6
POPSThe CO2 extractor Every living thing relies on CO2 being in the atmosphere. That said, why do environmental alarmists oppose the CO2 scrubber? The argument that it is inefficient just doesn't fly because all technology becomes cheaper and more efficient over time. I think we all know the reason why they oppose it. The CO2 scrubber does not allow them to control your life.
18
POPSDo Not Read This ! At the current state of our planet, and mounting evidence to human induced climate change, these rich resources of fossil fuels are nothing short of a Faustian proposition.
18
POPSMore bad news for alarmists For example, the recent summary by Fred Singer and 22 expert contributors to “Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate” makes some extraordinary statements about computer models. (In addition to the many excellent contributors, this summary also contains 167 references to the scientific literature). This is important since computer models are being improperly, yet extensively, used by state legislatures as the basis of policies for greenhouse gas mitigation, rather than using actual climate data taken from the real world. These statements include: Computer models do not consider variations of irradiance and magnetic fields of the sun Computer models do not accurately model the role of clouds Computer models do not simulate a possible negative feedback from water vapor Computer models do not explain many features of the Earth’s observed climate. Computer models cannot produce reliable predictions of regional climate change.
14
POPSNASA: 70% of climate change due to Pacific oscillations, not CO2 What this means is no matter how much you change your CO2 footprint, how much you try to be CO2 green, no matter how much liberal governments tax you - you cannot save the planet from its natural cycles. Say they reduced the CO2 25%. Say the CO2 is the driver for the remaining 30% of Global Warming (which it cannot be, but let’s just be only half as ridiculous as the IPCC), then all that effort would only impact 7.5% of the forces driving the global climate. The other 92.5% would roll on, impervious to the effort. And since CO2 is not 100% of the remaining 30% of the equation (more like 10%), a more realistic expectation is that all the suffering that would go into dropping CO2 levels by 25% would result in a less than 1% change in the forces driving our climate.
0
POPSFuture Climate Change
The average surface temperature of the Earth is likely to increase by 2 to 11.5°F (1.1-6.4°C) by the end of the 21st century, relative to 1980-1990, with a best estimate of 3.2 to 7.2°F (1.8-4.0°C) (see Figure 1). The average rate of warming over each inhabited continent is very likely to be at least twice as large as that experienced during the 20th century. Warming will not be evenly distributed around the globe (see Figure 2): Land areas will warm more than oceans in part due to water's ability to store heat. High latitudes will warm more than low latitudes in part due to positive feedback effects from melting ice (as discussed above). Most of North America; all of Africa, Europe, northern and central Asia; and most of Central and South America are likely to warm more than the global average. Projections suggest that the warming will be close to the global average in south Asia, Australia and New Zealand, and southern South America. The warming will differ by season, with
0
POPSPersian Clouds - NLC's going south
Spaceweather says: "Noctilucent clouds (NLCs) are supposed to be a high-latitude phenomenon, most often seen in Canada, Russia and northern Europe. On July 19th the electric-blue clouds crept south, all the way to Iran: "I took this picture from Mt. Sabalan, a 15,784 ft extinct volcano in northwestern Iran," says Siamak Sabet. "It is the third highest peak in our extremely mountainous country." When noctilucent clouds first appeared in the late 19th century, they were confined to latitudes above 50o N. Mt Salaban is located at 38o N, far below the old threshold. Just last week, NLCs were sighted in Turkey at 40o N and in recent years they have appeared at least as far south in the United States as Colorado and Utah, also around 40o N. Why are NLCs spreading south? That is an unsolved mystery of these puzzling clouds. Some researchers believe it is a telltale sign of climate change, but this remains controversial. One thing is certain: Sky watchers at all latitudes should be ale
19
POPSFacing the Freshwater Crisis As demand for freshwater soars, planetary supplies are becoming unpredictable. Existing technologies could avert a global water crisis, but they must be implemented soon
0
POPSWetlands As A Form of Time Bomb- Here in Florida, the speculators and their cronies are perpetually trying to " develop " Florida's Everglades. Brazil, Russia and many other countries are also in the process. Stop It Now!
11
POPSA dash of lime -- a new twist that may cut CO2 levels back to pre-industrial levels Tim Kruger, a management consultant at London firm Corven is the brains behind the plan to resurrect the lime process. He argues that it could be made workable by locating it in regions that have a combination of low-cost 'stranded' energy considered too remote to be economically viable to exploit – like flared natural gas or solar energy in deserts – and that are rich in limestone, making it feasible for calcination to take place on site.
1
POPSThe Day the Seas Died But the permafrost melting is probably more dire. All that methane imbedded will be released and accelerate the climate's disruption.
6
POPSRussian scientists challenge 'man-made' global warming theory.
“We found that the level of CO2 had fluctuated greatly over the period but at any given time increases in air temperature preceded higher concentrations of CO2,” says academician Kapitsa, who worked in Antarctica for many years. Russian studies showed that throughout history, CO2 levels in the air rose 500 to 600 years after the climate warmed up. Therefore, higher concentrations of greenhouse gases registered today are the result, not the cause, of global warming. Critics of the CO2 role in climate change point out that water vapours are a far more potent factor in creating the greenhouse effect as their concentration in the atmosphere is five to 10 times higher than that of CO2. “Even if all CO2 were removed from the earth atmosphere, global climate would not become any cooler,” says solar physicist Vladimir Bashkirtsev. The hypothesis of anthropogenic greenhouse gases was born out of computer modelling of climate changes. Russian scientists say climate models are inaccurate si
17
POPSGlobal Warming Scientist Comes Clean
1. The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it. Each possible cause of global warming has a different pattern of where in the planet the warming occurs first and the most... We have been measuring the atmosphere for decades using radiosondes: weather balloons with thermometers that radio back the temperature as the balloon ascends through the atmosphere. They show no hot spot. Whatsoever. If there is no hot spot then an increased greenhouse effect is not the cause of global warming. 2. There is no evidence that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. None. ... 3. The satellites that measure the world's temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001, and that the temperature has dropped about 0.6C in the past year 4. ice cores show that in the past... half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon.
0
POPSAnother Reading Comprehension FAIL! The Right gets the APS Position Wrong! Another FAIL for the Right (and not a few clippers here). It helps to: 1. Read articles,documents and reports, fully and completely. 2. Reading comprehension is necessary. Otherwise you are wasting everybody's time. 3. The Three Rs are useless if you don't know how to apply them. 4. Denying is not the same as truth telling. Learn the difference!
2
Pops
Newest Clips
Latest Comments
Most Pops
Print
Save
Turn on live update