not, he's projecting that I SAID That "we can't posssibly be doing anything bad to something as large as Earth". I never said that....I'm stating that we aren't causing "Man Made Global Warming"....period. These "faith followers" never give up....Their "faith" has made Gore a very rich man.

 

[skookerasbil]

Its all good...........

Anybody take a gandor over to DRUDGE this PM? Im still laughing my balls off. The Great Fraud hit 40% approval rate today at Gallup. All this far left BS is in the shitter and will be for at least a generation as the worm continues to turn.

Meanwhile, more and more faIl continues to surface about how bogus "global warming" really is. And this time, its those phoney scientists at NASA.

New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole in Global Warming Alarmism - Global Warming - Fox Nation

 

[westwall]

Another member of the clueless Amen Choir that insists we must have "faith" that we can't possibly be doing anything bad to something as large as Earth, but WE'RE the ones that are supposed to be part of a religion?!?!

You're not very good at this are you..... so sad.

No he's not, he's projecting that I SAID That "we can't posssibly be doing anything bad to something as large as Earth". I never said that....I'm stating that we aren't causing "Man Made Global Warming"....period. These "faith followers" never give up....Their "faith" has made Gore a very rich man.

Oh believe me i know. Disagree with a enviro nut case like konradchrisolfraud et al and they will say you are in favor of pouring boiling tar into lake Tahoe. I find it amusing that because you disagree with them on this issue you are automatically placed into the "will pollute at whatever cost because you want to pollute" camp.

And they wonder why they are losing the argument worldwide.

 

[Old Rocks]

“A federal wildlife biologist whose observation in 2004 of presumably drowned polar bears in the Arctic helped to galvanize the global warming movement has been placed on administrative leave and is being investigated for scientific misconduct...Charles Monnett, an Anchorage-based scientist with the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, or BOEMRE, was told July 18 that he was being put on leave, pending results of an investigation into "integrity issues." (APNewsBreak: Arctic scientist under investigation - Yahoo! News)

The central premise behind the theory of anthropological global warming, without which the entire belief falls apart, is that CO2—either man-made or naturally occurring—causes heat to be trapped in the atmosphere, unable to escape.

“NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing(http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=AkJkxs.../**http://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/3/8/1603/pdf). The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxidetrap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.”

"Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA's Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA's Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models."

"In addition to finding that far less heat is being trapped than alarmist computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer models predicted." (New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism - Yahoo! News)

I'm sure Dr. Roy Spencer will soon be dragged over the coals and labeled a denier. These new findings confirm what has already been reported: that, despite man-made CO2 emissions growing by a third, from 1998-2008 global temperatures did not rise.

There are people who want to regulate CO2 in the name of combating global warming. These keepers of the faith have told us that having pets is bad for the environment (Britain's problem with pets: they're bad for the planet | Environment | The Guardian), having children is the worst thing you can do, and the government has a moral obligation to regulate the population in the name of combating global warming (Are Babies Bad for the Environment? : Scientific American Podcast). In Australia they are combating global warming by slaughtering camels (Australia: Killing Camels for Carbon Credits? - Ecocentric - TIME.com).

Once you except the flawed premise that CO2, a vital element without which life would not exist, is a pollutant and must be regulated there is literally no end to which your life may be controlled. These religious extremists want to regulate something that all humans breath out, that plants and bacteria breathe in, all based on the faith that it is causing the planet to warm.

There are going to be plenty of leftists respond by saying they are more educated and intelligent and that anyone who has doubts about man-made global warming is akin to a holocaust denier. That the existence of global warming is just a easily proven as the genocide committed by Nazi's, and they refuse to except any evidence to the contrary; even though the environmental left has been incorrect about every prediction made going back to the 1960's. Worldwide famine, over population, running out of oil, global climate cooling/warming/change--and for the most part they are saying the same damn thing.

