7 thoughts on “New paper contends that carbon dioxide causes less than 50% of the greenhouse effect”

  1. Thanks Warwick. As a member of the NO CARBON TAX Climate Sceptics party, I posted a reference to our member, Tim Curtin’s paper HERE

    Great to see that peer-reviewed “anti the AGW hypothesis” papers are being disseminated on the blogosphere.

  2. I BET (and try to LOSE) that in the next 12 months a [AVERTABLE IF we cooperate] world devastating volcanic winter will break, after one or more at least 6-7 VEI volcanic eruptions, IF we do not cooperate to AVERT them, as it is proposed with anyone of the 3 methods, here:
    www.mediafire.com/download.php?a7ufgz75q1nb8f2.
    Explosive volcanic eruptions triggered by [DIVERTIBLE] cosmic rays
    Toshikazu Ebisuzaki, Hiroko Miyahara, Ryuho Kataoka, Tatsuhiko Sato, Yasuhiro Ishimine
    www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1342937X10001966.
    Let the bet be symbolic, as WORLWIDE ALERT is the most important:
    If i lose, i sing a HAPPY volcano-winning song – if i “win”, i hope that all humankind will have been prepared for everything!
    Volcano-winner vs volcano-fatalism.

  3. Some of us are well aware that that we are one major volcanic eruption away from a global famine, but if someone has come up with a credible means of predicting such an eruption, I missed it.

  4. There is an experiment that proves that the Greenhouse gas effect does not exist. This experiment which has been peer reviewed by Ph.D physicists . Ph.D. Chemical engineers and others. The experiment is found on the web-site http:// www.slayingtheskydragon.com click on the blog tab. It is titled “The Experiment that failed which can save the world trillion-Proving the greenhouse gas effect does not exist”

  5. The greenhouse effect does keep some small amount of heat from escaping into space, but it’s important to understand HOW small an amount we’re talking about.

    There are 3 ways that heat is dissipated from the earth, radiation is only one. We tend to forget about conduction and convection. CO2 accounts for less than half of 1% of the atmosphere. Such a small part of the atmosphere blocking radiative heat loss only, ignores the fact that the other 99+% of the atmosphere is very effective at dissipating heat away from the earth through conduction and convection.

    This entire farce would be funny if it weren’t so damaging to our society, for the simple reason that nobody ever seems to realize the one most obvious flaw in the entire theory.

    Warming is good!

    The fact is, as history has clearly proven, that the only type of climate change that poses any threat whatsoever to us is extreme cooling. Man, and all other forms of life have always thrived during the earth’s warm periods, while every extended or extreme cold period has brought suffering, starvation and death. It doesn’t take an atmospheric physicist to understand why this is true. It’s simple. Crops don’t grow well when it gets really cold. Crop failures cause famines, which take enormous numbers of lives of both people and their domestic animals all of whom suffer from reduced resistance to disease when they’re cold.

    We need to stop using meaningless terms such as “carbon footprint” because doing so lends credence to the junk science of the alarmists. We should pay more attention to the basic science in our debates on the issue. We shouldn’t argue against CO2 taxes and bogus regulations on coal because the “meager benefit isn’t worth the high cost”.. We should argue against these things on the grounds that it’s all pure bull$hit.

    There IS no benefit from reducing our CO2 output. CO2 is plant food. Without it, NOTHING would be green.

    fs

  6. I once suggested that most AGW claims in Europe should be multiplied by a “reality factor”.

    The factor was the total number of northern europeans spending their summer holidays in Svalbard, Greenland and on Baffin Is. divided by the number going to Spain, Portugal, Italy, Greece etc.

    It did behave like a hot air balloon.

  7. Sorry,
    typo. in last line
    Should be understood as went over like a lead balloon. Memo; don’t mix metaphors.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>