It had to happen I guess, Ian Plimer has a big feature letter in this months SC. After being scarred from reading his book recently I couldn't make it past the first paragraph, my mind instantly when back into limbo again. How many issues is that now about carbon polution and energy etc?
BTW, I couldn't help screen grabbing this when I saw it:
Dave.
-- ================================================ Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast: http://www.eevblog.com
**Poor old Leo has really lost the plot. Did you read his comments about Steve Fielding (Family First)? Yikes! Fielding is hardly a towering intellect, what, with all that God stuff. Leo is actually putting this moron forward as an example of an intelligent politician. His belief in the supernatural rules him out of any discussion about logic, reason and science.
Wake up and smell the coffee, Leo. Plimer got it wrong when he claimed the CO2 levels lag temperature rises. He was proven wrong and he steadfastly avoided dealing with the facts.
-- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
ths
tSeveral. Good to see too.
Dont feed the troll though. (Tosspot)
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
log.com
No. Plimer did not get it wrong. In fact all parties pretty much agree that CO2 levels lag temperature rise; some just try and explain that away, not very successfully.
A number of mechanisms are required to explain climate change and CO2 is the least of these. Continental drift, now more fashionably but less descriptively known as plate tectonics, is involved in locating the continents to permit the necessary deep oceanic currents which transfer heat. The Milankovitch cycles are are an obvious but not sufficient contributor. There are the solar cycles of which the best known is about 11 years. There are other longer cycles. The reversals and changes in the earth's magnetic field are probably a factor. Much of the radiation from space is trapped in the Van Allen belts. This radiation gets through when the Van Allen belts collapse along with the geomagnetic field.
R**Bollocks. Plimer just repeated other bollocks promoted by others. The stats tell a completely different story. CO2 levels lead and lag temperature rises with approximately similar frequency. Right now, we are experiencing a CO2 rise which is preceding the temperature rise. Here is the data that Plimer and Simpson carefully avoid dealing with:
Continental drift, now more fashionably but less
**All of which, and more, allow this planet to be capable of supporting life as we know it. One of those factors is the CO2 levels we have evolved with. Increase those levels and things will go awry.-- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
There is not a shred of evidence in support of that proposition.
R
Nine years old. More recent and more detailed study shows that CO2 always lags temperature.
Currently CO2 does not correlate with temperature at all.
There is not a shred of evidence to support that proposition.
R
Are you the Trevor Wilson who used to post loony ideas about gun control?
If so have you switched your loony tunes?
R**Feel free to provide more current information.
**Let's see your cite first, before we jump to any conclusions. The data I supplied may be 9 years old, but the the data it refers to is more than 400,000 years old.
**Then you need to explain (precisely) the influences that have given us the rapid temperature rise we've noted over the last 200 years. Don't foget: Solar variability has already been factored in at around 20% of the total. You need to explain the other 80%. I'm going with CO2 level rises, but I'll interested in hearing your thoughts.
-- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
**Depends. What "loony ideas" do you refer to? (A precise answer is required please)
-- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Do your own legwork.
There are more than 500 cites in the first third of Plimer's book. Help yourself.
Recovery from the Little Ice age for starters.
Don't foget:
By whom?
You can go with Gough Whitlam for all I care. Be careful though; who knows what you might catch.
R**Already done. The cite stands. You are unable to supply alternate data, so mine is all you have. **You seem unable to supply any cites.
*Lack of precision, duly noted.
**Science.
**Your inability to back up your claims is duly noted.
-- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
onths
ast
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
vblog.com
Too late, the cockspanker has started. :(
**Still waiting for your answer.
-- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
**Your inability to supply cites to back your claims is duly noted. Claims rejected.
-- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.