You want to know where this unwavering religious-like faith comes from? This is the Captain Planet Generation, indoctrinated from youth into this idea. The theory of global warming is no more complicated than this:

‪Captain Planet CO2 brainwashing‬‏ - YouTube

Interesting.
http://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/3/8/1603/pdf


Article
On the Misdiagnosis of Surface Temperature Feedbacks from
Variations in Earth’s Radiant Energy Balance
Roy W. Spencer * and William D. Braswell
ESSC-UAH, University of Alabama in Huntsville, Cramer Hall, Huntsville, AL 35899, USA;
E-Mail: danny.braswell@nsstc.uah.edu
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: roy.spencer@nsstc.uah.edu;
Tel.: +1-256-961-7960; Fax: +1-256-961-7751.
Received: 24 May 2011; in revised form: 13 July 2011 / Accepted: 15 July 2011 /
Published: 25 July 2011
Abstract: The sensitivity of the climate system to an imposed radiative imbalance remains
the largest source of uncertainty in projections of future anthropogenic climate change.
Here we present further evidence that this uncertainty from an observational perspective is
largely due to the masking of the radiative feedback signal by internal radiative forcing,
probably due to natural cloud variations. That these internal radiative forcings exist and
likely corrupt feedback diagnosis is demonstrated with lag regression analysis of satellite
and coupled climate model data, interpreted with a simple forcing-feedback model. While
the satellite-based metrics for the period 2000–2010 depart substantially in the direction of
lower climate sensitivity from those similarly computed from coupled climate models, we
find that, with traditional methods, it is not possible to accurately quantify this discrepancy
in terms of the feedbacks which determine climate sensitivity. It is concluded that
atmospheric feedback diagnosis of the climate system remains an unsolved problem, due
primarily to the inability to distinguish between radiative forcing and radiative feedback in
satellite radiative budget observations.
Keywords: climate; sensitivity; temperature; feedback; clouds; warming; CERES; models

Yet the polar melt this year is running right with that of 2007, far lower than any models ever predicted. And there must be a bit of an increase in the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere. After all, we had not only a very snowy river, but continued huge rainfall in central USA. The Missouri and the Mississippi have been in flood since May, and will continue until September, provided the storms let up.

Spencer continues to predict a cooling, yet by his own site;

UAH Global Temperature Update for June, 2011: +0.31 deg. C « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

Shows that 2011, starting with a super La Nina, and the lowest TSI since early last century, has already posted a high higher than any prior to 1998 back to 1979. And the average, by Dr. Spencer's own figures, is going to be higher than any point prior to 1998. In fact, there is not other way of looking at the graph than the trend is up, and accelerating.

Flap yap all you want, The events worldwide, and, particulary, in the Arctic, say that something important is happening.

 

[westwall]

“A federal wildlife biologist whose observation in 2004 of presumably drowned polar bears in the Arctic helped to galvanize the global warming movement has been placed on administrative leave and is being investigated for scientific misconduct...Charles Monnett, an Anchorage-based scientist with the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, or BOEMRE, was told July 18 that he was being put on leave, pending results of an investigation into "integrity issues." (APNewsBreak: Arctic scientist under investigation - Yahoo! News)

The central premise behind the theory of anthropological global warming, without which the entire belief falls apart, is that CO2—either man-made or naturally occurring—causes heat to be trapped in the atmosphere, unable to escape.

“NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing(http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=AkJkxs.../**http://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/3/8/1603/pdf). The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxidetrap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.”

"Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA's Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA's Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models."

"In addition to finding that far less heat is being trapped than alarmist computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer models predicted." (New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism - Yahoo! News)

I'm sure Dr. Roy Spencer will soon be dragged over the coals and labeled a denier. These new findings confirm what has already been reported: that, despite man-made CO2 emissions growing by a third, from 1998-2008 global temperatures did not rise.

There are people who want to regulate CO2 in the name of combating global warming. These keepers of the faith have told us that having pets is bad for the environment (Britain's problem with pets: they're bad for the planet | Environment | The Guardian), having children is the worst thing you can do, and the government has a moral obligation to regulate the population in the name of combating global warming (Are Babies Bad for the Environment? : Scientific American Podcast). In Australia they are combating global warming by slaughtering camels (Australia: Killing Camels for Carbon Credits? - Ecocentric - TIME.com).

Once you except the flawed premise that CO2, a vital element without which life would not exist, is a pollutant and must be regulated there is literally no end to which your life may be controlled. These religious extremists want to regulate something that all humans breath out, that plants and bacteria breathe in, all based on the faith that it is causing the planet to warm.

There are going to be plenty of leftists respond by saying they are more educated and intelligent and that anyone who has doubts about man-made global warming is akin to a holocaust denier. That the existence of global warming is just a easily proven as the genocide committed by Nazi's, and they refuse to except any evidence to the contrary; even though the environmental left has been incorrect about every prediction made going back to the 1960's. Worldwide famine, over population, running out of oil, global climate cooling/warming/change--and for the most part they are saying the same damn thing.

You want to know where this unwavering religious-like faith comes from? This is the Captain Planet Generation, indoctrinated from youth into this idea. The theory of global warming is no more complicated than this:

‪Captain Planet CO2 brainwashing‬‏ - YouTube

Interesting.
http://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/3/8/1603/pdf


Article
On the Misdiagnosis of Surface Temperature Feedbacks from
Variations in Earth’s Radiant Energy Balance
Roy W. Spencer * and William D. Braswell
ESSC-UAH, University of Alabama in Huntsville, Cramer Hall, Huntsville, AL 35899, USA;
E-Mail: danny.braswell@nsstc.uah.edu
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: roy.spencer@nsstc.uah.edu;
Tel.: +1-256-961-7960; Fax: +1-256-961-7751.
Received: 24 May 2011; in revised form: 13 July 2011 / Accepted: 15 July 2011 /
Published: 25 July 2011
Abstract: The sensitivity of the climate system to an imposed radiative imbalance remains
the largest source of uncertainty in projections of future anthropogenic climate change.
Here we present further evidence that this uncertainty from an observational perspective is
largely due to the masking of the radiative feedback signal by internal radiative forcing,
probably due to natural cloud variations. That these internal radiative forcings exist and
likely corrupt feedback diagnosis is demonstrated with lag regression analysis of satellite
and coupled climate model data, interpreted with a simple forcing-feedback model. While
the satellite-based metrics for the period 2000–2010 depart substantially in the direction of
lower climate sensitivity from those similarly computed from coupled climate models, we
find that, with traditional methods, it is not possible to accurately quantify this discrepancy
in terms of the feedbacks which determine climate sensitivity. It is concluded that
atmospheric feedback diagnosis of the climate system remains an unsolved problem, due
primarily to the inability to distinguish between radiative forcing and radiative feedback in
satellite radiative budget observations.
Keywords: climate; sensitivity; temperature; feedback; clouds; warming; CERES; models

Yet the polar melt this year is running right with that of 2007, far lower than any models ever predicted. And there must be a bit of an increase in the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere. After all, we had not only a very snowy river, but continued huge rainfall in central USA. The Missouri and the Mississippi have been in flood since May, and will continue until September, provided the storms let up.

Spencer continues to predict a cooling, yet by his own site;

UAH Global Temperature Update for June, 2011: +0.31 deg. C « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

Shows that 2011, starting with a super La Nina, and the lowest TSI since early last century, has already posted a high higher than any prior to 1998 back to 1979. And the average, by Dr. Spencer's own figures, is going to be higher than any point prior to 1998. In fact, there is not other way of looking at the graph than the trend is up, and accelerating.

Flap yap all you want, The events worldwide, and, particulary, in the Arctic, say that something important is happening.

Yes it allways is. That's the point. It is allways changing. And for all your yapping there is still no open water at the North Pole like there was in the late '50's early '60's. You still can't cultivate grapes in areas that were cultivated during the MWP.

 

[Old Rocks]

Adopting the faith that CO2 definitively has the atmospheric result of increased heat distorts and shapes views on a wide range of issues. It has long reaching consequences.

Liberals of attempted to rationalize all the flaws and historical inaccuracies, highlighting the fact that it is a theory. It is scientific malpractice to insist that something is definitive. Physicists are just now able to test fundamental theories that may turn out to be untrue. If that happens they throw out all physics books since the 60's.

They admit that their idea that the aptly named God particle exists holds all modern theories of physics together.

Yet the much more less proven theory of anthropological global warming is supposed to be unquestionably excepted and taught to children.

Wow, you are one ignorant fruitcake. Really amazing that you can find your way out of bed in the morning.

It is only something like 97% of scientists that will tell you that because of the absorption bands of CO2, that it is a GHG. That was discovered in 1858, by Tyndall, a British chemist. In 1896, Arrnhenius, a Swedish chemist and Nobel Prize winner, quantified the effect of CO2, and even predicted, with surprising accuracy, the amount of increase in temperature from the doubling of CO2.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Adopting the faith that CO2 definitively has the atmospheric result of increased heat distorts and shapes views on a wide range of issues. It has long reaching consequences.

Liberals of attempted to rationalize all the flaws and historical inaccuracies, highlighting the fact that it is a theory. It is scientific malpractice to insist that something is definitive. Physicists are just now able to test fundamental theories that may turn out to be untrue. If that happens they throw out all physics books since the 60's.

They admit that their idea that the aptly named God particle exists holds all modern theories of physics together.

Yet the much more less proven theory of anthropological global warming is supposed to be unquestionably excepted and taught to children.

Wow, you are one ignorant fruitcake. Really amazing that you can find your way out of bed in the morning.

It is only something like 97% of scientists that will tell you that because of the absorption bands of CO2, that it is a GHG. That was discovered in 1858, by Tyndall, a British chemist. In 1896, Arrnhenius, a Swedish chemist and Nobel Prize winner, quantified the effect of CO2, and even predicted, with surprising accuracy, the amount of increase in temperature from the doubling of CO2.

Did you mean Arrhenius?

"We often hear lamentations that the coal stored up in the earth is wasted by the present generation without any thought of the future, and we are terrified by the awful destruction of life and property which has followed the volcanic eruptions of our days. We may find a kind of consolation in the consideration that here, as in every other case, there is good mixed with the evil. By the influence of the increasing percentage of carbonic acid in the atmosphere, we may hope to enjoy ages with more equable and better climates, especially as regards the colder regions of the earth, ages when the earth will bring forth much more abundant crops than at present, for the benefit of rapidly propagating mankind."

"Arrhenius estimated that halving of CO2 would decrease temperatures by 4–5 °C (Celsius) and a doubling of CO2 would cause a temperature rise of 5–6 °C.[5] In his 1906 publication, Arrhenius adjusted the value downwards to 1.6 °C (including water vapour feedback: 2.1 °C)." (Known as "oopsies" in the scientific community)

And, finally and not at all surprisingly

"Racial biology
Svante Arrhenius was one of several leading Swedish scientists actively engaged in the process leading to the creation in 1922 of The State Institute for Racial Biology in Uppsala, Sweden, which had originally been proposed as a Nobel Institute. Arrhenius was a member of the institute's board, as he had been in The Swedish Society for Racial Hygiene (Eugenics), founded in 1909."


Svante Arrhenius - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Old Rocks]

“A federal wildlife biologist whose observation in 2004 of presumably drowned polar bears in the Arctic helped to galvanize the global warming movement has been placed on administrative leave and is being investigated for scientific misconduct...Charles Monnett, an Anchorage-based scientist with the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, or BOEMRE, was told July 18 that he was being put on leave, pending results of an investigation into "integrity issues." (APNewsBreak: Arctic scientist under investigation - Yahoo! News)

The central premise behind the theory of anthropological global warming, without which the entire belief falls apart, is that CO2—either man-made or naturally occurring—causes heat to be trapped in the atmosphere, unable to escape.

“NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing(http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=AkJkxs.../**http://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/3/8/1603/pdf). The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxidetrap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.”

"Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA's Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA's Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models."

"In addition to finding that far less heat is being trapped than alarmist computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer models predicted." (New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism - Yahoo! News)

I'm sure Dr. Roy Spencer will soon be dragged over the coals and labeled a denier. These new findings confirm what has already been reported: that, despite man-made CO2 emissions growing by a third, from 1998-2008 global temperatures did not rise.

There are people who want to regulate CO2 in the name of combating global warming. These keepers of the faith have told us that having pets is bad for the environment (Britain's problem with pets: they're bad for the planet | Environment | The Guardian), having children is the worst thing you can do, and the government has a moral obligation to regulate the population in the name of combating global warming (Are Babies Bad for the Environment? : Scientific American Podcast). In Australia they are combating global warming by slaughtering camels (Australia: Killing Camels for Carbon Credits? - Ecocentric - TIME.com).

Once you except the flawed premise that CO2, a vital element without which life would not exist, is a pollutant and must be regulated there is literally no end to which your life may be controlled. These religious extremists want to regulate something that all humans breath out, that plants and bacteria breathe in, all based on the faith that it is causing the planet to warm.

There are going to be plenty of leftists respond by saying they are more educated and intelligent and that anyone who has doubts about man-made global warming is akin to a holocaust denier. That the existence of global warming is just a easily proven as the genocide committed by Nazi's, and they refuse to except any evidence to the contrary; even though the environmental left has been incorrect about every prediction made going back to the 1960's. Worldwide famine, over population, running out of oil, global climate cooling/warming/change--and for the most part they are saying the same damn thing.

You want to know where this unwavering religious-like faith comes from? This is the Captain Planet Generation, indoctrinated from youth into this idea. The theory of global warming is no more complicated than this:

‪Captain Planet CO2 brainwashing‬‏ - YouTube

Interesting.
http://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/3/8/1603/pdf


Article
On the Misdiagnosis of Surface Temperature Feedbacks from
Variations in Earth’s Radiant Energy Balance
Roy W. Spencer * and William D. Braswell
ESSC-UAH, University of Alabama in Huntsville, Cramer Hall, Huntsville, AL 35899, USA;
E-Mail: danny.braswell@nsstc.uah.edu
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: roy.spencer@nsstc.uah.edu;
Tel.: +1-256-961-7960; Fax: +1-256-961-7751.
Received: 24 May 2011; in revised form: 13 July 2011 / Accepted: 15 July 2011 /
Published: 25 July 2011
Abstract: The sensitivity of the climate system to an imposed radiative imbalance remains
the largest source of uncertainty in projections of future anthropogenic climate change.
Here we present further evidence that this uncertainty from an observational perspective is
largely due to the masking of the radiative feedback signal by internal radiative forcing,
probably due to natural cloud variations. That these internal radiative forcings exist and
likely corrupt feedback diagnosis is demonstrated with lag regression analysis of satellite
and coupled climate model data, interpreted with a simple forcing-feedback model. While
the satellite-based metrics for the period 2000–2010 depart substantially in the direction of
lower climate sensitivity from those similarly computed from coupled climate models, we
find that, with traditional methods, it is not possible to accurately quantify this discrepancy
in terms of the feedbacks which determine climate sensitivity. It is concluded that
atmospheric feedback diagnosis of the climate system remains an unsolved problem, due
primarily to the inability to distinguish between radiative forcing and radiative feedback in
satellite radiative budget observations.
Keywords: climate; sensitivity; temperature; feedback; clouds; warming; CERES; models

Yet the polar melt this year is running right with that of 2007, far lower than any models ever predicted. And there must be a bit of an increase in the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere. After all, we had not only a very snowy river, but continued huge rainfall in central USA. The Missouri and the Mississippi have been in flood since May, and will continue until September, provided the storms let up.

Spencer continues to predict a cooling, yet by his own site;

UAH Global Temperature Update for June, 2011: +0.31 deg. C « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

Shows that 2011, starting with a super La Nina, and the lowest TSI since early last century, has already posted a high higher than any prior to 1998 back to 1979. And the average, by Dr. Spencer's own figures, is going to be higher than any point prior to 1998. In fact, there is not other way of looking at the graph than the trend is up, and accelerating.

Flap yap all you want, The events worldwide, and, particulary, in the Arctic, say that something important is happening.

Yes it allways is. That's the point. It is allways changing. And for all your yapping there is still no open water at the North Pole like there was in the late '50's early '60's. You still can't cultivate grapes in areas that were cultivated during the MWP.

******* BS, Walleyes.

RealClimate: Medieval warmth and English wine

The earliest documentation that is better than anecdotal is from the Domesday Book (1087) – an early census that the new Norman king commissioned to assess his new English dominions, including the size of farms, population etc. Being relatively ‘frenchified’, the Normans (who had originally come from Viking stock) were quite keen on wine drinking (rather than mead or ale) and so made special note of existing vineyards and where the many new vines were being planted. Sources differ a little on how many vineyards are included in the book: Selley quotes Unwin (J. Wine Research, 1990 (subscription)) who records 46 vineyards across Southern England (42 unambiguous sites, 4 less direct), but other claims (unsourced) range up to 52. Lamb’s 1977 book has a few more from other various sources and anecdotally there are more still, and so clearly this is a minimum number.
Of the Domesday vineyards, all appear to lie below a line from Ely (Cambridgeshire) to Gloucestershire. Since the Book covers all of England up to the river Tees (north of Yorkshire), there is therefore reason to think that there weren’t many vineyards north of that line. Lamb reports two vineyards to the north (Lincoln and Leeds, Yorkshire) at some point between 1000 and 1300 AD, and Selley even reports a Scottish vineyard operating in the 12th Century. However, it’s probably not sensible to rely too much on these single reports since they don’t necessarily come with evidence for successful or sustained wine production. Indeed, there is one lone vineyard reported in Derbyshire (further north than any Domesday vineyard) in the 16th Century when all other reports were restricted to the South-east of England.

Wine making never completely died out in England, there were always a few die-hard viticulturists willing to give it a go, but production clearly declined after the 13th Century, had a brief resurgence in the 17th and 18th Centuries, only to decline to historic lows in the 19th Century when only 8 vineyards are recorded. Contemporary popular sentiment towards English (and Welsh) wine can be well judged by a comment in ‘Punch’ (a satirical magazine) that the wine would require 4 people to drink it – one victim, two to hold him down, and one other to pour the wine down his throat.

Unremarked by most oenophiles though, English and Welsh wine production started to have a renaissance in the 1950s. By 1977, there were 124 reasonable-sized vineyards in production – more than at any other time over the previous millennium. This resurgence was also unremarked upon by Lamb, who wrote in that same year that the English climate (the average of 1921-1950 to be precise) remained about a degree too cold for wine production. Thus the myth of the non-existant English wine industry was born and thrust headlong into the climate change debate…

Since 1977, a further 200 or so vineyards have opened (currently 400 and counting) and they cover a much more extensive area than the recorded medieval vineyards, extending out to Cornwall, and up to Lancashire and Yorkshire where the (currently) most northerly commercial vineyard sits. So with the sole exception of one ‘rather improbably’ located 12th Century Scottish vineyard (and strictly speaking that doesn’t count, it not being in England ‘n’ all…), English vineyards have almost certainly exceeded the extent of medieval cultivation. And I hear (from normally reliable sources) they are actually producing a pretty decent selection of white wines.

So there are currently about 10 times as many vineyards in England as there were in the MWP.

 

[Old Rocks]

It has always been a World-Wide Socialist/Communist Movement. Look at the people who are behind all the Fear Mongering. That's all you have to do to find your answers. Al Gore? Yea a dufus who claimed he invented the Internet knows what he's talking about. The Leftist Dummies even gave the guy a Nobel Peace Prize for God's sake. A Peace Prize? For what? Might as well give Obama one too. Oh wait,they did that. The Earth warms and the Earth cools. There's no need to panic about Armageddon. All this Fear Mongering from the Left has gotten old.

So that's your thesis? More lies about Gore? As we all should know, those that know the subject, discuss it; those that don't, talk about Gore.

Gore and the United Nations are the roots of this "man made global warming religion" of yours. What else is there to be discussed?

I see. Damned Gore and the UN made Fourier say that there was something in the atmosphere that was retaining heat in 1820. Must have been their Masonic branch, eh? Then they forced Tyndal to do experiments that established some of the absorption bands for CO2, water vapor, CH4, and other GHGs in 1858.

And, of course, those damned Swedes are always up to something. That is why Arrnhenius quantified the effects of CO2 and water vapor in 1896. Geez, these conspiracies have such deep roots. Or else the conspiracy theorists have such shallow minds. Now which is more likely?

 

[wirebender]

I see. Damned Gore and the UN made Fourier say that there was something in the atmosphere that was retaining heat in 1820. Must have been their Masonic branch, eh?

The whole hoax is built on Fourier's experiment and none of you guys seem to know that his premise was falsified by professor Woods in 1909 and again recently by Nasif S. Nahle.

Woods and Nahle repeated Fourier's experiment except in Wood's case, he used a pane for his "greenhouse" that was made of rock salt. Rock salt is invisible to IR. His greenhouse heated up just like a glass greenhouse proving Fourier's claims of trapping IR false. Anyone who knows the first thing about heat transfer knows that a greenhouse works because you block convection and conduction, not because you are trapping IR. Nahle also used materials that are invisible, opaque and translucent to IR and like Woods, saw all his greenhouses heat up not because of trapped IR, but because of blocked conduction and convection.

 

[Truthmatters]

Im so tired of the right being set on stupid mode

 

[wirebender]

Im so tired of the right being set on stupid mode

Care to elaborate?

 

[Truthmatters]

You are some internet poster.

You blindly come here and spout some talking points which you think proves you know more than 90% of the people who work in the sceintific field.

You are stuck on stupid mode

 

[Big Fitz]

You are some internet poster.

You blindly come here and spout some talking points which you think proves you know more than 90% of the people who work in the sceintific field.

You are stuck on stupid mode

Um wow? Beyond irony.

 

[westwall]

Im so tired of the right being set on stupid mode

So....what's your excuse?

 

[Si modo]

Im so tired of the right being set on stupid mode

So now scientific points are talking points?

You are usually out of your league in other areas, but when it comes to any science.....wow, there are no words to describe how very out of your league you are.

 

[skookerasbil]

Im so tired of the right being set on stupid mode

Id suggest some over the counter N0-DOZE s0n..........The Stupids are well on their way to being in charge for a long, long time!!


And Im laughing.........even if by sme miracle, the economy turns around to some dgree and the president eeks out a re-election bid, THE HOUSE is staying GOP for at least the next 6 years and it is very likely it'll be 10 years.

If you dont understand why Einstein, go google "redistricting", "governorships" and "2010 election".

Of course I'm giddy as fcukking hell...........this means zero new significant climate legislation to fcukk over the middle class. The environmental k00ks will get thrown some little bones here and there to keep them quiet, and thats just fine with me.

After next year though, the Varsity is back in charge and we'll see a rush to big time clean coal and it'll be drill, drill, drill baby = winning.

 

[wirebender]

You are some internet poster.

You blindly come here and spout some talking points which you think proves you know more than 90% of the people who work in the sceintific field.

You are stuck on stupid mode

Care to point out any "talking points" I have "spouted" as opposed to substantiated arguments?

 

[westwall]

You are some internet poster.

You blindly come here and spout some talking points which you think proves you know more than 90% of the people who work in the sceintific field.

You are stuck on stupid mode

Care to point out any "talking points" I have "spouted" as opposed to substantiated arguments?

Truthdoesn'tmatter doesn't do "fact" or truthful anything. She is a partisan pseudo intellectual with a fundamental inability to understand even basic high school science. She is merely here for amusement so pay her absolutely no mind. Did I mention she's a prevaricator?

 

[konradv]

I see. Damned Gore and the UN made Fourier say that there was something in the atmosphere that was retaining heat in 1820. Must have been their Masonic branch, eh?

The whole hoax is built on Fourier's experiment and none of you guys seem to know that his premise was falsified by professor Woods in 1909 and again recently by Nasif S. Nahle.

Woods and Nahle repeated Fourier's experiment except in Wood's case, he used a pane for his "greenhouse" that was made of rock salt. Rock salt is invisible to IR. His greenhouse heated up just like a glass greenhouse proving Fourier's claims of trapping IR false. Anyone who knows the first thing about heat transfer knows that a greenhouse works because you block convection and conduction, not because you are trapping IR. Nahle also used materials that are invisible, opaque and translucent to IR and like Woods, saw all his greenhouses heat up not because of trapped IR, but because of blocked conduction and convection.

It's called the "Greenhouse Effect" as an analogy, NOT because they work by the same principle or that anyone says it does. I could call it the "Extra Blanket Effect", but that wouldn't mean that the atmosphere is suddenlly full of wool!!!